View Full Version : Diana Porter, born in Norfolk
Forlorn hope time here.
If anyone looking at the Norfolk prs comes across the baptism of a Diana (or Dinah) Porter bp circa 1738 and her first marriage to a Massingham, first name unknown, prior to 1774, please let me know!
Her second marriage, the baptisms of three of her children, and her burial in 1802 are all in Cley, but I can find no early trace of her and have searched innumerable registers for her. (So please don't look specially - there are some 700+ parishes in Norfolk!)
As Cley is a port, she might have come from another county, but her first husband, and so presumably her marriage, must have been local.
Could she be Dinah Porter baptised Kings Lynn 29 May 1740, father Edwd Porter. This is from freeREG.
scuda
Her marriage, from freeREG: Dinah Porter, single woman & John Massingham, wid, Kings Lynn, 10 Dec 1770.
scuda
Blinkety flip, scuda, that didn't take you long!
No wonder I never found her when searching the old fashioned way!
Thank you so, so much. I've only been looking for her for twenty years.
Ooh, you've opened a can of worms, scuda!
Diana - I am descended from both her twin daughters, bp three days after she married Henry Hook - first appears in Cley registers when Dorothy, her daughter "by her husband's son" is bp.
Thanks to you, I can now find a posible father for Dorothy: John Massingham's eldest, William, b 1752.
Lookinging for any children of Diana Massingham, I now find Earl, s of WILLIAM & Diana Massingham, b 9 months after Dorothy, but bp in Aylmerton:D
Glad I could help. I have Norfolk ancestors and keep looking into freeREG because Norfolk parishes are quite well represented there, with frequent additions. What a useful note from the vicar about Dorothy's birth!
scuda
Believe me, I didn't think so till today!
Wierdly, the online register for Aylmerton shows the mother as Mary, so I am now completely nonplussed! And there is a pedigree on the IGI for William Massingham, making him very respectable. Hmm.
I wonder if Aylmerton is from bts on freereg
freeREG has William Massingham marrying Mary Bowman 24 January 1775 at Aylmerton. How does that tie in?
scuda
Mmmm, Earl's birth is definitely after that marriage, so where does Diana come into it? Strange.
scuda
According to Aylmerton bps, Earl's mother is Mary which ties up with the marriage. There's no way I can make Diana out of what is written. So where did the Free reg transcriber get it from???
I've just looked at Earl's baptism on familysearch - it's a really clear image, and the mother is definitely Mary. It seems odd that if the freeREG transcriber has made a mistake they have chosen the very name that means something to you.
scuda
Don't forget you can browse images of the actual PR pages for much of Norfolk via Family Search Record Search here:
http://search.labs.familysearch.org/recordsearch/start.html?datestamp=1201203282703#p=allCollection s;r=1
(see the red asterisk towards the bottom of the page)
Merry, that's the image I referred to in my last post.
scuda
That's what I, and now scuda, have done. As Scuda says, the image on the original register is very clear. Earl is neatly born 9 months after the marriage & all is well. It's just that the free reg transcriber says the mother is Diana.
kiterunner
24-02-10, 16:51
Is it possible the FreeREG transcriber was working from the Bishop's Transcripts or from a printed transcription?
Looking on the parish info on freeREG it appears that the actual registers have been transcribed. The ATs are in the course of transcription, but there is no indication that any of the ATs are online at the moment.
scuda
Don't forget you can browse images of the actual PR pages for much of Norfolk via Family Search Record Search here:
http://search.labs.familysearch.org/...ollections;r=1
Thanks for this info Merry - I had no idea this was available! I just got lucky and found a baptism and a marriage. :)
Blinkety flip, Dinah sure was a scarlet lady. It looks as if she was seduced by John Massingham, had a whole family with him before his first wife died, when she married him, then had a child with his son (who presumably was no more than 15) before landing up with Henry Hook. As the only children she had within that marriage were twins bp 3 days after the wedding, I really do think he was paid to get her out of the public eye!
maggie_4_7
02-03-10, 19:08
Blinkety flip, Dinah sure was a scarlet lady. It looks as if she was seduced by John Massingham, had a whole family with him before his first wife died, when she married him, then had a child with his son (who presumably was no more than 15) before landing up with Henry Hook. As the only children she had within that marriage were twins bp 3 days after the wedding, I really do think he was paid to get her out of the public eye!
Oh well she was certainly liberated if indeed it was all her choice :)
vBulletin® v3.8.7 PL3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.