> >> One of my most puzzling ones was a gg grandfather, whose family came > >> from the Isle of Axholme. He lived in Hull, got married in Bath, and > >> Came to Natal within a month of getting married. I wondered how he > >> came to meet his wife, as Hull and Bath seem quite far apart. The Bath > >> family were from Belfast, and seem to have been from quite settled > >> farmers in Ballynure before the 19th century, when they scattered to > >> Quebec, Mauritius, Bath and Durban. > >> > > > > Hull was an major port and trading centre. It's not unusual for > > inhabitants of trading centres to have far-flung connections. Maybe > > Bristol would have been the common meeting ground. Good point. Hull was also home to a number of @Hamburg merchants' so you might get the odd Anglo-German marriage. And Basth was a spa town, where vaguely ill people from all over the place went to achieve a cure -if they could afford it. There are surpsising numbers of families with roots in Northumberland and Durham who flee to Bath for the winter. Just possibly, your man chased a local girl whose family were 'taking the waters' originally, but changed his mind when the irish lass met his eye. > > > > I found the link for my gg-grand parents quite fortuitiously, he was a > barrister's clerk in London (Middle Temple) and she was the daughter of > a wine & spirits merchant in York. The barrister was a chap called John > Cowling who worked the northern circuit which included York. I > discovered it because my gg-grandfather was missing from home in one of > the censuses and turned up in the same digs as his employer in Liverpool. Barristers got around everywhere. I am still chasing the totally unsuitable marriage of a barrister, James O Griffits, (sic) later a judge, to an East End girl in the 1850s. Nowhere in London, apparently, could be anywhere in the country (and maybe recorded as Griffith/s. Am beginning to wonder if it happened (and what happened to her after having two children. He didn't marry again (to a rich girl) till he was pushing 60. I do hope Mrs G No 1 was dead by then. EVE > > -- > Graeme Wall > This account not read, substitute trains for rail. > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GENBRIT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society
On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 7:33:51 PM UTC+1, melanie chesnel wrote: > On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 11:42:30 AM UTC+1, Ian Goddard wrote: > > On 25/10/15 17:44, melanie chesnel wrote: > > > > > Just think stone masons building castles and cathederals v. ag labs > > > > Ag labs, hired from year to year with no home of their own could have > > been quite mobile. > > > I quite agree I was thinking more when ag labs were serfs tied to the manor - I suppose I shouldn't have used the 19th century abbreviation when thinking of the middle ages. > The controlling factor in a persons mobility seems to be their job or the search for work, but I think their character also played a role. Some people are just stick in the mud and others take even the slightest of opportunities to roam. What I find interesting is both my mother and father came from mobile families. Although on the surface my mum's working class northern background was different to my dad's middle class home counties their families were very similar back in the 18th century - one both sides they were butcher's, metal workers of one sort or another, coach builders, shipwrights and carpenters, yeoman farmers and a surprising number owned pubs or were malsters or dealers in beer! > regards melanie chesnel that should read "on both sides" - sorry regards melanie
On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 11:42:30 AM UTC+1, Ian Goddard wrote: > On 25/10/15 17:44, melanie chesnel wrote: > > > Just think stone masons building castles and cathederals v. ag labs > > Ag labs, hired from year to year with no home of their own could have > been quite mobile. > I quite agree I was thinking more when ag labs were serfs tied to the manor - I suppose I shouldn't have used the 19th century abbreviation when thinking of the middle ages. The controlling factor in a persons mobility seems to be their job or the search for work, but I think their character also played a role. Some people are just stick in the mud and others take even the slightest of opportunities to roam. What I find interesting is both my mother and father came from mobile families. Although on the surface my mum's working class northern background was different to my dad's middle class home counties their families were very similar back in the 18th century - one both sides they were butcher's, metal workers of one sort or another, coach builders, shipwrights and carpenters, yeoman farmers and a surprising number owned pubs or were malsters or dealers in beer! regards melanie chesnel
On Monday, May 25, 1998 at 8:00:00 AM UTC+1, Howard Smith wrote: > I have hit a brick wall. Can anyone help in locating birth and parentage > of: > Thomas Threlfall, born Lancashire 1801-1806, married Alice Winpenny, Gt > Budworth, Cheshire on 26 June 1828. Moved to Hulme, Manchester 1840. > Died there in 1844. Occupation plumber and sometime publican. Can you > help? > > Is anybody else researching Threlfall? > > Howard Smith He's supposed to have been born in Liverpool, but not convinced about that, myself
On Monday, 26 October 2015 17:16:50 UTC, Ian Goddard wrote: > On 26/10/15 13:58, Chris Dickinson wrote: > > On Saturday, 24 October 2015 06:15:53 UTC+1, Steve Hayes wrote: > >> Britons still live in Anglo-Saxon tribal kingdoms, Oxford University > >> finds > >> > >> A new genetic map of Britain shows that there has been little movement > >> between areas of Britain which were former tribal kingoms in > >> Anglo-Saxon England > > <snip> > > > > > > That a core population has remained doesn't say anything about movement. > > > > The area that I study is largely rural. It could only support a limited population. Any surplus had to move somewhere else. > > > > That raises an interesting question. Given the number of recurrences of > the plague between the C14th & C17th to what extent did a surplus build up? > > -- > Hotmail is my spam bin. Real address is ianng > at austonley org uk A standard view is that there was steady population growth after the Black Death. http://chartsbin.com/view/28k The last blips were the 1623 famine, the Civil War and the Great Plague. What's more, after the mid-seventeenth century, the home population increased despite migration to Ireland and the colonies.
On 26/10/2015 10:42, Ian Goddard wrote: > On 25/10/15 17:44, melanie chesnel wrote: > >> Just think stone masons building castles and cathederals v. ag labs > > Ag labs, hired from year to year with no home of their own could have > been quite mobile. > But generally in the same area, eg again on my wife's side, one ancestor was a ploughman near Dumfries at the beginning of the 19th Century. Each of his children was born in a different village but all within about 10 miles of the town. The really mobile group was domestic servants who would often move around the country with their employer and then change employers in a distant town. -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
On 26/10/2015 10:29, Ian Goddard wrote: > On 26/10/15 00:48, Steve Hayes wrote: >> One of my most puzzling ones was a gg grandfather, whose family came >> from the Isle of Axholme. He lived in Hull, got married in Bath, and >> Came to Natal within a month of getting married. I wondered how he >> came to meet his wife, as Hull and Bath seem quite far apart. The Bath >> family were from Belfast, and seem to have been from quite settled >> farmers in Ballynure before the 19th century, when they scattered to >> Quebec, Mauritius, Bath and Durban. >> > > Hull was an major port and trading centre. It's not unusual for > inhabitants of trading centres to have far-flung connections. Maybe > Bristol would have been the common meeting ground. > I found the link for my gg-grand parents quite fortuitiously, he was a barrister's clerk in London (Middle Temple) and she was the daughter of a wine & spirits merchant in York. The barrister was a chap called John Cowling who worked the northern circuit which included York. I discovered it because my gg-grandfather was missing from home in one of the censuses and turned up in the same digs as his employer in Liverpool. -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
On 25/10/15 17:44, melanie chesnel wrote: > Just think stone masons building castles and cathederals v. ag labs Ag labs, hired from year to year with no home of their own could have been quite mobile. -- Hotmail is my spam bin. Real address is ianng at austonley org uk
On 26/10/15 00:48, Steve Hayes wrote: > One of my most puzzling ones was a gg grandfather, whose family came > from the Isle of Axholme. He lived in Hull, got married in Bath, and > Came to Natal within a month of getting married. I wondered how he > came to meet his wife, as Hull and Bath seem quite far apart. The Bath > family were from Belfast, and seem to have been from quite settled > farmers in Ballynure before the 19th century, when they scattered to > Quebec, Mauritius, Bath and Durban. > Hull was an major port and trading centre. It's not unusual for inhabitants of trading centres to have far-flung connections. Maybe Bristol would have been the common meeting ground. -- Hotmail is my spam bin. Real address is ianng at austonley org uk
On 26/10/2015 00:48, Steve Hayes wrote: > On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 22:03:56 +0000, Graeme Wall > <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> On 25/10/2015 20:40, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: >>> In message <05c33620-c70a-4959-8a66-5dddf30c1c83@googlegroups.com>, >>> melanie chesnel <mellychesnel@gmail.com> writes: >>>> On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 9:05:20 AM UTC+2, J. P. Gilliver >>>> (John) wrote: >>> [] >>>>> In my own researches, I had assumed the coming of the railways in the >>>>> mid to late 19C would have led to much greater migration around the >>>>> country; however, I've found the effect was much less than I'd expected. >>>>> Still, when doing research for work colleagues (at Rochester in Kent), I >>>>> find quite a lot of them are from local areas. >>> [] >>>> I think even before the railways there was quite a lot of movement >>>> over long distances in some families and notably mine. Both my >>>> mother's and >>> [] >>>> This shows you can take nothing for granted about the movement of >>>> people in the past. Each family is different and some were very >>>> mobile, particularly mariners and artisans. Just think stone masons >>>> building castles and cathederals v. ag labs >>>> regards melanie chesnel >>> >>> Well, obviously I can only speak from my own researches - which are >>> that, in an awful lot of cases, people didn't move much during their >>> lifetime - even after the railways, and even in towns. Not just my own >>> family (which is diverse - but comes from a lot of little clusters who >>> mostly didn't move much), but research I've done for others too. >>> >>> Occasionally you (I) _do_ find someone who's moved a long way; but, I've >>> generally found them the exception. YMMV (well, clearly does). >> >> Teachers and Churchmen! One of my wife's gg-grandfathers was both and, >> as a National School teacher he moved from Abergavenny to Manchester via >> Staffordshire, then remustered as a vicar and successively was in >> Dumbarton, a Devonshire village, Oban, Aberdeen and finally died in >> Guildford. > > One of my most puzzling ones was a gg grandfather, whose family came > from the Isle of Axholme. He lived in Hull, got married in Bath, and > Came to Natal within a month of getting married. I wondered how he > came to meet his wife, as Hull and Bath seem quite far apart. The Bath > family were from Belfast, and seem to have been from quite settled > farmers in Ballynure before the 19th century, when they scattered to > Quebec, Mauritius, Bath and Durban. > > The teacher/vicar still puzzles me about how he met his wife, he was born in Hathern, Leics. She was born in Wrexham. He was a teacher in Abergavenny and she was a teacher in Cardigan, right the other side of Wales. -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
On Saturday, 24 October 2015 06:15:53 UTC+1, Steve Hayes wrote: > Britons still live in Anglo-Saxon tribal kingdoms, Oxford University > finds > > A new genetic map of Britain shows that there has been little movement > between areas of Britain which were former tribal kingoms in > Anglo-Saxon England <snip> That a core population has remained doesn't say anything about movement. The area that I study is largely rural. It could only support a limited population. Any surplus had to move somewhere else.
On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 22:03:56 +0000, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: >On 25/10/2015 20:40, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: >> In message <05c33620-c70a-4959-8a66-5dddf30c1c83@googlegroups.com>, >> melanie chesnel <mellychesnel@gmail.com> writes: >>> On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 9:05:20 AM UTC+2, J. P. Gilliver >>> (John) wrote: >> [] >>>> In my own researches, I had assumed the coming of the railways in the >>>> mid to late 19C would have led to much greater migration around the >>>> country; however, I've found the effect was much less than I'd expected. >>>> Still, when doing research for work colleagues (at Rochester in Kent), I >>>> find quite a lot of them are from local areas. >> [] >>> I think even before the railways there was quite a lot of movement >>> over long distances in some families and notably mine. Both my >>> mother's and >> [] >>> This shows you can take nothing for granted about the movement of >>> people in the past. Each family is different and some were very >>> mobile, particularly mariners and artisans. Just think stone masons >>> building castles and cathederals v. ag labs >>> regards melanie chesnel >> >> Well, obviously I can only speak from my own researches - which are >> that, in an awful lot of cases, people didn't move much during their >> lifetime - even after the railways, and even in towns. Not just my own >> family (which is diverse - but comes from a lot of little clusters who >> mostly didn't move much), but research I've done for others too. >> >> Occasionally you (I) _do_ find someone who's moved a long way; but, I've >> generally found them the exception. YMMV (well, clearly does). > >Teachers and Churchmen! One of my wife's gg-grandfathers was both and, >as a National School teacher he moved from Abergavenny to Manchester via >Staffordshire, then remustered as a vicar and successively was in >Dumbarton, a Devonshire village, Oban, Aberdeen and finally died in >Guildford. One of my most puzzling ones was a gg grandfather, whose family came from the Isle of Axholme. He lived in Hull, got married in Bath, and Came to Natal within a month of getting married. I wondered how he came to meet his wife, as Hull and Bath seem quite far apart. The Bath family were from Belfast, and seem to have been from quite settled farmers in Ballynure before the 19th century, when they scattered to Quebec, Mauritius, Bath and Durban. -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/ --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
On 25/10/2015 20:40, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > In message <05c33620-c70a-4959-8a66-5dddf30c1c83@googlegroups.com>, > melanie chesnel <mellychesnel@gmail.com> writes: >> On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 9:05:20 AM UTC+2, J. P. Gilliver >> (John) wrote: > [] >>> In my own researches, I had assumed the coming of the railways in the >>> mid to late 19C would have led to much greater migration around the >>> country; however, I've found the effect was much less than I'd expected. >>> Still, when doing research for work colleagues (at Rochester in Kent), I >>> find quite a lot of them are from local areas. > [] >> I think even before the railways there was quite a lot of movement >> over long distances in some families and notably mine. Both my >> mother's and > [] >> This shows you can take nothing for granted about the movement of >> people in the past. Each family is different and some were very >> mobile, particularly mariners and artisans. Just think stone masons >> building castles and cathederals v. ag labs >> regards melanie chesnel > > Well, obviously I can only speak from my own researches - which are > that, in an awful lot of cases, people didn't move much during their > lifetime - even after the railways, and even in towns. Not just my own > family (which is diverse - but comes from a lot of little clusters who > mostly didn't move much), but research I've done for others too. > > Occasionally you (I) _do_ find someone who's moved a long way; but, I've > generally found them the exception. YMMV (well, clearly does). Teachers and Churchmen! One of my wife's gg-grandfathers was both and, as a National School teacher he moved from Abergavenny to Manchester via Staffordshire, then remustered as a vicar and successively was in Dumbarton, a Devonshire village, Oban, Aberdeen and finally died in Guildford. -- Graeme Wall This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
In message <05c33620-c70a-4959-8a66-5dddf30c1c83@googlegroups.com>, melanie chesnel <mellychesnel@gmail.com> writes: >On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 9:05:20 AM UTC+2, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: [] >> In my own researches, I had assumed the coming of the railways in the >> mid to late 19C would have led to much greater migration around the >> country; however, I've found the effect was much less than I'd expected. >> Still, when doing research for work colleagues (at Rochester in Kent), I >> find quite a lot of them are from local areas. [] >I think even before the railways there was quite a lot of movement over >long distances in some families and notably mine. Both my mother's and [] >This shows you can take nothing for granted about the movement of >people in the past. Each family is different and some were very mobile, >particularly mariners and artisans. Just think stone masons building >castles and cathederals v. ag labs >regards melanie chesnel Well, obviously I can only speak from my own researches - which are that, in an awful lot of cases, people didn't move much during their lifetime - even after the railways, and even in towns. Not just my own family (which is diverse - but comes from a lot of little clusters who mostly didn't move much), but research I've done for others too. Occasionally you (I) _do_ find someone who's moved a long way; but, I've generally found them the exception. YMMV (well, clearly does). -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf # 10^-12 boos = 1 picoboo # 2*10^3 mockingbirds = 2 kilo mockingbird # 10^21 piccolos = 1 gigolo # 10^12 microphones = 1 megaphone # 10**9 questions = 1 gigawhat
On Saturday, October 24, 2015 at 9:05:20 AM UTC+2, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > In message <0m4m2blnpj3el62hehob679o1danln696u@4ax.com>, Steve Hayes > <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> writes: > [] > >A new genetic map of Britain shows that there has been little movement > >between areas of Britain which were former tribal kingoms in > >Anglo-Saxon England > [] > >The 'People of the British Isles' study analysed the DNA of 2,039 > >people from rural areas of the UK, whose four grandparents were all > >born within 80km of each other. > > > >Because a quarter of our genome comes from each of our grandparents, > >the researchers were effectively sampling DNA from these ancestors, > >allowing a snapshot of UK genetics in the late 19th Century before > >mass migration events caused by the industrial revolution. > [] > Thanks for posting this; interesting. > > Although the Telegraph's analysis - though it left the second two > paragraphs above in - seems to have ignored them; by limiting its focus > to those whose grandparents were all born within 80 km of each other, it > is obviously biased to immobility. The general thrust of the article is > that we haven't moved much for 14 centuries; however, a better summary > would be that _up to the late 19th century_ we hadn't moved much. Still > interesting, especially the fact that Viking, Saxon, and Roman (genetic) > influence is only moderate, but not particularly startling to > genealogists: anyone who has done much research in the field will have > already discovered that people before even up to the end of the > nineteenth century often lived their entire lives within a few miles of > where they were born. > > It would be interesting to have another study taken without the > restriction, to see how things _have_ changed since "mass migration". > > In my own researches, I had assumed the coming of the railways in the > mid to late 19C would have led to much greater migration around the > country; however, I've found the effect was much less than I'd expected. > Still, when doing research for work colleagues (at Rochester in Kent), I > find quite a lot of them are from local areas. > -- > J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf > > My daughter is appalled by it at all times, but you know you have to appal > your 14-year-old daughter otherwise you're not doing your job as a father. - > Richard Osman to Alison Graham, in Radio Times 2013-6-8 to 14 I think even before the railways there was quite a lot of movement over long distances in some families and notably mine. Both my mother's and my father's family have a diverse footprint with the movement happening in the late 18th/ early 19th century if not before. Mum's 18th century ancestors come from West Cumberland, Lancashire, Scotland, north Wales and Ireland mixing in the West Cumberland/Liverpool economy in the late 18th century; Dad's from a line tracing from Somerset through Gloucestershire and up into Staffs, Shropshire, Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire, with outliers in Norfolk and Herts. they mixed in the blackcountry and London in the early 19th century and later My step father's family all come from a circle round Bedford that only slips into Bucks and doesn't even stretch down to Luton. His DNA would definitely have been of use to the survey. This shows you can take nothing for granted about the movement of people in the past. Each family is different and some were very mobile, particularly mariners and artisans. Just think stone masons building castles and cathederals v. ag labs regards melanie chesnel
On 24/10/15 08:04, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: > by limiting its focus > to those whose grandparents were all born within 80 km of each other, it > is obviously biased to immobility. I felt that the criteria were rather lax. I could manage all 4 grandparents, indeed all 8 ggparents born with 8km. Rather than rely in the Telegraph's report here are the links back to research: http://www.peopleofthebritishisles.org/ http://www.peopleofthebritishisles.org/nl6.pdf http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v519/n7543/full/nature14230.html and http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v519/n7543/extref/nature14230-s1.pdf The paper seems to be somewhat misnamed as it extends to N Ireland. OTOH if this is its full scope the project is also misnamed as the paper omits the bulk of Ireland. From an ecological point of view the most striking thing is that the map divides between the lowland & highland zones of Britain. The lowland zone is somewhat homgenous and the highland zone is subdivided into a number of geographically distinct clusters. The authors see these clusters as originating largely in pre-Roman population divisions, a possible break-down of these in the area of Roman occupation and then a superimposition of AngloSaxon settlement. I think relative ease of communication in the lowland zone vs the highland zone may be another factor. This goes a long way to explaining one facet of genealogy. There seem to be a lot of genealogists who consider it feasible that everybody in Britain/UK/whatever are descended from Edward II/Edward III/Carlemagne/whoever whilst to others it seems completely infeasible. -- Hotmail is my spam bin. Real address is ianng at austonley org uk
Interesting item on today's Woman's Hour. They were talking about a court challenge to remove discrimination in civil partnerships to allow normal heterosexual couples to have the same rights as homosexuals. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06k9bzw One advantage for family historians would be that the mothers' names would be records - there have been calls for this to be added to marriage records. One couple on the programme have devised a surname for their children by combining both their surnames. That might cause confusion for future family historians!
On Sat, 24 Oct 2015 09:45:46 +0100, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: >On 24/10/2015 09:12, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: >> In message <skcm2btt20v37tc76j88cjrdgmmsfpcul5@4ax.com>, Steve Hayes >> <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> writes: >>> On Sat, 24 Oct 2015 08:04:59 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" >>> <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> In message <0m4m2blnpj3el62hehob679o1danln696u@4ax.com>, Steve Hayes >>>> <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> writes: >>>> [] >>>>> A new genetic map of Britain shows that there has been little movement >>>>> between areas of Britain which were former tribal kingoms in >>>>> Anglo-Saxon England >> [] >>>> It would be interesting to have another study taken without the >>>> restriction, to see how things _have_ changed since "mass migration". >>> >>> I think the restriction would have been necessary to discover what >>> they had changed *from*. >>> >>> If you want to find the DNA of a particular area, it makes little >>> sense to test the DNA of people who *have* migrated from elsewhere. >>> Only when yopu've established the base can you work out where the >>> others may have migrated from. >>> >> I agree, and this first study is certainly useful. I was just a little >> cross with the headline ("there has been little movement"), since it is >> misleading (though probably pleasing to the target audience). > >There have been earlier studies which have come to much the same >conclusion so I am not sure what is so different about the current one. > There's even a book, called The Tribes of Britain which goes into it >at great length. Basically it refutes the classical ideas that the >Celts retreated westward into Wales and Cornwall under pressure from >first the Romans and later the Anglo-Saxon, Viking and even Norman >invasions. Arguing that the peasant classes remained on their lands >while the leaders may well have been routed or killed. Given there was >little mixing between the ruling and peasant classes in either society >then one would expect exactly this result. I think there have been earlier reports on this study as well, and they show progress as the findings are correlated. The most immediately useful thing is that it means that when you go back before censuses, and start looking for people in the mid-18th century, you needn't think "they could have come from anywhere" and not know where to look. Chances are they came from somewhere nearby, and you should therefore look in neighbouring parishes. They *may* have come from further away, of course, but studies like this show that it is worth looking in the neighbourhood first, unless you have information to the contrary. -- Steve Hayes Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/ http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/ --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
On Sat, 24 Oct 2015 07:16:25 +0200, Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote: >Britons still live in Anglo-Saxon tribal kingdoms, Oxford University >finds > >A new genetic map of Britain shows that there has been little movement >between areas of Britain which were former tribal kingoms in >Anglo-Saxon England > >By Sarah Knapton, Science Editor > >6:00PM GMT 18 Mar 2015 > >Britons are still living in the same 'tribes' that they did in the 7th >Century, Oxford University has found after an astonishing study into >our genetic make-up. > >Archaeologists and geneticists were amazed to find that genetically >similar individuals inhabit the same areas they did following the >Anglo-Saxon invasion, following the fall of the Roman Empire. > >In fact, a map showing tribes of Britain in 600AD is almost identical >to a new chart showing genetic variability throughout the UK, >suggesting that local communities have stayed put for the past 1415 >years. > >Many people in Britain claim to feel a strong sense of regional >identity and scientists say they the new study proves that the link to >birthplace is DNA deep. > >The most striking genetic split can be seen between people living in >Cornwall and Devon, where the division lies exactly along the county >border. It means that people living on either side of the River Tamar, >which separates the two counties, have different DNA. > >Similarly there is a large area in southern and central England with a >shared genetic heritage which coincides with the boundaries of >Anglo-Saxon England. Likewise, separate genetic groups can be found in >areas of North and South Wales corresponding to the ancient kingdoms >of Gwynedd and Dyfed. > >In the North, specific groups were found in the North East, tallying >with the area of Bernicia which was colonised by the Angles from >Southern Denmark. And, intriguingly, a small genetic cluster was >spotted in the West Riding of Yorkshire, which coincides with the >former small kingdom of Elmet, one of the last strongholds of the >ancient Britons. > >Geneticist Professor Sir Walter Bodmer of Oxford University said: >What it shows is the extraordinary stability of the British >population. Britain hasnt changed much since 600AD. > >When we plotted the genetics on a map we got this fantastic parallel >between areas and genetic similarity. > >It was an extraordinary result, one which was much more than I >expected. We see areas like Devon and Cornwall where the difference >lies directly on the boundary. > >Professor Mark Robinson, of Oxford Universitys department of >archaeology added: The genetic make-up we see is really one of >perhaps 1400 years ago. > >The People of the British Isles study analysed the DNA of 2,039 >people from rural areas of the UK, whose four grandparents were all >born within 80km of each other. > >Because a quarter of our genome comes from each of our grandparents, >the researchers were effectively sampling DNA from these ancestors, >allowing a snapshot of UK genetics in the late 19th Century before >mass migration events caused by the industrial revolution. > >They then analysed DNA differences at over 500,000 positions within >the genome and plotted each person onto a map of the British Isles, >using the centre point of their grandparents birth places, they were >able to see how this distribution correlated with their genetic >groupings. > >Professor Peter Donnelly, Director of the Wellcome Trust Centre for >Human Genetics said: It has long been known that human populations >differ genetically but never before have we been able to observe such >exquisite and fascinating detail. > >We used the genetic material to really tease apart the subtle >differences in DNA. And were able to zoom in and see which areas are >closer genetically. > >In a certain sense there are more genetic differences between North >and South Wales than between Kent and Scotland. > >And in a certain sense there is more similarity between people in the >North of England and Scotland than people in the south of England. > >The findings also showed that there is not a single Celtic genetic >group. In fact the Celtic parts of the UK (Scotland, Northern Ireland, >Wales and Cornwall) are among the most different from each other >genetically. > >And the research has finally answered the question of whether the >Romans, Vikings and Anglo-Saxons interbred with the Brits or wiped out >communities. > >The team found that people in central and southern England have a >significant DNA contribution from the Anglo-Saxons showing that the >invaders intermarried with, rather than replaced, the existing >population. > >But there is no genetic signature from the Danish Vikings even though >they controlled large parts of England The Danelaw from the 9th >century, suggesting they conquered, kept largely to themselves, and >then left. Only Orkney residents were found to have Viking DNA. > >We found that 25 per cent of the DNA of someone living in Orkney is >from Norse ancestry which suggests that when the Vikings arrived the >intermingled with the local population rather than wiping them out, >added Prof Peter Donnelly. > >Similarly the Saxons in Germany have contributed DNA to some of the >English groups but not to some of the others. We can see not only the >differences in the UK but the reasons for those differences in terms >of population movements. > >There is also little Roman DNA in the British genetic make-up. > >The research, which was also carried out by University College London >and the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute in Australia, was >published in the journal Nature. > >https://t.co/w6MrFLN3xa Thanks for posting this, Steve. My line of Kirkmans, who arrived in the Maryland colony mid-17th century, have a significant Scandinavian DNA factor not found in any other US Kirkmans from other parts of England so far. I wonder if Orkney is a clue our researchers should be looking at. -- Don Kirkman donsno2@charter.net
Sorry about the mess in original posting. Hopefully now tidied up! On 23/10/2015 11:28 AM, johnfhhgen via wrote: > On 22/10/2015 9:10 PM, brightside S9 via wrote: >> I have been sent the following 1911 census page. >> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/61253607/1911%20FLORRIE%20MERCER.jpg >> I have tried and tried to find the page by search on Ancestry. I can't >> find it. It's driving me nuts! >> Anyone care to find it by a search on Ancestry and give me a clue. >> And please interpret the place of birth of Sarah Mercer >> Thanks. > I've had a look at Lancashire Towns and parishes on GENUKI but nothing > obvious. > Also a quick look at The New Lancashire Gazatteer here > http://search.ancestry.co.uk/search/db.aspx?dbid=2105 > > but not time to search thoroughly. > > Searching Google on Lancashire Gazatteer produces a lot of hits. And it > might also be worth searching on Lancashire place-names > > Also consider places across the border in neighbouring counties which > may have once been in Lancashire. > > Note that 'Lancs' and the " marks have been added in a different hand, > possibly the enumerator. > > FreeBMD has only one possible marriage of a Robert Mercer to a Sarah: > Marriages Dec 1900 (>99%) > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Gimbert* *Sarah Ellen* *Warrington* *8c* *259* > Mercer Robert Warrington 8c 259 > *Sankey* *Caroline* ** *Warrington* *8c* *259* > Whitlow John Henry Warrington 8c 259 > > BUT, in 1901 Robert Mercer is a widower boarding in Preston. > AND Lancashire BMD reveals that this Robert married Caroline Sankey :( > > However, Lancahire BMD reveals bith of these children in 1902, 1903, and > 1905 > Surname Forename(s) Sub-District Registers At Mother's Maiden Name > > MERCER Florrie Trinity Preston TRAVIS > > MERCER William Henry East Preston Preston TRAVIS > > > > But, can find no trace of a marriage for Robert Mercer and Sarah Travis > Regards > John Henley > >