I have these burials from the Fife CD
Janet HAXTEN Alias LAWS Kirkcaldy Died 24 Sep 1827 aged 63 wife of John Haxten (sailor) Lair CH2-636-28&30
John Haxton Kirkcaldy died 26 Jul 1790 buried 27 Jul 1790 son of John Haxton sailor Lair CH2 - 636-28 & 30
James Haxten died 27 Dec 1792 buried 29 Dec 1792 son of John Haxten (sailor) Lair CH2-636-28&30
John HAXTON Kirkcaldy died 12 Sep 1832 aged 76 Sailor Prob from cholera as grave 6ft deep Lair CH2-636-28 & 30
Does the lair number 28&30 indicate they are probably a family? My thoughts are Janet Lawson and John Haxton & their children (although I have found no baptism for young John - there was another John in the family some years later)
Problem I have is a conflict in that the marriages of 2 of the children of John Haxton and Janet Lawson- 1817 and 1827 state that their father John Haxton, sailor, is deceased. Could he have left the family perhaps? Gone to sea & thought to be deceased? Is there any way of resolving such a conflict (Burial oprs for Kirkcaldy at this time don't seem to exist)
Trish
Kirkcaldy burials
Moderators: Global Moderators, LesleyB
-
LesleyB
- Posts: 8184
- Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 12:18 am
- Location: Scotland
Re: Kirkcaldy burials
Hi Trish
From what you have written, I'd think that the lairs are very close to each other, which usually implies some family relationship, especially given that the surname is the same.
The lair records certainly exist, but from the reference you have given (CH2) they are held at NAS, so these will not show on the SP OPRs - in this case the lair records probably served as the burial records, and I'd have my doubts that there would be another set of records to be found. The lair records at NAS may not give any further information than you already have - some of them are just "one liners" as as you have here. There is a reasonable amount of info in these ones, such as age, occupation etc., so they are better than many I've seen.
Not sure why John may have been described as deceased, when it seems from the lair records that he died in 1832 - that is a puzzle. It might be a case of luck if there is any other documentation -wills, deeds, etc. which could take some rummaging about and may not reveal anything further.
Best wishes
Lesley
From what you have written, I'd think that the lairs are very close to each other, which usually implies some family relationship, especially given that the surname is the same.
The lair records certainly exist, but from the reference you have given (CH2) they are held at NAS, so these will not show on the SP OPRs - in this case the lair records probably served as the burial records, and I'd have my doubts that there would be another set of records to be found. The lair records at NAS may not give any further information than you already have - some of them are just "one liners" as as you have here. There is a reasonable amount of info in these ones, such as age, occupation etc., so they are better than many I've seen.
Not sure why John may have been described as deceased, when it seems from the lair records that he died in 1832 - that is a puzzle. It might be a case of luck if there is any other documentation -wills, deeds, etc. which could take some rummaging about and may not reveal anything further.
Best wishes
Lesley
-
Archiver
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:49 pm
- Location: Aberdeen
Re: Kirkcaldy burials
I don't think the reference CH2-636-28 & 30 refers to a lair number, rather it is an indication of the burial register the information came from. It would seem that the same information appears in two different volumes - numbers 28 and 30.
CH2/636/28 is a burial register for Kirkcaldy, Old, (St Bryce) Kirk Session dating from 1826 - 1856.
CH2/636/30 is volume for the same church which is a Temporary register of deaths and burials 1783-1838, List of dates of burials from burial letters to session clerk 1807-40, Burials 1768-95, Burials 1826-83.
This is where indexes can raise more questions. Did they record the page number from the volume? Did they include all information from the register or just the bare bones? It may be that lair information was not recorded, but you never know.
The volumes will be available to view in the NAS on their virtual volumes system, so if you can I would go and check them just to make sure.
Go to http://www.nas.gov.uk/onlineCatalogue/ and type CH2/636 into the Reference field and make sure that it is set to include 'Starts'. This will bring up the catalogue for the surviving records of the St Bryce Kirk Session, but it won't show the actual volumes.
CH2/636/28 is a burial register for Kirkcaldy, Old, (St Bryce) Kirk Session dating from 1826 - 1856.
CH2/636/30 is volume for the same church which is a Temporary register of deaths and burials 1783-1838, List of dates of burials from burial letters to session clerk 1807-40, Burials 1768-95, Burials 1826-83.
This is where indexes can raise more questions. Did they record the page number from the volume? Did they include all information from the register or just the bare bones? It may be that lair information was not recorded, but you never know.
The volumes will be available to view in the NAS on their virtual volumes system, so if you can I would go and check them just to make sure.
Go to http://www.nas.gov.uk/onlineCatalogue/ and type CH2/636 into the Reference field and make sure that it is set to include 'Starts'. This will bring up the catalogue for the surviving records of the St Bryce Kirk Session, but it won't show the actual volumes.
Work is the curse of the drinking classes
-
LesleyB
- Posts: 8184
- Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 12:18 am
- Location: Scotland
Re: Kirkcaldy burials
Hi Archiver
Yes, how silly of me - of course you are correct - it was the lack of forward slashes in the Fife Death Index numbers which confused me!
Trish - next time I'm at NAS I will try to look the entries up for you, (if no one else beats me to it...) but it may be some time before I'm there agian.
Best wishes
Lesley
Yes, how silly of me - of course you are correct - it was the lack of forward slashes in the Fife Death Index numbers which confused me!
Trish - next time I'm at NAS I will try to look the entries up for you, (if no one else beats me to it...) but it may be some time before I'm there agian.
Best wishes
Lesley
-
trish1
- Posts: 1320
- Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 3:38 am
- Location: australia
Re: Kirkcaldy burials
Thank you both for your ideas and replies. It is not so easy for me to "drop into NAS" so if anyone has time to check anything for me I am always very thankful. If you ever want anything checked that I can access in Oz, I am happy to do so. If you do have time Lesley - much appreciated.
The numbers I gave are from the Fife Death Index CD and for the source (left of the number) it says "Lair" - so not knowing the numbering systems that exist for such things I did assume it was a Lair number - my apologies if I confused. I noticed when checking the catalogue (thanks archiver) that /31 is a Pew register - would it be difficult to check if my family had a Pew?
Unfortunately there seems to be no will for sailor John, so I cannot use that to assist. I am slowly finding records for more of his children, so I keep hoping to find another marriage for additional information. As is usual with my luck, another of his children married in Markinch in 1816 - and marriages seem to be missing for that parish at that time.
Trish
The numbers I gave are from the Fife Death Index CD and for the source (left of the number) it says "Lair" - so not knowing the numbering systems that exist for such things I did assume it was a Lair number - my apologies if I confused. I noticed when checking the catalogue (thanks archiver) that /31 is a Pew register - would it be difficult to check if my family had a Pew?
Unfortunately there seems to be no will for sailor John, so I cannot use that to assist. I am slowly finding records for more of his children, so I keep hoping to find another marriage for additional information. As is usual with my luck, another of his children married in Markinch in 1816 - and marriages seem to be missing for that parish at that time.
Trish