NOTES FROM THE HENNING /RICHARDT/ I PUT IN THE MISC. FILE (I.E., THE PROBABLE FATHER OF CHILDREN 1-9 ON THE DITFURT INDEX (1596-1618). THEREAFTER BEGIN NOTES FOR OUR HENNING RICHARDT, WHO HAD CHILDREN MATTHIAS AND CATHARINA (1628, 1631):
LOG/NOTES:
-- The Ditfurt index shows this person as having children from 1596-1631. The last two, Matthias and Catharina, born 1628 and 1631, are ours. There is a gap between Matthias (1628) and Andreas (1618). This leads me to believe there are actually two families with Henning or Heinrich /RICHARDT/ (Heinrich reported in the Ditfurt index, Henning reported as actually in the records by Christoph Schröter, researcher who actually searched the records). A note in the index says "1609 - welcher die Frau in Quedlinburg beschafen gehabt, darum er auch müssen Kirchenbuße tun" = "1609 - who slept with the woman in Quedlinburg, so he had to do repent with the church." So it is possible that his first wife died in 1609 (it's possible that there are no death records for this year for Ditfurt, but check inventory to be certain). There is no gap between 1609 and the 1611 child, however, but there is one between the 1613 and 1616 children. This may not necessarily indicate anything, but the researcher, Christoph Schröter writes: "...daß im Februar 1610 die "Witwe von Henning Richardt" die Patin ist. Diese Frau könnte auch seine Mutter sein; dann gäbe es drei Generationen Henning Richardt" = "...that in February 1610 the "widow of Henning Richardt" was the witness. This woman could also be his mother. In this case, there would be three generations of Henning Richardt." Even if the index showed children of two Hening Richardt's, if the witness were the mother of the person in question, there could be three generations of H. R.'s. It is actually possible that there were between one and four generations of Henning /RICHARDT/s in our family. It seems probable, though, that (at least as far as the index goes) there were two, with Matthias and Catharina (1628, 1631) belonging to ancestor, the rest belonging to the other person (not sure if related to this person), but all options should be checked, and remain open - SRE - 2 Apr 2001."
OUR HENNING'S NOTES:
LOG/NOTES:
-- In the FHL there is an index to Ditfurt parish registers: "Ditfurth: auszug aus dem Kirchenbuch : 1595-1924." On FHL 1806092, p. 248-9, there are at least two Richardt families listed, one on p. 248, the other on p. 249. In reality, there are probably at least two families listed on that page, possibly three. Heinrich Richardt is supposed to have died in 1610, which would leave a second family AFTER 1610. Also, there is a big gap between child # 9 and child # 10, ten years, which could be a third family. Some confusing information is listed in this index. Heinrich Richardt, the father (supposedly suspected by indexer as bing father of all these children, as is evidenced in organization of chart), is listed as having died in 1610. Since there seems to be no gap between children #5 and 6 (b. 1609, 1611), the Heinrich Richardt who died 1610 isn't likely the person having children at this time. Although possible, he would have had to marry almost immediately after his wife died, and just kept having children. Also, there is a notation before child #6: "2/392". Not sure what this means. It is interesting that the notation was made on the child born just after the supposed death of the father (Another explanation is that the white space on the page between entries 5 and 6 is only a physical gap. There were so many children listed, that another paper had to be added. Perhaps this is the reason for the notation before entry #6?). But why would 6-11 even be listed as children of this person, on his family group sheet, if it was known the father died in 1610? Also, if his wife was mentioned as being a widow, why isn't her name listed in the index? There is also a notation between children #9 and 10 (as well as between their corresponding page numbers): "neue Person?", so the indexer suspected that the post-1628 kids belonged to a different family than those before (pre-1618). It is quite probable that no mother was listed for any of the children in this list, hence the confusion. Probably there were at least two Heinrich Richardt's. But this should be checked. Should write to the parish and get full extracts of all Richardt's. What seems probable is that Mathias, b. 1628 and Catharina, b. 1631, are ours. Children 1-9, b. 1596-1618 are probably children of another Heinrich Richardt. If Mathias and Catharina are ours, and the other family has a different father, then it is quite probable that the only other Richardt family listed in the index (on the following page) is a connection for us, too. It lists the birth of a Heinrich Richardt 4 Jan 1597 to a Jacob Richardt. This would put Heinrich b. 1597 at 31 years old when his supposed son, Mathias, is born. It would make more sense that the person b. 1597 is the father of our Catharina b. 1631, than that another Heinrich is, who started having kids in 1596, 35 years before her birth. However, it could still be the person. Get extracts of all this stuff from Ditfurt to be sure. Also, check other sources, perhaps wills. For now, I am connecting Jacob to this person as a challenged link. This person's estimated birth date, based on Mathias being his son, would be 1602. Jacob's child Heinrich was born 1597, which is very close to the estimated birth date of 1602, but should be looked at very closely - SRE 22 Jan 2001.
-- Received another research report from Christoph Schröter, Adelheidstr. 12, D06484 Quedlinburg, Germany: "Am 4.1.1597 ist in Ditfurt kein Henning Richardt getauft worden. Es gibt keine andere Familie Richardt damals (auch ein Jacob ist 1597 nicht geboren)" = "On 4 Jan 1597, no Henning Richardt was baptized in Ditfurt. There are no other Richardt families at the time (neither is there a Jacob born in 1597)." This information was in the Ditfurt parish register index, though. Is it possible that the indexer could have gotten this information from another source than the parish registers? Also, Mr. Schröter says that he checked 4 Jan 1597, when the actual date would have been 4 APR 1597. He may also just have missed other Richardt families. The best thing to do for now would be to leave it as is (as the index says), and then check parish registers again later - SRE - 2 Apr 2001.
