Earliest records inconsistency - Forest of Dean FHT Forum

On researching my Teagues I find the earliest records in Ruardean go back to 1566, while those in Walford only start in 1717. I assume that this is due to local inconsistencies in recording events or could anybody enlighten me to other reasons?

The earliest records for Walford are 1661 taken from the Bishops Transcripts. I can see a couple of Teague marriages in 1703. Although the Ruardean records go back to 1537 they are far from being complete.

A little search can explain the reason for inconstant records ""

Although a nationwide order was given in 1538 that each parish keep a register of baptisms, marriages, and burials, many parishes did not start to keep registers until later and some early records have since been lost or destroyed. The English Civil war caused turmoil and in some places entries to parish registers either ceased or entries became scarce lost or destroyed
Many records are damaged or missing and have to consider that the original records may not have been kept as well as they should have and are not ever going to be complete once we take into account the ravages of time Indeed only about 800 or so parishes have registers that survive back to an early date

? Held at Gloucestershire Records Office

Year

1500
Edward PEAUGE - Parish: Ruardean

Notes: 1741 - see page 210

Looking at the early records of Ruardean on this site around early 16th Century, quite a few have illegible in the Surname.

There are some previous threads on the Teague of Ruardean

If you enter Illegible in the surname search, in total there are 1,752 entries, 60 for Ruardean. Luckily, there are thousands transcribed with surnames.

My thanks, Ill give that a try for interest, Im reading the Tribes of England at the moment, fascinating to think of some identifiable Teagues resident in Ruardean when 1st Queen Elizabeth was on throne

RSS Feed of thread