VA-ROOTS Archives

June 2021

VA-ROOTS@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Eric Grundset <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Research and writing about Virginia genealogy and family history." <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 2 Jun 2021 20:20:36 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (106 lines)
Doug,
I suspect that the typed versions of the earliest records were either done (perhaps) by people paid by the WPA in the 1930s, by approved volunteers, or by the clerk's staff when they had time decades ago and when typewriters with wide carriages existed. This is not uncommon to find among Virginia records, so there was some concerted effort to do this. Clearly, the idea was to save record books that were deteriorating. Who know what the knowledge base of these folks doing the transcriptions was and how well they could read the old handwriting? That is likely the reason for discrepancies. 
Perhaps someone else has a definitive explanation for this.
Eric Grundset


-----Original Message-----
From: Douglas Burnett <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wed, Jun 2, 2021 1:14 pm
Subject: [VA-ROOTS] 1728 Will

I have a question for my more experienced Virginia Researchers as I have
run into a first of a kind situation.

I am researching George Cox of Henrico County who died sometime between Feb
1727/8 and 21 May 1728 as determine by the date of the will and date it was
proven from the image on the microfilm.

The microfilm was on FamilySearch.org/records/Images and labeled

Goochland. Will Records 1728 – 1742/Deed Books 1728 -1742—743 images.



From Title Slide on the above Microfilm:

Goochland County Virginia

Deeds Etc NO.1

With Wills Inventories Etc

1728 – 1734



Image 16 of 743



The copy of the record that was microfilmed had led a rough life and lots
of bits and pieces missing.



As I was working through the transcription I realized that I had a pdf file
that was obtained from who knows where but was by the signature block
obtained from the County Court as it was signed by the Deputy Clerk and was
the same will I was working on.



I started comparing microfilm to pdf and identifying differences. There was
nothing on the Court House copy that would indicate that any of the
original file was missing as it appeared to be a complete transcription.



I was also surprised that the Court House would have a typed copy of a
1727/8 will which it would issue as an official copy. There is no date on
the Deputy Clerks signature on what I will call the Court House copy.



As I have been taught over the last 20 years of genealogy work a
transcription is a letter by letter effort with all of the relevant
spelling errors and punctuation as it is. Not up to the 21st Century to
correct grammar of the 18th Century if you will. I do go one step further
than some and make the line length of the transcription match the original
so when someone wants to check, it is much easier to negotiate between the
two documents.



Any thoughts on how a Deputy Clerk for the County

(1) would have a transcribed will from 1728

(2) why there would be a number of differences between transcribed and
original

(3) why the County  issued copy has no indication of pieces missing yet the
microfilmed copy has significant chunks missing.



Thanks in Advance



-- 
Douglas Burnett
Satellite Beach
FL

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
https://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html

This list is made possible by a grant from the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS).

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
https://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html

This list is made possible by a grant from the U.S. Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS).

ATOM RSS1 RSS2