Yes it could certainly be that long. Last year I researched the history of a house in Bristol which was built on land leased for 1,000 years from Christmas Day 1596, at a peppercorn rent of 1 penny per year. There is a house in Lostwithiel, Cornwall, which has the details of a 3,000 year lease, beginning 29 September 1652, carved into its stonework: http://goo.gl/UOiI50. Caroline Gurney http://www.carolinegurney.com On 24 September 2014 18:02, Lin & David via <sog-uk@rootsweb.com> wrote: > > In a poll book for a parish in Somerset dated 1832, I noticed that the > nature of qualification for one voter had been recorded as: "freehold and > leasehold houses and land, for the remainder of a period of 1,000 years". > Does anyone know whether this is likely to be a mistranscription of the > original records, or could such a long period be accurate? > > > Lin Howard > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In a poll book for a parish in Somerset dated 1832, I noticed that the nature of qualification for one voter had been recorded as: "freehold and leasehold houses and land, for the remainder of a period of 1,000 years". Does anyone know whether this is likely to be a mistranscription of the original records, or could such a long period be accurate? Lin Howard

The New England Historical and Genealogical Society are advertising the new book 'Elements of Genealogical Analysis' by Robert Charles Anderson (http://www.americanancestors.org/Product.aspx?id=29383). It is apparently based on his methods for his Great Migration series of studies. I've not seen any reviews, nor any previews of sections online. Does anyone know if it is of any interest for those of us doing genealogy but not in 17th century New England? Best wishes Andrew -- Andrew Millard - A.R.Millard@durham.ac.uk Chair, Trustees of Genuki: www.genuki.org.uk Maintainer, Genuki Middx + London: www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/MDX/ + ../LND/ Academic Co-ordinator, Guild of One-Name Studies: www.one-name.org Bodimeade one-name study: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/ My genealogy: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/

I agree - I don't rule out the possibility of *my* mid-Cheshire Pickstocks having their origin in a Pickstone / Peckstone variant. I do think, however, that the burden of proof has crept up a bit as a result of this discussion. What I really need is a Rosetta Stone.... Adrian On 19/09/2014 08:00, sog-uk-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > ... "An unaccented suffix was particularly susceptible to change, > and could be confused with almost any other frequent suffix." > > In the light of this I would be inclined to keep an open mind on the > Pickstock/Pickstone question - I certainly wouldn't want to rule out the > possibility of one changing to the other. > ...

While following this thread it occurred to me that it might be interesting to see what George Redmonds has to say about this kind of issue in his "Surnames and Genealogy: A New Approach". The index doesn't include Pickstock or Pickstone, nor, from a quick skim through, any names with similar suffixes. However, in a section on suffix confusion (p.143ff) he notes that the suffixes Brook, Brough and Burn were quite often interchanged; these sound quite different to a modern ear, yet he quotes examples from registers such as "Blakburne alias Blakebrooke" (there is here, admittedly, a similarity of meaning). This kind of thing is said to have occurred more as surnames spread to areas where they were not well known, often with assimilation to those that were better known. In Appendix 3 (p. 205ff) he lists further examples of suffix confusion. Again, Stock and Stone are absent, but he begins the list with the comment, "An unaccented suffix was particularly susceptible to change, and could be confused with almost any other frequent suffix." In the light of this I would be inclined to keep an open mind on the Pickstock/Pickstone question - I certainly wouldn't want to rule out the possibility of one changing to the other. Arthur

> From: Adrian Bruce via > Sent: 18 September 2014 17:32 > > <<snipped>> > Not just consonants - the vowels are quite different, even if the > spelling is the same. Peter > <<snipped>> > > Agreed - though my impression is that vowels are more susceptible to > shifts from accents (anyone caring to disagree, please do so!) In this part of the country (Durham) the vowel sounds would be the same. Best wishes Andrew -- Andrew Millard - A.R.Millard@durham.ac.uk Chair, Trustees of Genuki: www.genuki.org.uk Maintainer, Genuki Middx + London: www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/MDX/ + ../LND/ Academic Co-ordinator, Guild of One-Name Studies: www.one-name.org Bodimeade one-name study: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/Bodimeade/ My genealogy: community.dur.ac.uk/a.r.millard/genealogy/

<<snipped>> Not just consonants - the vowels are quite different, even if the spelling is the same. Peter <<snipped>> Agreed - though my impression is that vowels are more susceptible to shifts from accents (anyone caring to disagree, please do so!) I think I mentioned my Spode / Spord family where the two spellings refer to the same family (again, from Cheshire). Did two different family members have different accents and both names are phonetically written by the clerk? Or was it always pronounced "Spord" and there are two clerks, one who wrote phonetically and the other who knew the "correct" spelling? Either way round, I think we both agree that Pickstock being rendered as, or changing into, Pickstone (or vice versa) is not hugely likely - not impossible either, but needing solid evidence of matching families, say. Adrian

Not just consonants - the vowels are quite different, even if the spelling is the same. peter -----Original Message----- The last syllables of Pickstock and Pickstone seem to me to be a different matter with the consonant pronounced in a different part of the mouth, so to me the difference is not just spelling but one of basic sounds. The two names occupy different parts of Cheshire whereas if it were simply different spellings of roughly the same sound, I'd expect to see a mix. (Although my Pickstocks first appear on the edge of the Pickstone area, which is how I got wondering whether there might be a link).

I have documentation for my 6th great grandfather (Richard MacQuillin) dating back to 1749, the only records I can find for his father, also Richard MacQuillin, are for his second marriage at St Martins in the Fields,  I believe he was born in Ireland.  I have found online in the Irish Extractions Database, a marriage by Consistory Lycence for another Richard McQuillin who later turns up in London making an appeal at the House of Lords which is documented - raising the question as to whether he is the father of my 7th great grandfather Richard MacQuillin. My question is are there any known searchable records for births in the 1700's in Ireland, either online or at a record office?  If so, where would I begin to search? Tricia Tanner

Thanks for the thoughts Blair. Unfortunately, there is no sign of any relevant wills. I don't *think* Pickstock v. Pickstone is an example of idiosyncratic spelling. There are plenty of Pickstock variants (Pigstock, Pixtock, etc..) and no doubt ditto for Pickstone. However, all the variants that I've found sound the same to me or are tiny variants - e.g. one Cheshire Pickstock was transported to Tasmania and his descendants became Pitstock I am told. The last syllables of Pickstock and Pickstone seem to me to be a different matter with the consonant pronounced in a different part of the mouth, so to me the difference is not just spelling but one of basic sounds. The two names occupy different parts of Cheshire whereas if it were simply different spellings of roughly the same sound, I'd expect to see a mix. (Although my Pickstocks first appear on the edge of the Pickstone area, which is how I got wondering whether there might be a link). Adrian On 17/09/2014 08:00, sog-uk-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > ... Spelling in the seventeenth century was notoriously idiosyncratic: have you been able to locate any original documents (wills?) bearing the names and hopefully signatures. I have seen wills of this period and earlier where the same person's name was written differently, even by the same scribe. ...

Adrian I have not been following this thread in detail so apologies if I repeat what has already been suggested. Spelling in the seventeenth century was notoriously idiosyncratic: have you been able to locate any original documents (wills?) bearing the names and hopefully signatures. I have seen wills of this period and earlier where the same person's name was written differently, even by the same scribe. And I have examples of signatures where the spelling has been inconsistent. My great (5) grandfather used one variant when at home in Yorkshire and another when he was in London. Coming right up to date (well, comparitively) I knew a traveller in the 1970s who had called himself by one name (forename and surname) at one location and a completely different name only five miles away. This was not done to hide his identity, he never moved far from the area in Kent, but his identity changed with his locus. I don't fancy trying to research him in the future..... Best regards Blair > On 16 Sep 2014, at 08:01, sog-uk-request@rootsweb.com wrote: > > Re: Pickstock and Pickstone name variants? (Adrian Bruce)

Picking up on some digest comments, for which, thanks. Thanks for the comments from Rainey about the origins of Pickstock and Pickstone. It certainly suggests that the bulk of the two populations have independent origins. However, as Chris points out, that Manchester population of Pickstone (etc), is too close to my Pickstocks of mid-Cheshire to be dogmatic about their independence. I would agree that without hard genealogical evidence, I can only talk in terms of possibilities. Certainly, I can't just say, "John Pickstock is a form of John Pickstone so he is that Pickstone baptism there...." Of course, I *was* secretly hoping that someone would say, "The two names were interchangeable in X in year Y"! For what it's worth, just so people understand my interest: my earliest reference to a Pickstock in *mid* Cheshire is John Pickstock who has his daughter baptised at Davenham, 20 July 1662. The forms "Pickstocke", "Pickstock" and "Pecstocke" are used for his family. A number of online trees identify him with a John Pickstock who marries a Mary Mellburne at Colwich, Staffs, 25 July 1663 and also with a John Pickstock who is baptised to George and Dorothy Pickstock at Myddle, Shropshire on 7 October 1627. All three are real and John of Myddle has the added attraction of appearing in the History of Myddle and doing a runner after he "gott a wench with child". However, while identifying all three as the same person is a legitimate speculation, I personally can't accept it. There appears no logic other than "Same name, same area (roughly), same era". In fact the Shropshire Collection on FMP, throws the whole thing wide open by adding in a John Pickstock baptised 5 April 1635 at Stockton, Shropshire. It also makes no sense that John of Davenham would have a child baptised as legitimate, then, a year later, waltz off to Colwich to get married. Why? Since there are Pickstone / Peckstone families in Cheshire, I wonder if they might have provided our John... Hence my query about the names being variants of Pickstock. Adrian

Thanks for your comments. As per your sensible advice, I've taken care to look at the original entries in the PR - my belief would be that if one were an "error" (whatever that means!) for the other, then I'd expect to see the names mixed but there's little serious mixing. (Conversely take "Spode" and "Spord" - the two forms are intermixed in the parish of Sandbach, Cheshire - I guess that's clearly a case of a broad accent being interpreted differently. ) So far as I can see, "Pickstone" occurs sufficiently often and in its own area to remove any possibility of its normal use being a transcription or spelling error for "Pickstock". Doesn't mean the two don't have a common root - but I can find no clear evidence of it. Irene - interested in your Marlborough examples. Seems to me that there are (at least) two major forces at work there - different pronunciations leading to different spellings and a name that does change but where there's clear evidence for it. I don't think my "Pickstock" / "Pickstone" pair satisfy either case. I've discovered no direct evidence (unlike, say, "Billington" / "Billinge" or your "Mallabar" / "Marlborough"). As for different pronunciations of the same root-name, well, the "k" and "n" sounds are surely formed in different parts of the mouth so I find it difficult to believe one shifts into the other. (They might, but maybe it's via a different sound???) (Any contrary examples warmly welcomed!) Chris - interesting - I can't remember coming across "Brickstock" or "Brigstock" for "Pickstock" before. (It is Pickstock that I'm searching, by the way). I think I've tried wild-carding in ways that would pick up "Brickstock" but can't be sure. (I need a number of wild-card searches to find all my variants of the "Pickstock" name). It may be significant that no-one's leaping to the defence of these "alternate forms" databases.... Adrian B

The Oxford Dictionary of English Surnames lists the two names separately, but offers Pickstoke as a variation of Pickstock. It's a little easier to see how Pickstoke might have become Pickstone. Peter > Not for the first time, I have come across Pickstock and Pickstone > being presented as variants of the same surname > (http://www.namethesaurus.com/Thesaurus/search.aspx has them so, for > instance) > > To be true variants, this would mean to me that a family documented as > Pickstock somewhere, over the years, has turned into one documented as > Pickstone, possibly over several generations. Or vice versa. (And I > discount occasional spelling "errors"). > > I have no idea whether there is any documented justification for this > variant pair or whether someone has simply run through a census, > evaluated the Soundex values for surnames and decided that all > surnames with minimal difference in their Soundex are variants. > > I've seen several changes in my families' surnames - Healow ends up as > Heler (I think the underlying pronunciation is probably "Healer"), for > instance, but I am, in fact, sceptical of this Pickstock / Pickstone > change as the "k" sound and the "n" sound are surely quite different. > > So, does anyone know of any documented justification for either this > change or one similar? Or any authoritative work on variants? > (Probably too much to expect there, as each would need to be driven on > a family by family basis, like my Heler origins). > > Thanks for any thoughts > Adrian > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

It may not be as simple as that. In the 1851 census the distribution of "Pickston(e)(s)" is overwhelmingly in and around Manchester, close to the "Pickstock" heartland which is in Cheshire, Shropshire and neighbouring counties (Lancashire/Staffordshire/Montgomeryshire). This suggests that the medieval instances identified by Reaney in Sussex and Norfolk may be bynames unconnected with the later surname. Of course it does not prove, by itself, that there is a connection between Pickstock and Pickstone. I agree with the suggestion that you look at any of George Redmonds' books - he does prove some surprising evolutions of one surname into an apparently different one. Each surname is different, and, unless there is specific record somewhere of someone called "Pickstock alias Pickstone", the only sure way to discover whether the names are the same is to trace the individual families and see if there is any evidence for a connection. I have found occasional confusion between "Pickstock" and my one name study surname Brigstock/Bridgstock/Brickstock. So far all those I have found are cases of one name being mistranscribed as the other by modern indexes - I will email you (Adrian) off list with details. I am pretty confident that they are separate names as they have a different geographical distribution - Brigstock seems to derive from a village of that name in Northamptonshire and is centered there and eastwards into the Fens, with outliers in Surrey and South Wales. However, I have not yet properly studied London, where both names do occur, so could be confused. I have seen the surname Brickstone in Surrey (not surprisingly - presumably from Brixton) and wondered if there was a connection with the Brigstock family there, but I have no evidence that there is. Chris Pitt Lewis On 14/09/2014 14:34, Peter Christian via wrote: > Rainey (Dictionary of English Surnames) gives good reasons for not treating > them as variants: > > Pickstock is a locative surname from a place in Shropshire. > Although the etymology of Pickstone (also Pixton) is unclear the name is > much more widespread (Sussex, Norfolk), making a locative origin unlikely > And both are attested back to the 13th C, which means the later derivation > of one from the other is impossible. > > This doesn't discount the slight possibility that in a settlement where both > were in use, they might have become confused or interchangeable, but in > origin they are clearly independent. > > peter > > > -----Original Message----- > From: sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On > Behalf Of Adrian Bruce via > Sent: 13 September 2014 17:36 > To: SOG Mailing List > Subject: [SOG-UK] Pickstock and Pickstone name variants? > > Not for the first time, I have come across Pickstock and Pickstone being > presented as variants of the same surname > (http://www.namethesaurus.com/Thesaurus/search.aspx has them so, for > instance) > > To be true variants, this would mean to me that a family documented as > Pickstock somewhere, over the years, has turned into one documented as > Pickstone, possibly over several generations. Or vice versa. (And I discount > occasional spelling "errors"). > > I have no idea whether there is any documented justification for this > variant pair or whether someone has simply run through a census, evaluated > the Soundex values for surnames and decided that all surnames with minimal > difference in their Soundex are variants. > > I've seen several changes in my families' surnames - Healow ends up as Heler > (I think the underlying pronunciation is probably "Healer"), for instance, > but I am, in fact, sceptical of this Pickstock / Pickstone change as the > "k" sound and the "n" sound are surely quite different. > > So, does anyone know of any documented justification for either this change > or one similar? Or any authoritative work on variants? (Probably too much to > expect there, as each would need to be driven on a family by family basis, > like my Heler origins). > > Thanks for any thoughts > Adrian > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4015/8206 - Release Date: 09/13/14 > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com

Rainey (Dictionary of English Surnames) gives good reasons for not treating them as variants: Pickstock is a locative surname from a place in Shropshire. Although the etymology of Pickstone (also Pixton) is unclear the name is much more widespread (Sussex, Norfolk), making a locative origin unlikely And both are attested back to the 13th C, which means the later derivation of one from the other is impossible. This doesn't discount the slight possibility that in a settlement where both were in use, they might have become confused or interchangeable, but in origin they are clearly independent. peter -----Original Message----- From: sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:sog-uk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Adrian Bruce via Sent: 13 September 2014 17:36 To: SOG Mailing List Subject: [SOG-UK] Pickstock and Pickstone name variants? Not for the first time, I have come across Pickstock and Pickstone being presented as variants of the same surname (http://www.namethesaurus.com/Thesaurus/search.aspx has them so, for instance) To be true variants, this would mean to me that a family documented as Pickstock somewhere, over the years, has turned into one documented as Pickstone, possibly over several generations. Or vice versa. (And I discount occasional spelling "errors"). I have no idea whether there is any documented justification for this variant pair or whether someone has simply run through a census, evaluated the Soundex values for surnames and decided that all surnames with minimal difference in their Soundex are variants. I've seen several changes in my families' surnames - Healow ends up as Heler (I think the underlying pronunciation is probably "Healer"), for instance, but I am, in fact, sceptical of this Pickstock / Pickstone change as the "k" sound and the "n" sound are surely quite different. So, does anyone know of any documented justification for either this change or one similar? Or any authoritative work on variants? (Probably too much to expect there, as each would need to be driven on a family by family basis, like my Heler origins). Thanks for any thoughts Adrian ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4015/8206 - Release Date: 09/13/14

Adrian, Try looking at handwritten entries in a census or church register, almost any Pickst*** could be thought of as being a variant, it may not actually be a used surname, they could just be a transcription error. Also bear in mind that in earlier days when many people could neither read nor write, or had limited skills, they employed a scribe to write for them. It's easy to see how someone could mishear or forget a surname and enter something similar. The person signing the document may just have been able to scribble an X or even may not have read the paper carefully, and not noticed a variation in the true spelling of the surname. Certainly when looking at my surnames, I always consider many variations as potential relatives until proven otherwise. Happy hunting Pickard Trepess (surname often misspelled even in the 21st century !) (Don't think that Pickard is close enough to Pickstock though !) -----Original Message----- From: Adrian Bruce [mailto:abruce@madasafish.com] Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2014 6:36 PM To: SOG Mailing List Subject: [SOG-UK] Pickstock and Pickstone name variants? Not for the first time, I have come across Pickstock and Pickstone being presented as variants of the same surname (http://www.namethesaurus.com/Thesaurus/search.aspx has them so, for instance) To be true variants, this would mean to me that a family documented as Pickstock somewhere, over the years, has turned into one documented as Pickstone, possibly over several generations. Or vice versa. (And I discount occasional spelling "errors"). I have no idea whether there is any documented justification for this variant pair or whether someone has simply run through a census, evaluated the Soundex values for surnames and decided that all surnames with minimal difference in their Soundex are variants. I've seen several changes in my families' surnames - Healow ends up as Heler (I think the underlying pronunciation is probably "Healer"), for instance, but I am, in fact, sceptical of this Pickstock / Pickstone change as the "k" sound and the "n" sound are surely quite different. So, does anyone know of any documented justification for either this change or one similar? Or any authoritative work on variants? (Probably too much to expect there, as each would need to be driven on a family by family basis, like my Heler origins). Thanks for any thoughts Adrian

This doesn't seem surprising to me at all. Pronunciation of names can vary a lot and therefore spelling by some cleric who is not familiar with local dialects can differ a lot too. In my family there are lots of examples but the longer the name, the more potential for mangling there seems to be. My surname of Marlborough apparently began as Mallabar but variants clearly include Mallabourne, Malburn, Mulberry etc. I can directly document one of the places where the name changed from Mallabar to Marlborough/Malbrough. This time was late enough to be on census returns where one brother's family was Mallabar and another's was Marlborough. Another family name is the Cornish Beswetherick. This morphs through many variants including Buswarrick, Boswarthick etc. While this won't help directly with your Pickstone/Pickstock puzzle, I recommend books by George Redmond. I expect the SOG library will have copies. He traces the evolution of several surnames and you'd be surprised at how different they can be. Regards, Irene Marlborough

Mmmm, I find Soundex for Gullick or Gullock really weird as it includes Giles, although one search gave me a couple of Gollig entries which is at least likely. Last night I was searching for a John Close, not finding what I wanted changed to Soundex and received masses of Chant entries. I was looking for a John Close who married a Susan (surname unknown) on FreeReg, where you have to open each entry to discover where the surname appears and if it is Close it may not be a John and the chances of whoever marrying a Susan/Susannah are very low that I gave up after the first 500 entries and that was just one County. From Merryl Wells of Luton, Beds. E-Mail: merryl.wells@one-name.org GOONS Mem. No. 1757 Reg. ONS: Bawtree; Gullick/ock, Moist/Moyst. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Irene Marlborough via" <sog-uk@rootsweb.com> To: "Adrian Bruce" <abruce@madasafish.com>; "SOG Mailing List" <SOG-UK@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2014 11:24 PM Subject: Re: [SOG-UK] Pickstock and Pickstone name variants? > This doesn't seem surprising to me at all. Pronunciation of names can vary > a > lot and therefore spelling by some cleric who is not familiar with local > dialects can differ a lot too. > > In my family there are lots of examples but the longer the name, the more > potential for mangling there seems to be. > > My surname of Marlborough apparently began as Mallabar but variants > clearly > include Mallabourne, Malburn, Mulberry etc. I can directly document one of > the places where the name changed from Mallabar to Marlborough/Malbrough. > This time was late enough to be on census returns where one brother's > family > was Mallabar and another's was Marlborough. > > Another family name is the Cornish Beswetherick. This morphs through many > variants including Buswarrick, Boswarthick etc. > > While this won't help directly with your Pickstone/Pickstock puzzle, I > recommend books by George Redmond. I expect the SOG library will have > copies. He traces the evolution of several surnames and you'd be surprised > at how different they can be. > > Regards, Irene Marlborough

Not for the first time, I have come across Pickstock and Pickstone being presented as variants of the same surname (http://www.namethesaurus.com/Thesaurus/search.aspx has them so, for instance) To be true variants, this would mean to me that a family documented as Pickstock somewhere, over the years, has turned into one documented as Pickstone, possibly over several generations. Or vice versa. (And I discount occasional spelling "errors"). I have no idea whether there is any documented justification for this variant pair or whether someone has simply run through a census, evaluated the Soundex values for surnames and decided that all surnames with minimal difference in their Soundex are variants. I've seen several changes in my families' surnames - Healow ends up as Heler (I think the underlying pronunciation is probably "Healer"), for instance, but I am, in fact, sceptical of this Pickstock / Pickstone change as the "k" sound and the "n" sound are surely quite different. So, does anyone know of any documented justification for either this change or one similar? Or any authoritative work on variants? (Probably too much to expect there, as each would need to be driven on a family by family basis, like my Heler origins). Thanks for any thoughts Adrian