Re: Vandom SCHENCK Marriage 1 Sarah C. HOUP

Hello JC

As an enthusiastic researcher of the Schenck Family name, I make a regular practice of studying the postings on the Schenck Forum of the Genforum website.

It was therefore with interest that I saw your posting re 'Vandom Schenck'.

The name 'Vandom' is certainly unusual and I feel certain that this has resulted from a mistake in transcription.However, I cannot say whether this is a recent or an historical error, it could even be that the error occurred before the birth, in which case, rightly or wrongly, the child name was, indeed 'Vandom'.

I believe that 'Vandom' Schenck was a descendant of the 1723 marriage liason between the historic Families of Schenck van Nydeggen and van Dorn and that the error has arisen because, when they appear side by side, the letters 'r' and 'n' appear very much like an 'm' thus : -rn.

Quite by co-incidence, I experienced a simliar case, but in reverse, only last week where a Farm named 'Clitsome' had been transposed from a Census record as 'Clitsorne' so that Census searches for the Farm failed to produce any result in that Census year.

However, my thinking re 'Vandom' seems to be confirmed by the fact that the forename of one of the children was 'Dorn'.

It may, of course, be that you already have information re the van Dorn Family, but if not, please let me know and I will be happy to send you the details by e-mail, together with the URLs of two websites that may be helpful to your study.

With warm good wishes for your research

David
(David H J Schenck in the County of Surrey, England)