Parish Records


The original Parish Registers have many pages usually in date order, mainly without page numbers (latter pages have some numbers annotated). The majority of the pages have left and right sides. Some pages/sides are blank. Some registers have been damaged through dampness, vermin or misuse and may not necessarily be in sequential order as repairs and re-writes occur throughout the centuries. In some instances entries appear more than once where different clergy have up-dated the records. If these have been identified, wherever possible the transcribers have annotated subsequent entries as duplicates.


Essex Record Office (ERO) has digitised the original registers and the Images follow the original page order. They use an “Image Numbering sequence” that links the image back to its position in the original document. The ERO have made the images available on-line using a facility called SEAX. There is a charge to view the images if you are not at the ERO or an Access Point.

Accessing the Images

With your Internet Browser open, copy/paste this link: – the basic search is free but to see the register images you will be charged for this service by Essex Record Office; alternatively visit Saffron Walden Library.

Notes applicable to events prior to 1752

England, Ireland and the British colonies changed the start of the year to 1 January in 1752. Prior to the change, the start of the year was 25 March. This means that recorded event dates prior to the change could be confusing and the following example may help users to understand the calendar being used.

Alice Jones married John Smith on the 29th May 1750 and almost straight away, they started a family. Baby Sarah Smith was then born nine months later in February of the following year. The register in the church would record the marriage on 29 May 1750 and baptism of Sarah 5 March 1750. With a modern calendar, it would appear that the baby was born before the couple married. However, because the year 1750 did not end until the 24th of March, the marriage in the early part of 1750 followed by the birth in late 1750 was perfectly legitimate