Genealogy Chat

Thanks Victoria, suppose there is a chance that she was born somewhere else like her husband Abraham I am having trouble finding his birth too.

Marilyn

'Of the parish' only means that the party concerned was living in the parish at the time of the marriage and was not necessarily born there. Any help?

Victoria

Thanks for answering Janet, its just that I have gone so far back with that branch to before 1600 just through parish records and it would be a shame if it was wrong, in fact I think I would cry lol.

I know really that it is extremely unlikely for this to happen, but I live in hope that there is a simple explanation.

I will have another good look and see if I can get any advice from the record office when I next go.

Thanks again

Marilyn

If the births had been 20 years previous it would be entirely possible but England adopted the gregorian calendar in 1752.

This is my opinion. It is incredibly unlikely that a twin born at 28 week gestation would have survived. It is even more unlikely that the other twin would survive in utero until 40 weeks. In the 1700's infant mortality ran at about 20%. Of those that survived the first two years 50% did not live to their 5th birthday.

Moonbeam

Thats exactly on the lines which I was thinking when I said is this ever so remotely possible, but wondered if it was me being daft. So maybe there is a slight chance after all, dont think there are two families. Thanks for that

Gwyn

Witnesses were Joseph Stainton and Nancy Lupton on the marriage of Abraham and Mary, dont have any incidences of those names in my tree, might be missing something. Also ages are not given, wish they were.

She didnt remarry either, Abraham was a widower when he married and he was born around 1763 ish.

Thanks again everyone for your help, it is much appreciated.

Marilyn

When Mary married Abraham, who were the witnesses, ...any clues there to link her to a family?

Did she ever remarry at a time when her father was named?

Gwyn

I am wondering if Ann and Mary were non-identical twins. Ann could have been born at 28 weeks gestation and Mary born at the normal 40 weeks. Ann could have died at a young age and a later child given the same name. I know this sounds improbable but I'm sure stranger things have happened.

If not this then I am inclined to think that there were two families with the same names.

Thanks Bren will check that one out too!

Think I have already done that Jill, they are the right dates, thanks



Marilyn

Might be worth double-checking the dates carefully - maybe you wrote down the wrong year for one of them. I know it's unlikely but it is possible ...

Have you thought of looking at the records for St Andrews Dent It's the next parish and if your ancestors lived at one of the isolated farms they could have benn baptised there instead of Sedburgh

Jill

Ann was born 14th Feb baptised 15th March, so she couldnt have been stillborn could she.

Mary was born 10th May baptised 14th June.

No other John Atkinson and Margarets I dont think, will have a recheck when I go.

No addresses or occupations

Thanks for info but think I am running out of solutions.

Marilyn

Are these dates the dates of birth or the dates of baptism - or maybe a mixture of the two?

Are there two families with the same named parents - unlikely but possibly cousins who happened to marry women with the same name?

Do the records show addresses and father's occupations? Does that info help at all?

I know it might be a miracle but if it is wrong then maybe a good few of my ancestors may be wrong too!

I have a Mary Atkinson who married Abraham Nowell in 1801 in Sedbergh and both were of Sedbergh.

The only Mary Atkinson I can find in Sedbergh Parish Records who would be old enough to marry in 1801 is one born 10th May 1767 to a John and Margaret Atkinson (nee Washington). She is one of 8 brothers and sisters but the problem is that one of the sisters Ann was born 14th February same year.

There is also another Ann born to the family later in 1771.

Would it be remotely possible for Ann to be born three months previous to Mary, I know its a long shot but with another Ann being born later I thought maybe the first one was stillborn, or she lost it or something. On last looking I couldnt find a death or burial though. Abraham and Mary had three children, John in 1802, Elizabeth 1804 and Grace 1806, so the only name continuation is John.

I am going to Kendal sometime soon and will have to have another look, but in the meantime, am I clutching at straws.

Thanks for any help

Marilyn x