Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere!



Go Back   Genealogists' Forum - We have branches everywhere! > Research > Research Questions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 14-10-14, 19:46
Lindsay Lindsay is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 898
Default Too many Georges

George Senior's marriage licence of 22 Oct 1753 (on FMP) said that he was of Silkstone, Yorkshire and age 22 - so born 1731.

That fits perfectly with this baptism at Silkstone on 14 April 1731, George son of George Senior of Hoylandswaine:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/22...nSearchResults.

Other children apparently with the same father are:
Stillborn child Buried 12 Aug 1723
Martha bap 15 Aug 1724 Buried 20 Nov 1730
Ann bap 15 Aug 1724. Buried 10 Nov 1724
Elizabeth bap 15 Sept 1727 Buried 12 Nov 1730
Rebekah bap 14 Mar 1730/31
George bap 14 April 1731
Martha 29 Apr 1733
George bap 14 Sept 1735

The problem I have is with Rebekah, bap. a month before George, and the 2nd George bap. in 1735.

Vicar's mistakes? Any opinions welcome.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 14-10-14, 20:17
Phoenix's Avatar
Phoenix Phoenix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,650
Default

Er, isn't there also George s of Richard Senior bp 2 Mar 1731?
__________________
The chestnuts cast their flambeaux
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 14-10-14, 20:20
Phoenix's Avatar
Phoenix Phoenix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,650
Default

Scrub that. It's a burial
__________________
The chestnuts cast their flambeaux
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 14-10-14, 20:26
Lindsay Lindsay is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 898
Default

Lol! This lot kept recycling the same names, and not giving the mothers' names on baptisms makes it very hard to disentangle them.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 14-10-14, 21:08
Phoenix's Avatar
Phoenix Phoenix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,650
Default

And it means that the vicar could get confused as well.

There is the possibility that when it came to the licence young man lied. And that a burial is missing.

Or that the vicar got father or son's name wrong in a few instances. Or that there were two George Senior snrs. Both of the same place.

As the family seems well entrenched, I cannot imagine any poor law records.

What about wills? If you have the time, wills for the place might be worth pursuing.
__________________
The chestnuts cast their flambeaux
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 14-10-14, 21:55
kiterunner's Avatar
kiterunner kiterunner is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 25,302
Default

I suspect there were two George Seniors fathering children at the same time.
__________________
KiteRunner

Family History News updated 29th Feb
Findmypast 1871 census update
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 15-10-14, 07:47
Lindsay Lindsay is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kiterunner View Post
I suspect there were two George Seniors fathering children at the same time.
That's what I thought, but I'm having trouble proving it - no suitable marriages or burials, for example.

I think you're right, and the only way to prove it one way or the other is with Wills. I'm not too optimistic, though - I know I've looked for Wills for this family in the past and not found anything.

I don't like loose ends
Thanks for looking.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 16:35.


Hosted by Photon IT

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 PL3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.