Thursday, April 10, 2014

Treasure Chest Thursday - Post 209: 1789 Birth Record for Hannah Sawtell in Brookline, N.H. Town Records

It's Treasure Chest Thursday - time to look in my digital image files to see what treasures I can find for my family history and genealogy musings.

The treasure today is the Birth Record for Hannah Sawtell (1789-1857), born in Brookline, New Hampshire.


The birth record for Hannah "Sartell" is on the right-hand page in the image above, and says:

"526  Hannah Sartell the daughter of Josiah Sartell and Hannah his wife born November the 6th 1789."

The source citation for this record is:

"New Hampshire Town Clerk, Vital and Town Records, 1636-1947," digital images, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/searchapi/search/collection/1987741: accessed 12 November 2012), Hillsborough County, Brookline Town, "Town Records, 1758-1907," Page 33 (penned, image 13 of 167), Hannah Sartell birth entry, 6 November 1789 (daughter of Josiah and Hannah Sartell); citing New Hampshire Town Clerk Records.

There are some handwritten notes under the "526" entry for this birth that say "copy Mar 25 1911 by E.E.P."  Apparently, Edward E. Parker used this record in his book History of Brookline, Formerly Raby, Hillsborough County, New Hampshire (Brookline, N.H. : Town of Brookline, N.H., 1914).
The book was my first source for this birth entry. 

The top of the page says "Record of Births from the Old book."  Page 526 is the page in the old book.  Can I find the "Old Book?"

Yes, it's in the same New Hampshire Town Record collection.  Here is the page image from the "Old Book:"


The birth record information is on the left-hand page in the image above, and says:

"Hannah Sartell the daughter of Josiah Sartell and Hannah his wife Born October the November 6th 1789."

However, this record has the month "October" crossed out.  Interesting, but probably the clerk's error.

There is also a mark to the left of the birth entry, which are initials (J.S.?).  I think this is a note that the compiler of the "New book" made when he copied the record from the "Old Book."

The source citation for this record is:

"New Hampshire Town Clerk, Vital and Town Records, 1636-1947," digital images,  FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/searchapi/search/collection/1987741: accessed 12 November 2012), Hillsborough County, Brookline Town, "Town Records, 1769-1833," Page 526 (stamped and penned, image 266 of 279), Hannah Sartell birth entry, 6 November 1789 (daughter of Josiah and Hannah Sartell); citing New Hampshire Town Clerk Records.

While this "Old Book" has a later start date than the "New" book, that is because the "new" book has transcriptions from two older books, plus more records after the two older books were filled up.  

I consider the "Old Book" - the one for 1769 to 1833, to be an Original Source, and this birth entry to be Primary Information and Direct Evidence.  

I will use both citations in my genealogy management program, but I will use the more "original" record image - the one from the "Old Book," so as not to clutter up my database, since the two birth entries are essentially the same.

Hannah (Sawtell) Hildreth (1789-1857) is my third great-grandmother, the daughter of Josiah Sawtell (1768-1847) and Hannah Smith (1768-1827).  


copyright (c) 2014, Randall J. Seaver


1 comment:

Mark Roy said...

It's interesting, in an unfortunate way, that the URL contained in the citation is not useful to access the image or even the collection.

Rather, it's a link to XML content that contains information about the source. So, you're stuck having to dig through FamilySearch.org to "re-find" the cited document.

It would be far more useful, IMO, for the citation to include a 'permalink' URL to a page that contained a link to the cited image.