Maine vital records in 1600s: Would they submit to England?

Marjorie Geiser

Hi all,

I've been researching ancestors who were living in Maine/New Hampshire/Massachusetts in the 1600s, but I keep finding vital records that list all the right people, but then it says the event took place in parishes in England.

At first I've been discounting them, but I wonder if the families would then submit them to be documented in the particular parishes in England? I'm still not sure this makes sense, though, because why would parents, for instance, document that their child was baptized in, say Stoke Gabriel, Devon, if that's not where he was actually baptized?

Thanks,

Margie

Dik Thurston

That is an interesting question. I think the England Genealogy Research group would be the best place to get an answer.

Marjorie Geiser

Thank you, Dik; I wasn't positive WHICH was the better group. I'll do that.

Dik Thurston

Marjorie; Did you have any success with the England group?

Marjorie Geiser

@Dik Thurston

I do believe that the reply I received makes the most sense, that those in America would NOT have been registering their births/baptisms and marriages in England. Apparently the name Crockett is NOT that unusual in England back then.

Thank you so much for checking, Dik!

Dik Thurston

This is probably something you already know. Maine was part of New York and did not become its own state until well after the revolution. This information may help in your search.

Marjorie Geiser

Hi @Dik Thurston ,

Yes, I have had no problems finding even records from the 1600s of births, marriages and deaths in America. In some countries, people would DOUBLE register their children, however. My grandmother was registered as born in England, and I have that document, but then when her parents returned to Poland, they registered her there, too.

Thanks!

Margie