Make contacting you more easy
"England, Lancashire Non-Conformist Church Records, 1647-1996", database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:C1WZ-KXMM : 5 May 2020), John Knight, 1830.
This says location Lancaster. No. We see this a lot. The location - in this specific case - is Rochdale in Lancashire. In the old days, Lancashire was called "county of Lancaster", or Lancaster for short. BUT NOT the city of Lancaster - the county!!!
Comments
-
The point of this record is that it was originally indexed as for Lancaster, but that has now been changed to Lancashire. There seem to have been restrictions imposed when permission was provided for FamilySearch to index these records, whereby the record custodians have not allowed for indexing of the parish (Rochdale) - just the county. Don't ask me why they should do this - I see it a lot with Essex records. It is sometimes connected with the fact that you have to pay the record custodian in order to get a copy of the entry / page showing the full detai, but this obviously is not the case here because an image is available via FamilySearch.
Alternatively, there are "project instructions" for each indexed collection and (again for some unknown reason) these must have included the instruction not to record the individual parishes.
By the way, as with other FamilySearch collections, this one appears to be intended to relate to non-conformist records, yet contains records relating to Church of England parishes. I have tried to get FamilySearch to stop this practice (of indexing records under a title which is not applicable) but the organisation do not see this as a problem and continue to leave many records included in collections where you would not think to look for them.
2