Kent Probate Indexes
Free use for research purposes.
Kent Probate Indexes PCC
Kentish Administrations in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury,
1559-1660
National Archives PROB 6/1-36; PROB 6/234; PROB 8/42
This is an abstract from a much longer and more detailed article about the index in the June 2016 issue of the Kent Family History Society Journal.
The Prerogative Court of Canterbury (PCC) was the supreme probate court for the whole of southern England and Wales as well as for the many people either dying or domiciled abroad (this group including large numbers of military and naval personnel).
All dates have been converted to new style, so original entries from, say, January, February or March 1645 will appear under 1646.
First, Former and Further grants (FG)
The clerks were careful to record these, often of widely varying dates as some estates were complex and subject to certain restrictive conditions, perhaps to be released only upon the (much later) death of a relative or other person. It therefore follows that some first or former grants may have occurred before the extant administrations begin in 1559, and that some further grants may be included in years far beyond the extent of the present index and so will need checking in the original volumes. Time spent on examining them is seldom wasted, and may throw up surprising new details which can in turn lead to other classes of records.
Surnames
In searching, some considerable lateral thinking may be necessary as all surnames have been left as they appear. In the 1500s and 1600s a surname like Bishop might equally be spelled Bysshope, reflecting the extreme interchangeability of all the vowels with each other (as well as with the letter “y”) and the irrelevance of double consonants; therefore Smyth(e) is perhaps more likely to occur than Smith, Sheparde than Shepherd, Meadeherst than Medhurst, Duncke than Dunk, and so on.
It was frequently the case that the surname written in the margin by a clerk to assist in quick reference was spelled slightly differently to the surname in the body of the text, and this has led to considerable numbers of (mostly) slight variants where overlapping indexes exist. In these cases I therefore enter both connected by an “otherwise” (o/w) if different enough to cause a moment’s confusion, but enter silently under just the one spelling if the difference is trifling. All aliases, former and other surnames have been entered twice and cross-referenced. Again, these are valuable and may indicate a widow’s subsequent remarriage or other possibly more complex relationships.
Parish Names
All are given in their modern form with an estate or other name within the parish (if given) following immediately, but this is still a problematic area. Some people are described as merely of Kent or of the Diocese of Rochester (Roch) or Canterbury (Cant) while others show parish and diocese which do not agree; and others give a place name of which there are sometimes two or three in the county, often far distant from each other (e.g. Ash, Boughton, Cliffe, Goodnestone, Hoo, Milton, Newington, Preston, and Stone). Some are differentiated but others are not and may require some work to identify the correct parish. There are also a regrettable number of entries entered, faute de mieux, under only a possible manorial, estate, hamlet, house or other name whose parish is not certain to either former editors or the present writer.
All dates have been converted to new style, so original entries from, say, January, February or March 1645 will appear under 1646.
First, Former and Further grants (FG)
The clerks were careful to record these, often of widely varying dates as some estates were complex and subject to certain restrictive conditions, perhaps to be released only upon the (much later) death of a relative or other person. It therefore follows that some first or former grants may have occurred before the extant administrations begin in 1559, and that some further grants may be included in years far beyond the extent of the present index and so will need checking in the original volumes. Time spent on examining them is seldom wasted, and may throw up surprising new details which can in turn lead to other classes of records.
Surnames
In searching, some considerable lateral thinking may be necessary as all surnames have been left as they appear. In the 1500s and 1600s a surname like Bishop might equally be spelled Bysshope, reflecting the extreme interchangeability of all the vowels with each other (as well as with the letter “y”) and the irrelevance of double consonants; therefore Smyth(e) is perhaps more likely to occur than Smith, Sheparde than Shepherd, Meadeherst than Medhurst, Duncke than Dunk, and so on.
It was frequently the case that the surname written in the margin by a clerk to assist in quick reference was spelled slightly differently to the surname in the body of the text, and this has led to considerable numbers of (mostly) slight variants where overlapping indexes exist. In these cases I therefore enter both connected by an “otherwise” (o/w) if different enough to cause a moment’s confusion, but enter silently under just the one spelling if the difference is trifling. All aliases, former and other surnames have been entered twice and cross-referenced. Again, these are valuable and may indicate a widow’s subsequent remarriage or other possibly more complex relationships.
Parish Names
All are given in their modern form with an estate or other name within the parish (if given) following immediately, but this is still a problematic area. Some people are described as merely of Kent or of the Diocese of Rochester (Roch) or Canterbury (Cant) while others show parish and diocese which do not agree; and others give a place name of which there are sometimes two or three in the county, often far distant from each other (e.g. Ash, Boughton, Cliffe, Goodnestone, Hoo, Milton, Newington, Preston, and Stone). Some are differentiated but others are not and may require some work to identify the correct parish. There are also a regrettable number of entries entered, faute de mieux, under only a possible manorial, estate, hamlet, house or other name whose parish is not certain to either former editors or the present writer.
David Wright, January 2016
NOTE: Please use the scroll bars to search both across and down in the embedded file, easiest to view on a mobile device. Alternatively, please use the PDF version to view and to download:
