RootsWeb.com Mailing Lists
Total: 2/2
    1. Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest
    2. pauline davy
    3. Hi everyone - I'm butting in here, hope you don't mind, but you mentioned a family who had three children named William, obviously the first two had died. Does anyone find, as I do, that these children who are given a deceased siblings name, often die themselves? Just recently I came across a Margaret, three times a child was christened that, and three times the baby died. This doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either. I'd be interested in what other listers think. Regards, Pauline in OZ >From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> >Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest >Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:49:03 +1100 > >Donna, > > I don't have any links to this family. But your's was the only >message received today, so I had the luxury of some time to have a close >look. Lucky for you. > > I've been advising people for years to click on batch numbers on >IGI records. It's amazing what you find. > > I found the 1694 record for Elizabeth, clicked on the batch number >and searched for KIGHTLEY. Only the one record came back up. I suspected >possible surname variants. It would be unusual for just one child. > > Not to be outdone, I searched the batch again, this time using just >father's given name Francis. Et Voila !!. Elizabeth and seven brothers and >sisters all with different surname spellings. Only one included a mother's >name Elizabeth. Primed with success I went and found the marriage. > > Francis Kitely married Elizabeth Cliffton on 3rd May 1677 in >Houghton Conquest. Elizabeth was the youngest of eight children. The name >William was used three times suggesting the earlier two had died. The >children were :- Francis 1678, William (I) 1680, John 1682, Joseph 1685, >William (II) 1687, William (III) 1689, James 1691 and Elizabeth 1694. > > I also clicked on the batch number for the marriage record. It >indicated that Elizabeth Cliffton had a brother John who married Ann >Slingsby. > > Your back in the "dark ages" when it comes to finding birth records >for Francis and Elizabeth. I found nothing for Francis, but there was an >Elizabeth Clifton b1849 at Houghton Conquest. It makes her 28 at marriage >which might be a bit old for the era. And there are lots of Elizabeth's in >other counties. > > That will give you something to do for a couple of days. Hope you >can follow the logic. get back to me if you have problems. > > Good luck > > Peter in Sydney > >PS!! Some of the variant spellings were Kitely, Kightly, Kitly, Citly, >Keightley and Kitghtley. > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== >The Bedfordshire Surnames List can be viewed at: >http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > _________________________________________________________________ realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au

    02/20/2006 04:16:10
    1. Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest
    2. Patricia Salter
    3. Hi Pauline I thought I was the only one thinking the very same thing. I have several families who kept christening their children with a particular name, and each time that child died - it was as if there was a curse on certain names in some families, so I'm with you there. Cheers Patti ----- Original Message ----- From: pauline davy To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 1:16 AM Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest Hi everyone - I'm butting in here, hope you don't mind, but you mentioned a family who had three children named William, obviously the first two had died. Does anyone find, as I do, that these children who are given a deceased siblings name, often die themselves? Just recently I came across a Margaret, three times a child was christened that, and three times the baby died. This doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either. I'd be interested in what other listers think. Regards, Pauline in OZ >From: "Peter Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> >Reply-To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >To: BEDFORD-L@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [BDF] KIGHTLEY family of Houghton Conquest >Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 16:49:03 +1100 > >Donna, > > I don't have any links to this family. But your's was the only >message received today, so I had the luxury of some time to have a close >look. Lucky for you. > > I've been advising people for years to click on batch numbers on >IGI records. It's amazing what you find. > > I found the 1694 record for Elizabeth, clicked on the batch number >and searched for KIGHTLEY. Only the one record came back up. I suspected >possible surname variants. It would be unusual for just one child. > > Not to be outdone, I searched the batch again, this time using just >father's given name Francis. Et Voila !!. Elizabeth and seven brothers and >sisters all with different surname spellings. Only one included a mother's >name Elizabeth. Primed with success I went and found the marriage. > > Francis Kitely married Elizabeth Cliffton on 3rd May 1677 in >Houghton Conquest. Elizabeth was the youngest of eight children. The name >William was used three times suggesting the earlier two had died. The >children were :- Francis 1678, William (I) 1680, John 1682, Joseph 1685, >William (II) 1687, William (III) 1689, James 1691 and Elizabeth 1694. > > I also clicked on the batch number for the marriage record. It >indicated that Elizabeth Cliffton had a brother John who married Ann >Slingsby. > > Your back in the "dark ages" when it comes to finding birth records >for Francis and Elizabeth. I found nothing for Francis, but there was an >Elizabeth Clifton b1849 at Houghton Conquest. It makes her 28 at marriage >which might be a bit old for the era. And there are lots of Elizabeth's in >other counties. > > That will give you something to do for a couple of days. Hope you >can follow the logic. get back to me if you have problems. > > Good luck > > Peter in Sydney > >PS!! Some of the variant spellings were Kitely, Kightly, Kitly, Citly, >Keightley and Kitghtley. > > >==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== >The Bedfordshire Surnames List can be viewed at: >http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~hughw/bedf.html > _________________________________________________________________ realestate.com.au: the biggest address in property http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au ==== BEDFORD Mailing List ==== For any updates our info about the status of this list go to http://helpdesk.rootsweb.com

    02/20/2006 02:16:33