-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 john lewis wrote: > > > If I am correct and John did marry again, the reference to 'John > the younger' suggests his father was also a John, neither of the > two Tadley families mentioned above would fit this idea. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Children's details snipped but clearly I have some additions to > make and possibly some 're-arrangement' of marriages. Thanks Joh for more info, it will take a while to digest. I shall be at the HRO later this week so I will pick up the Smiths from the Tadley registers. It is becoming clear that the only way to tackle the Kingsclere Smiths who are so linked with the Wolverton and Baughurst ones is to cast the net wider. On census data, HBI, and Hampshire Baptisms 1813-1841 CDs alone it is clear Richard is top name in the Tadley area. And Woodlands and Baughurst were first port of call as they expanded towards Kingsclere. By using the advanced search on ancestry.com it is possible to see how they migrated from one village to the next by comparing place of birth with place of residence for a selected name. Baughurst comes out top for the Tadley born Smiths to move into ca 1851. Latter Woodlands seems to have expanded faster than anywhere else, evidenced by the need for the church of St Paul. They also seem very keen on the name Caroline as well. Many of the Romany on settling, as they did in the heathlands of the Hants/Berks borders, used to take the name Smith, so I think we have the rapidly expanding Romany Smith population inter-mingled but only geographically with the Yeoman farming community of Smiths and Fosters and additionally many ag labs and woodmen, carpenters, gardeners and even Smith tailors over at Ecchinswell. No wonder with Romany and long established yeoman (who could outbreed due to relative prosperity and hence better diet thereby reducing infant mortality) North Hampshire has the highest density of Smith in the UK. I will check out Pamber as well because of course it is not included in the IGI. BTW: There are two Sarah Lovelocks in the area, one born ca 1780 and one born ca 1790. I think you may have at the moment the wrong one married to Warwick because the other one married to Richard Smith was still producing children in 1835 as described in 1841 census at Tadley and I doubt if she could do that at age 55. I expect Lovelock = Warwick was noted only one Sarah Lovelock had been found. There is a Sarah Warwick death in 1838 that would fit the older Sarah Lovelock very well. It also sorts out which Sarah Lovelock had a baseborn child very early in the 19th century. Lovelock at Hannington and into Tadley are much more linked than I had first thought. I am expecting Smith to come the other way from Tadley into Hannington but that is proving very difficult to build a case with evidence. The Robert Smith at Steventon in the 1851 but born at Foscot (nr Hannington but sometimes described as part of Kingsclere - aka Kingsclere in Hannington!) is the one I am investigating. The John of Steventon buried at Baughurst cries out to be checked out. There is a William Smith who later lives at Ibworth who might be a brother to Robert even John as well but no evidence found yet. Regards, Nigel Gerdes. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (Cygwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG1BCfIfLUp+iRBaARAmz/AKCbBnKc7C8fuQ83ExR5j8z1uWpe+QCeKgt1 YdMqVCxwv15Btb15I2ktvNs= =+YdW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----