G'day Mary-Jane was asking about Non conformist records recently. This may be of use- http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/news/stories/172.htm?homepage=news The National Archives' collection of nonconformist BMDs from 1567 to 1840 http://www.bmdregisters.co.uk/ FREE searchable database for the surname Index but pay to view the scans for further information. The wildcard search may be helpful. Note Most of Dr William's Library has been indexed by the LDS and is on the British Vital Records Index CDs. Good Hunting Wendy Warwick List Admin

Wendy Boland wrote: >Whoops I forgot Lea Marston in my list so please include it as one of this week's Villages of Interest. > >Thank you Jacqui- you information is very useful . > >Cheers >Wendy > > > Secondly, another Marston - Lea Marston. It is a parish in north Warwickshire near Whitacre Heath and Kingsbury, with Hams Hall alongside it. > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WARWICK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > I am interested in the HARVEY family John (b about 1803) married to Jemima CAPENER fom Nether Whitacre in 1832 children John (x2), James, William, Mary, Sarah, Thomas, Hannah, Henry, Jane Son William married Melinda Callow from Deddington, Oxfordshire and is my husband's gt Grandfather Happy hunting Jill

Whoops I forgot Lea Marston in my list so please include it as one of this week's Villages of Interest. Thank you Jacqui- you information is very useful . Cheers Wendy Secondly, another Marston - Lea Marston. It is a parish in north Warwickshire near Whitacre Heath and Kingsbury, with Hams Hall alongside it.

This week the Villages of Interest are the Marstons. I thought we could do something a little different and highlight a few places. Marston is a common place name- derived from "the farm on or by marsh land" So you might like to list your surnames from the following 4 places in Warwickshire Butlers Marston Butler refers to Ralph de Borteler who once held the manor. Photograph of the old school see http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/99365 Priors Marston Priors - belonged to the manor of Coventry http://www.priorsmarston.com/ Some interesting comments about the churchyard! Long Marston (Marston Sicca- meaning dry marsh?- a contradiction) http://www.longmarston.org/witch.htm "the last witch hunt" and Marston Green 1891 OS map see http://www.british-history.ac.uk/mapsheet.aspx?compid=55141&sheetid=8834 format as usual- surnames -dates - resources- useful information etc. Good Hunting Wendy

Hi All, I have posted Barb's pictures to PPP and copied the links to the Marston villages in case people have lost them ! http://www.hunimex.com/warwick/VP_Marstons.html directly to the villages page and http://www.hunimex.com/warwick/index.html for the PPP index Happy Hunting Pickard Sunny but chilly in Nagykanizsa today

Hi All, I've scanned a post card/photo of Deakins Farm, Marston Green in the 1890s, for anyone who'd like a copy. Barb

Hi All, I've scanned a 1920s painting of Butlers Marston. If anyone would like a copy on jpeg file, you're welcome. Barb Stacey Solihull UK > This week the Villages of Interest are the Marstons<

Hello List: First, Marston Green. It is a "problem" place for its ecclesiastical records. It was a chapelry of Yardley parish. Yardley parish was Worcester - so ecclesiastically you will find Marston Green listed as Worcestershire (as it is on Genuki). It has not, to my knowledge, ever geographically belonged to Worcestershire. Warwick RO holds its PRs since 1911 (creation of diocese of Coventry). Marston Green is now a housing area wedged beside Birmingham International Airport and the National Exhibition Centre. It is, I believe, now part of the civil parish of Bickenhill. You may find reference to Marston Culey...as far as I am aware, this is now, or is part of, Marston Green. Secondly, another Marston - Lea Marston. It is a parish in north Warwickshire near Whitacre Heath and Kingsbury, with Hams Hall alongside it. Hams Hall is now a large distribution centre being close to two major motorways - the Hall was removed many moons ago (to be re-erected at Cirencester as part of the Royal Agricultural College campus, and part I believe in USA). The site became an electricity generating plant before its reincarnation (if you can describe it as such) as a hub for trucks, thousands of them! All of these activities have brought people into the area. Lea Marston was part of the extensive diocese of Lichfield and Coventry, thus Bishop's Transcripts till mid-1800s are at Lichfield RO - as are probates to 1858; the parish registers are available at Warwick RO and should be also in some local libraries on film. If there is nobody on the list living in Lea Marston to oblige, if anyone needs photographs of any extant memorial stones I can go and explore with a camera. HTH Jacqui ----- Original Message ----- From: Wendy Boland To: warwick@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 9:46 PM Subject: [WAR] This week's villages-The Marstons This week the Villages of Interest are the Marstons. I thought we could do something a little different and highlight a few places. Marston is a common place name- derived from "the farm on or by marsh land" So you might like to list your surnames from the following 4 places in Warwickshire Butlers Marston Butler refers to Ralph de Borteler who once held the manor. Photograph of the old school see http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/99365 Priors Marston Priors - belonged to the manor of Coventry http://www.priorsmarston.com/ Some interesting comments about the churchyard! Long Marston (Marston Sicca- meaning dry marsh?- a contradiction) http://www.longmarston.org/witch.htm "the last witch hunt" and Marston Green 1891 OS map see http://www.british-history.ac.uk/mapsheet.aspx?compid=55141&sheetid=8834 format as usual- surnames -dates - resources- useful information etc. Good Hunting Wendy ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WARWICK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.30/1125 - Release Date: 11/11/2007 21:50

I agree with Paul: After long enquiry I have proven to my satisfaction that an ancestor (John) produced a son John by his first wife who died subsequently. He then married a widow, who also had a son John; this son taking his adoptive father's name. Both sons named John were born the same quarter of the same year in Coventry. This was untangled by identifying the maiden name of John's second wife, following her through her first marriage, and locating a birth certificate for the John who was subsequently adopted. Clearly in the family circle they would have had nicknames; perhaps John and Jack? By happy [??] mischance, no census year included both sons at home with the joint father, which caused early confusion. And yes, both sons subsequently married and produced a son who in a true flash of inspiration they named John. The serious problem was deciding which John married which wife, and which John then died first. And do I have the correct John as my ancestor? -- Joe Connell Firefox & Thunderbird portals Sunbelt & Avast protection

Nivard Ovington wrote: > That is certainly a thought but a while back there was discussion on one > list of a family in circa 1750 who had five sons, all named William and > three lived to marry and have a family of their own > > Perhaps the parents really liked the name <g> or perhaps it was a bet :-) > > Or they had a really rich relative named William ? <vbg> Or any combination thereof <G> -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Jacqui Simkins wrote: > Not unless the vicar went along with it. The girls were having > illegitimate babies AND having them baptised AND shown as being > "single woman" (or other phrases!). Both Williams claimed the same > father on their marriage lines - though that would be the case if > they were "absorbed" to hide illegitimacy. How a child was baptised (probably correctly since the incumbent would have known for sure whose child was whose <G>) wasn't necessarily how the child was registered, if it was a post 1837 birth. > Family history is full of oddities... Would we have it any other way though? :)) -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Family history is full of oddities...* It's what makes it so much fun! Rosemary Northumberland UK Email: rosemary@high-forest.co.uk Family History: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rprobert/ Banburyshire Website: http://www.rootsweb.com/~engcbanb/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ** > *Jacqui* > ** > ** > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Rosemary Probert <mailto:rosemary@high-forest.co.uk> > *To:* warwick@rootsweb.com <mailto:warwick@rootsweb.com> > *Sent:* Monday, November 12, 2007 10:18 AM > *Subject:* Re: [WAR] A Nickname > > Or -- one was the son of an older sister & brought up as the > parents' son, > > Rosemary > > Northumberland UK > Email: rosemary@high-forest.co.uk <mailto:rosemary@high-forest.co.uk> > Family History: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rprobert/ > Banburyshire Website: http://www.rootsweb.com/~engcbanb/ > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Nivard Ovington wrote: > > That is certainly a thought but a while back there was discussion > on one > > list of a family in circa 1750 who had five sons, all named > William and > > three lived to marry and have a family of their own > > > > Perhaps the parents really liked the name <g> or perhaps it was a > bet :-) > > > > Or they had a really rich relative named William ? <vbg> > > > > Best wishes Nivard Ovington, in Cornwall (UK) > > > > > >> What most likely happened was that the elder William was very > ill and > >> not expected to live when his mother had her next son, so he was > >> called William. When the elder William survived after all, the > family > >> had two sons living named William. > >> > >> -- > >> Charani (UK)

Not unless the vicar went along with it. The girls were having illegitimate babies AND having them baptised AND shown as being "single woman" (or other phrases!). Both Williams claimed the same father on their marriage lines - though that would be the case if they were "absorbed" to hide illegitimacy. It was just a set of circumstances I had to accept and live with! My connection is through one of the illegitimate children anyway <bg> But I suppose the theme of all this is to NEVER accept anything you find without exploring the possibilities of it being a "cover up", deliberate or otherwise. Family history is full of oddities... Jacqui ----- Original Message ----- From: Rosemary Probert To: warwick@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 10:18 AM Subject: Re: [WAR] A Nickname Or -- one was the son of an older sister & brought up as the parents' son, Rosemary Northumberland UK Email: rosemary@high-forest.co.uk Family History: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rprobert/ Banburyshire Website: http://www.rootsweb.com/~engcbanb/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nivard Ovington wrote: > That is certainly a thought but a while back there was discussion on one > list of a family in circa 1750 who had five sons, all named William and > three lived to marry and have a family of their own > > Perhaps the parents really liked the name <g> or perhaps it was a bet :-) > > Or they had a really rich relative named William ? <vbg> > > Best wishes Nivard Ovington, in Cornwall (UK) > > >> What most likely happened was that the elder William was very ill and >> not expected to live when his mother had her next son, so he was >> called William. When the elder William survived after all, the family >> had two sons living named William. >> >> -- >> Charani (UK) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WARWICK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.30/1125 - Release Date: 11/11/2007 21:50

Or -- one was the son of an older sister & brought up as the parents' son, Rosemary Northumberland UK Email: rosemary@high-forest.co.uk Family History: http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~rprobert/ Banburyshire Website: http://www.rootsweb.com/~engcbanb/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nivard Ovington wrote: > That is certainly a thought but a while back there was discussion on one > list of a family in circa 1750 who had five sons, all named William and > three lived to marry and have a family of their own > > Perhaps the parents really liked the name <g> or perhaps it was a bet :-) > > Or they had a really rich relative named William ? <vbg> > > Best wishes Nivard Ovington, in Cornwall (UK) > > >> What most likely happened was that the elder William was very ill and >> not expected to live when his mother had her next son, so he was >> called William. When the elder William survived after all, the family >> had two sons living named William. >> >> -- >> Charani (UK)

The "riches" theory doesn't seem to apply in the instance of William - but does in another branch of my explorations. "Lloyd" used as a given name in honour of John LLOYD who died 1835 leaving money to many of his nieces, nephews and their children. His will named many of them - such a helpful man! Jacqui ----- Original Message ----- From: Nivard Ovington To: warwick@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 10:04 AM Subject: Re: [WAR] A Nickname That is certainly a thought but a while back there was discussion on one list of a family in circa 1750 who had five sons, all named William and three lived to marry and have a family of their own Perhaps the parents really liked the name <g> or perhaps it was a bet :-) Or they had a really rich relative named William ? <vbg> Best wishes Nivard Ovington, in Cornwall (UK) > What most likely happened was that the elder William was very ill and > not expected to live when his mother had her next son, so he was > called William. When the elder William survived after all, the family > had two sons living named William. > > -- > Charani (UK) ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WARWICK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.30/1125 - Release Date: 11/11/2007 21:50

That is certainly a thought but a while back there was discussion on one list of a family in circa 1750 who had five sons, all named William and three lived to marry and have a family of their own Perhaps the parents really liked the name <g> or perhaps it was a bet :-) Or they had a really rich relative named William ? <vbg> Best wishes Nivard Ovington, in Cornwall (UK) > What most likely happened was that the elder William was very ill and > not expected to live when his mother had her next son, so he was > called William. When the elder William survived after all, the family > had two sons living named William. > > -- > Charani (UK)

Jacqui Simkins wrote: > The real mystery in my research has been a family with two sons > baptised "William". Before you all shout...BOTH reached adult > hood, both married and spawned more Williams!! The only conclusion > I could draw was that the elder trotted off to make his way in the > world in mid-teens, and parents needed someone around to call > Will...they had an enormous brood!! What most likely happened was that the elder William was very ill and not expected to live when his mother had her next son, so he was called William. When the elder William survived after all, the family had two sons living named William. -- Charani (UK) OPC for Walton, SOM http://wsom-opc.org.uk

Jacqui: > The real mystery in my research has been a family with two sons baptised > "William". Before you all shout...BOTH reached adult hood, both married > and spawned more Williams!! The only conclusion I could draw was that the > elder trotted off to make his way in the world in mid-teens, and parents > needed someone around to call Will...they had an enormous brood!! This is a bit of a long shot by way of explanation, but it is possible to get a family (eg in one of the censuses) with two children of the same name who are unrelated. For example, Mr and Mrs X have a son called William. Mr X dies while William is very young (perhaps not even born). Mrs X remarries a widower, Mr Y, who already has a son named William Y. Mrs X becomes Mrs Y, and William X also takes the name William Y, as his new father is the only one he's ever known. Of course, if you've got baptism records that's something else! Best wishes Paul Prescott

Welcome, Peter! My gt gran was Maggie...registered and baptised as just that. Her siblings...Tommy "John Thomas" and Harry "George Henry" had me thinking she must be Margaret Something...but no, just Maggie! We shall never understand the whims of our ancestors...but it is fun trying!! The real mystery in my research has been a family with two sons baptised "William". Before you all shout...BOTH reached adult hood, both married and spawned more Williams!! The only conclusion I could draw was that the elder trotted off to make his way in the world in mid-teens, and parents needed someone around to call Will...they had an enormous brood!! Jacqui ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter Hirons To: David Franks OPC Cc: warwick@rootsweb.com Sent: Monday, November 12, 2007 9:03 AM Subject: Re: [WAR] A Nickname - and Coventry Street Name [continued] Hi all, I'm new to this list so be gentle with me! just to comment on this - My Mother was baptised Peggy - not a Margaret in sight. I also know a Margaret who is usually called Meg or Miggs. -- Regards, Peter Hirons (Family roots in Long Lawford - Parish of Newbold upon Avon) > Although Polly was most often used as a pet name for Mary, including > Mary Ann, it could be used for any of the Mary names (such as > Marion/Marian) and another common formation was Molly. It is not > restricted to Mary Ann (indeed Polly Ann can be found, baptised Mary > Ann). Similarly Meg or Peg or Peggy was usually a pet name for > Margaret, but might also be used for any of the Marg names, such as > Maisie or Marjorie. There is an interesting discussion of these issues > in George Redmond's book 'Christian names in Local and Family History', > in which he warns against assuming a 'proper' name from a 'pet name', > citing one Betty who was baptised Elizabeth and another baptised > Beatrice, belonging to a quite different name group (and many other > examples). This doesn't matter when you have the kind of evidence that > Gus has, but it can obviously mislead if, for example, you have a > servant Molly xxxx in a census and start searching for the xxxx females > in baptism registers, and disregard all except the Mary Anns, because > you believe that Polly is only a pet name for Mary Ann. > > However, Gus, you're obviously quite safe in this instance. > > David ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to WARWICK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.30/1125 - Release Date: 11/11/2007 21:50

Peter Hirons wrote: > I'm new to this list so be gentle with me! Welcome :)) > just to comment on this - My Mother was baptised Peggy - not a Margaret in > sight. I also know a Margaret who is usually called Meg or Miggs. Many pet or nicknames became names in their own right.