Paul - > There is also a part of Henley-on-Thames known as Newtown. But I haven't a > clue if that would have been known as Newtown 150 years ago ! I had considered Newtown, but looking at its position in Henley with relation to the station, and trying to remember the type of housing there, I reckoned it had developed in the latter part of the 1800s. I haven't succeeded in getting Henley on www.old-maps.co.uk . I've now tried searching the 1881 census for Oxfordshire using the search capabilities of the version 3 viewer. That does show dwellings described as at Newtown, Rotherfield Greys - and looking at where some of the inhabitants of those houses lived in 1851 on the OFHS 1851 census (yes, we've indexed that too - for searches see www.ofhs.org.uk ) I see Newtown does exist there then. Back to BARKERs - you know, Paul, we might be getting somewhere here ! There *are* BARKERs in Henley in the 1851 census - just one family, but William would have been 18, which fits... Full 1851 Census Index Search made on 28 March 2001 from Index dated 02/01/2000 A project funded by the Oxfordshire Family History Society Folio 154 HO 107/1725 Henley 3 16, , BARKER, Elizabeth R, HD, w 40, Gentlewoman & Fundholder, SFK Hollesley , , , Charles B, SO, u 16, Scholar, BRK Culham , , , Arthur J, SO, u 15, Scholar, BRK Culham , , , George F, SO, 13, Scholar, BRK Culham , , , Elizabeth M, DA, 10, Scholar, OXF Henley , , , Fanny, DA, 1, , OXF Henley Two snags, though. The elder children were born in Berkshire, not Oxfordshire, but maybe William thought in terms of Henley, if we go with this hypothesis for a while, but worse, Douglas has just told me off-list that William's parents were Thomas Barker and mother Lucy Burke. Concentrating on the children - if I looked at Culham baptisms, hopefully/maybe (got to be optimistic) I'd find, working back, George, Arthur, Charles, and then William. Culham is even on the database already. Well, there are *no* BARKER baptisms in Culham. They may have been *born* there, but they weren't *baptized* there. Back in Suffolk, maybe? If you think this family is worth pursuing, Douglas, the next step might be the 1841 census of Culham. -- Wendy Archer Marlow (further down the Thames from Henley), Bucks, UK wharcher@cvd.co.uk