Like most people, I had always been interested in my family history, so on my retirement I began a long and complicated search through the many documents available to the public. I was sure of my ancestry back to my grandfather, William James Peen, who was born in Kent in 1858. To begin with, I decided to find out about his parentage by searching the indexes of birth for England and Wales.

Since 1837, such information has been kept in the records of the General Registration. There are some omissions due to ignorance and personal foibles of the record keepers, but most births, marriages and deaths have been recorded. There are four index volumes for each year (eight in the case of early marriages) and each one weighs approximately 25 lb. The public does not have access to the original records, but can see the indexes which give the basic details of names and registration areas. Given these details, officials of the Registrar General’s Department will then find for you the precise details of the original entry, on payment of a fee for each record checked, plus a further fee for each certificate copy they provide for you.

This may sound fairly straightforward, but problems can occur for several reasons. Firstly, the people that kept the records in the early days often spelled the entries phonetically, so it is possible that entries for a single family over the years could have been written with different spellings for each. Also, there are the problems of children who are unnamed at the date of registration and marriage entries where only one of the parties is recorded in the indexes. However, after about 1875 these records tend to be much better.

A search of the indexes from 1857 to June 1858 yielded the details of my grandfather, William Peen born on 24th March 1858 in Sutton Valence (Hollingbourne registration district), the son of James and Eliza Peen. James was a farm labourer, and Eliza had the maiden name of Link. The mother registered the birth by her mark on 17th April 1859.

It may be reasonable to assume that Eliza used a mark, or cross, because she was illiterate. Before Gladstone’s Education Bill was passed in 1870, primary education was only provided by voluntary schools provided by religious societies, and if there was not one in your area, you did not have an education unless you could afford to pay for it. In 1841 33% of men signed the marriage register with a mark, and 44% of women did the same. After the Education Bill of 1870, the rate of illiteracy declined rapidly. Other less common reasons for using a mark instead of a signature were physical ones, such as the loss of an arm or extreme illness.

Having found the parents of grandfather William, it was now possible to search for the record of their marriage. The previous search had revealed that their first child had been baptised in 1845, so therefore they must have been married before this date. Searching back from this date in the Hollingbourne district records, the marriage entry was found, but under the name of James Peer. James Peen, labourer of Sutton Valence, and Eliza Link, spinster of Headcorn, had been married by banns in the parish church of Headcorn on 17th April 1843. This marriage record also revealed that James was named after his father, also a labourer, and that Eliza was the daughter of George Link, another labourer. The groom signed his name, but the bride made her mark in the presence of two witnesses, presumably close relatives as their names were Mary Ann and Stephen Link. At the time of the ceremony, both bride and groom were recorded as being "of full age".

The term "of full age" which is often found in marriage registers and certificates, usually means that the person so described was over the age of 21, which of course used to be the age of consent for marriage. However, it was sometimes used by people under 21, perhaps to avoid the need for parental permission or to disguise a large differences in ages. When the age is recorded as 21, it is not necessarily the age of the person concerned but indicates that he or she is at least 21 years old.

Other records suggested that James Peen, father of the James that married Eliza Link, had been baptised in Sutton Valence on 27th May 1796. A search of the census returns for Sutton Valence confirmed the existence of these families. It was now necessary to search the original records for Sutton Valence.

Parish registers of births, marriages and deaths were begun in 1538. In 1597 clergymen were ordered to copy the registers annually onto parchment and send them to their bishop. Both sets of records have usually suffered damage over the centuries (and sometimes one set may have been completely lost) but usually by consulting both sets, the original records can be largely reconstructed.

Records of baptisms, marriages and burials were kept from the early Christian times, but most of these were destroyed during the Reformation. In 1538, Henry VIII’s Vicar General, Thomas Cromwell, ordered that proper register books of baptisms, marriages and burials should be kept by every parish priest in the land. This edict was repeated several times during the reign of Elizabeth the First, but very few of these early registers survive to this day. Of more than 11,000 ancient parishes, there are less than 1,000 with registers going back to the 16th century. Unfortunately, the original order did not state exactly what details should be recorded, so the amount of information available is very variable. Luckily, in 1812 (1754 in the case of marriages) a standard printed form was introduced.

Using the bishop’s transcripts, the burial records of Sutton Valence were searched from
Michaelmas 1789 to the end of 1851, and provided the following information.

1814 Oct 16 William Peene Sutton Valence aged 66
1824 Sep 21 John William Peen Sutton Valence aged 3 months
1828 Jul 10 William Peen Sutton Valence aged 17 years
1828 Feb 12 William Peen Sutton Valence aged 1 day
1832 Apr 12 Mary Peen Sutton Valence aged 35 years
1832 Feb 11 Ann Susannah Peen Sutton Valence aged l month
1833 Feb 10 Ann Peen Sutton Valence aged 6 years
1834 Dec 10 James Alexander Peen Sutton Valence aged 79 years
1836 Oct 18 Elizabeth Peen Sutton Valence aged 87 years
1838 Apr 21 Elizabeth Peen Sutton Valence aged 82 years
1840 Nov 22 James Peen (brought from Boughton Monchelsea)
Sutton Valence aged 22years
1844 Aug 27 James Peen East Sutton aged 48 years
1847 Mar 27 Mary Peen Sutton Valence aged 48
1851 Oct 24 William Peen Chart Sutton aged 64

There were no records of the burial of Peen’s (or its variant spellings) between 1789 and 1814 (had they lived elsewhere during this period?). However, referring to the James baptised in 1796 previously mentioned, this list shows the burial of a James Peen on the 27th August 1844 aged 48, which matches a date of baptism in 1796. His wife Mary was buried in either 1832 aged 35 or 1847 aged 48. James’s father James Alexander Peen was buried on the 10th December 1834 aged 79, which suggests he may have been born in 1754/5. There were possible burials for his wife Elizabeth in 1836 aged 87 or 1838 aged 82. The entry in 1838 is most likely as this would make her born in 1755/6 and she would be the same age as James Alexander.

The bishop’s transcripts of Sutton Valence were searched for baptisms and burials from 1739 to 1761 and yielded the information shown below, which revealed that James Alexander Peen was baptised in Sutton Valence in 1755, and that his parents were William and Elizabeth Peen.

1747 Jun 6 William Pain infant (buried) Affidavits brought in June 10th
1748 Aug 14 William son of William and Elizabeth Peen (bapt)
1753 Mar 4 Ann daughter of William and Elizabeth Peen (bapt)
1755 Jun 14 James Alexander son of William and Elizabeth Peen (bapt)

Now I knew that several children of William and Elizabeth Peen were christened in Sutton Valence between 1748 and 1755. A further search in the burial register of Sutton Valence for the period 1761 to 1790 produced the following:

1762 Nov 2 William Peen buried
1767 July 11 George Pain buried
1767 Dec 19 Elizth Peen buried
1773 Feb 6 Susannah Peen buried

So, William Peen was buried on 2nd November 1762 and his wife Elizabeth on the 19th December 1767.

For the period of 1718 to 1747 (29 years) there were only two entries of the name Peen in the Sutton Valence records of births, marriages and deaths:

1730 Sep 27 Daniel Peen and Hannah Champing by banns (mar)
1735/6 Feb 15 John son of Thomas and Elizabeth Payne (bpt)

There was no record in Sutton Valence of the marriage of William Peen to Elizabeth, therefore they must have married elsewhere. A search of the Kent Marriage Index for the period gave the following information:

1703 Oct 2 William PAIN Preston to Elizabeth BEECH Faversham
1716 Dec 23 William PAIN to Elizabeth FINNES St Margt. at Cliff
1720 Jul 7 William PEENE to Elizabeth FULLAGAR Wichling
1728 Nov 26 William PEEN to Elizabeth NEWMAN Sittingbourne
1741 Oct 11 William PAIN to Elizabeth MARKETMAN Lydd
1748 Nov 19 William PAIN wdr. to Elizabeth LOW wid Mongeham

The marriage most likely to fit well with the baptism of the first child in 1740, was of William Peen to Elizabeth or Eliza Newman in Sittingbourne on 26th November 1738. The full entry for this marriage in the Sittingbourne records added no more information other than the marriage took place after the calling of banns.

Now I needed to know if William and Elizabeth had any children that were baptised in Sittingbourne. The records of christenings in the bishop’s transcripts were searched between the dates of 29th September 1734 and Michaelmas 1751, but no children of William and Elizabeth were found. The only entry for the name Peen was a baptism of Mary, daughter of John and Mary Peen on the 14th February 1750. This certainly suggested that the couple who had married in Sittingbourne had moved elsewhere, perhaps to Sutton Valence.

It was decided to try that other source of valuable genealogical information, Wills. Often these are of great importance when local church records are of little use, or non-existent. Particularly useful is the fact that several generations of a family are often mentioned in the one document.

Before 1858, matters of probate were in the hands of the Church Courts, after 1858 they came under the jurisdiction of the High Court of Justice. This means that in order to trace a will made before 1858, it is necessary to know the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the parish involved, and then to find out where the records are now kept.

An examination of the indexes of the Archdeaconry and Consistory Courts of Canterbury, 1713 to 1857, gave information about the following wills.

PEAN Elizabeth Sutton Vall. 1832-1836 vol 109 folio 559
PEEN John Frittenden 1721-1727 vol 86 folio 44
PEEN William Duddington 1736-1739 vol 90 folio 12
PEEN William Newington 1736-1739 vol 90 folio 63
PEENE Henry Canterbury 1729-1732 vol 88 folio 15
PEENE William the elder Hawkhurst 1778-1783 vol 100 folio 473
In the higher court of the Consistory of Canterbury between 1796 and 1857 there were the following references:
PEANE Richard Halden 1706 book 59 folio 22
PEENE? Thomas Wittersham 1710 book 58 folio 267
PEANE Jacob Halden 1711 book 58 folio 408
PAEN or PAIN Mary Addisham 1747-1755 book 63 folio 163
PEENE Thomas Hawkhurst 1764-1774 book 65 folio 1
PAENE Mary St John 1774-1795 book 66 folio 46
PEAN William Dover 1774-1795 book 66 folio 122

John Peen of Frittenden and Elizabeth Pean of Sutton Valence seemed the most interesting, and their wills provided the following information.

Will for John Peen of Frittenden, a yeoman. He wished to be buried at Frittenden in the will dated the 1st April 1727 and proved on the 20th September following. John had a wife Mary together with three sisters, Elizabeth Golden, Mary Hovenden and Ann Rayns. The latter was dead by 1727. John and Mary seem to have had a daughter who was married to Richard Gommerby of Rolvendon.

A will for Elizabeth Pean of Sutton Valence. This document was dated the 2nd of April 1836 and proved on the 22nd of October in the same year. She was a widow and named her three children as Elizabeth Trowel, Thomas Drury and John Drury. Both of the sons were dead by 1836. Elizabeth named three granddaughters as Elizabeth, Sarah and Eliza Drury but their parentage is not stated. There was also a nephew Nathanial Kettle who was left a bequest in the will.

It seems likely that this is the will of Elizabeth Peen (Pean) who was buried in Sutton Valence on 18th October 1836. This means she was born in 1748/9, making her considerably older than her husband William, who had married her (Elizabeth Drury) on 4th March 1792.

I still needed to find out more regarding William Peen who had married Elizabeth Newman in Sittingbourne on 26th November 1738, and discover if they had indeed moved to Sutton Valence. There was no record of his baptism in Sutton Valence, so in order to find out where this had taken place, I needed to find a record of his parents marriage. The Kent Marriage Index was consulted again, and a long list was found.

1622 17 Apr Henry PEEN widower m Margaret LASHENDEN Wittersham
1634 3 Jul Edward PEENE Ulcombe m Sus. DIVE Headcorn at Bethersden
1665 13 Oct Gabriel PEENE wdr. Fuller Lt. Chart m Alice BISHOP 38 Smarden at Sturry lic
1666 13 June Richard PEENE wdr. millman Leeds m Judith COVERLED wid. of Geo yeoman
Hollingbourne at Leeds or Hollingbourne lic only
1668 19 Nov Thomas PEENE? m Elizabeth (blank) St My. Dover
1677 7 Aug William PEENE 25 tanner Dover m Margaret HOY 30 Tenterden lic.
1681 8 May Dan PEEN m Elizabeth BLAKE St My. Dover
1683 10 June Robert PEIN m Mary POLLARD Maidstone
1684 1 June John PEEN 28 yeoman Loose m. Barbara BARFOOT 28 Chart Sutton St Margt Canterbury lic
1688 13 Nov Gabriel PEENE m Elizabeth WOLSTONE Rainham
1688 2 Dec Dan PEEN m Ann QUAIFE both of Boughton Loose
1689/90 14 Jan William PEEN wdr tanner m Mary BAX 30 St My Dover lic
1690 27 April Henry PEEN St Andrew Canterbury m. Elizabeth TRITTON Bekesborn
1694 5 Oct William PEEN m Ann ABRAMS both of Lynstead Eastling
1695 31 Jul Thomas PEEN of Loose m Ann HAMMOND Maidstone
1706 30 June Robert PEEN m Mary PIERCE Maidstone
1708 20 June Thomas PEEN Hawkhurst m Sara ADAMS Sandhurst
1714/5 12 Jan Williamm PEAN m Mary KNIGHT St My Dover
1715/6 11 Mar Jos PEEN m Mary BUNYER Maidstone
1716 7 Oct Robert PEEN m Tomsen HOPE Newington Sittingbourne
1720 15 Dec Robert PEENE St Andrew Canterbury m Ann HARRIS Lydd
1720 7 Jul William PEENE m EIizabeth FULLAGAR Wychling
William was probably born between 1690 and 1720, so bearing this in mind, parishes around Sutton Valence were given more attention. No interesting references were found in the records of Sutton Valence, East Sutton or Boughton Malherbie (now Malherbe) for the years 1699 to 1721, but in the bishop’s transcripts for Boughton Monchelsea for the same period the following information regarding baptisms was extracted:

1699/1700 February 25 Thomas son of Daniel Peen
1701/2 February 22 John son of Daniel Peen
1703 August 22 Robert son of Daniel Peen
1707 April 1 Ann daughter of Arthur Peen
1709 March 30 John son of Arthur Peen
1711 July 6 Mary daughter of Arthur Peen
1715 December 11 William son of Arthur Peen
1718 January 19 Thomas son of Arthur Pine

Here was a William, baptised on 11th December 1715, which means he was aged 23 when Elizabeth Newman married a William Peen in Sittingbourne in 1738. The marriage of his father, Arthur, had not come to light in the search of the Kent Marriage Index. Also, who was Daniel Peen of Boughton Monchelsea?

The burial registers of Boughton Monchelsea for the years 1699 to 1750 provided four interesting references:

1703 Oct 27 Robert Peen son of Daniel Peen
1727/8 Feb 18 John Peen
1729 Nov 21 Anne Peen wife of Daniel Peen
1743/4 Jan 22 Daniel Peene

The data from the Kent marriage index showed that Daniel Peen married Ann Quaife on the 2nd December 1688 in Loose. Anne was buried in Boughton Monchelsea on 21st November 1729. Hannah Champing married a Daniel Peen in Sutton Valence on 27th September 1730, almost a year after the death of Anne in Boughton Monchelsea. Daniel was buried in Boughton Monchelsea in 1743/4. Could this be the link between Boughton Monchelsea and Sutton Valence? No Peen was buried in Boughton Monchelsea between 1751 and 1800. Had the family moved around 1740? The information strongly suggests a permanent movement out of the parish.

Between 1700 and 1710 there were no marriages recorded in the name of Peen or its variant spellings in Boughton Monchelsea. A search for baptisms between 1660 and 1699 and burials from 1680 to 1699 provided the following:

1686 John s/o John Peen bpt 22 Mar
1689 Thomas s/o Daniell Peen bpt 21 July
1689 William s/o Daniell Peen bpt 21 July
1691 Daniell s/o Daniell Peen bpt 26 Nov
1693/4 Mary d/o Daniell Peen bpt 21 Jan
1693/4 Mary d/o Daniell Peen bur 20 Feb
1695 Ann d/o Daniell Peen bap 1 Dec
1697/8 Elizabeth d/o Daniell Peen bap 13 Feb
1699/1700 Thomas s/o Daniel Peen bap 25 Feb
1699 Ann d/o Daniel Peen bur 3 Sept

Nine children of Daniel Peen were christened in the parish between 1689 and 1699, including a William. He also had a son named after himself, Daniell, baptised in 1691, so could this be the Daniel who married Hannah Champing in Sutton Valence in 1730, and not the one whose wife Anne had died the year before? This obviously needed clarifying.

Now what about Arthur Peen (Pine)? He had a son, William, who was baptised 11th December 1715 in Boughton Monchelsea, and there is no record in the parish of William’s death before 1750. There was no parish record of Arthur’s baptism in Boughton Monchelsea, or his marriage.
Another search of the Kent Marriage Index for the names Pean(e), Peen(e), Pine, Pyne and other variants came up with the marriage of Arthur Pine of Loose who married Mary Gilbert of the same parish on 28th January 1699/1700 at East Farleigh.

Now the records for the parish of Loose were examined for baptisms between 1660 and 1710, providing the following information:

1681 24 June Mary Peen d William and Susan his wife born 24 June 1659
1686 11 Apr Ann Peene d John and Barbara his wife
1685 13 Apr William Peene s John and Barbara his wife
(gap 1688 - 1690) No entries
1691 26 Dec Mary Peen d John and Barbara his wife
1695 4 Oct Barbara Peen d John and Barbara his wife
1696 13 Nov William Peen s Thomas and Ann his wife
1697 24 Oct James Peen s John and Barorot (sic) his wife
1701 24 Aug John Pine s Arthur and Mary his wife

There were no records of the family using Loose parish church between 1660 and 1681. One further child of Arthur and Mary was christened as John on 24th August 1701. Neither Arthur or Daniel Peen or Pine were recorded as having been baptised at Loose, and there no records of Peen marriages at Loose between 1660 and 1711. However, a search of the burial records for the years 1660 to 1750 provided a long list of names.

1665 5 Dec Susan Peene W. William
1676 23 Dec Sarah Peen Widdow
1684 6 Feb Mary Peen w John
1686 9 Jul Ann Peen d John
1688 4 June William Peen
1691 9 Oct Thomas Peen
1691/2 19 Jan Mary Pen d John
1694 17 Sep Elizabeth Peen
1694 18 Feb William Peen of Loose
1695 28 Ap. John Peen
1698 17 Ap Barbara Peen
1704 26 Sep John Pine s. Arthur and Mary his wife
1719 7 May Judith Peene A child
1723 4 June Mary Pyne A child from Boughton
1724 1 Aug John Peen s. Robert
1726 28 May --- Peen d Robert
1727 16 May Josias Peen s. Robert
1727 3 Feb John Peen of this parish
1729 4 July Robert Peen of this parish, Tanner
1729 22 Oct Mary Peen widow of this parish
1734 24 May Thomas Peen of this parish
1737 27 Aug Ann Peen widow, of this parish
1748 26 May Mary Peen w William of this parish

Further searches of the records of Sutton Valence, Langley, Chart Sutton, Maidstone and East Farleigh to find any Peen(e) or Pine entries during the mid to late 17th century proved fruitless.