Hi Peter Thanks for your help, I think you are right on reflection the Thomas in Bristol is probably not Thomas Snrs son. Worcester record office has a huge collection of deeds in no particular logical order due to the age of the collection. I think I am going to have to spend some more time going through it and hope to get lucky. I know it is like searching for a needle in a haystack with very few clues, a couple of listers have come up with a few ideas, the Astley connection looks interesting. Thanks Mark --- On Sat, 10/4/10, Peter Booth <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> wrote: > From: Peter Booth <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> > Subject: Re: [WOR] Spilsbury > To: "Mark Jennings" <m_jenningsuk@yahoo.co.uk> > Date: Saturday, 10 April, 2010, 12:13 > Mark, > >    Sorry Mark. I've tried everything I know > and looked everywhere. I don't think there is going to be > any easy answer. I think some accurate detailed research > will be required. > >    I can't see the Thomas (Snr) in > Belboughton in 1841, being the same as the Thomas living in > Bristol in 1851. Nothing else matches. And the Bristol one > has a son Thomas who is born c1829, not c1812 as in 1841 > census. > >    If the will is dated 1868, the one thing > we should be able to assume is that both are still living. > So logically they should both be in 1841, 1851 and 1861 and > possibly even 1871. > >    Free BMD has a Thomas Spilsbury death in > 1867 aged 82, and another in 1874 aged 55. These sort of > fit, although in 1874 the younger Thomas should be 62. But > try matching them to census records. > >    The only clue I did come up with is that > in 1841 census there is a Sarah Spilsbury aged 20 living > with the two Thomases. But IGI doesn't have a birth record. > >    Peter > > > > >