Hey guys. First I apologise for the long post but I didn't know how to shorten it.
I've been using a mixture of Ancestry, FreeReg and Family Search for my Peacock's this weekend. I had previously already gotten up to Richard Peacock in 1750, Horton IN Ribblesdale and his father was named Joseph who I found an hour away in Grinton 1717. That of course led me to his Father Thomas in Kirkleatham 1682. Now this is the tricky part. The name of Thomas Father is coming up as Philip and so I had a fight to find the next Baptism. 1 came up in 1646 as Philes Pacocke and at the time I had assumed that it could have been an odd spelling of Philip. Transcription error. I couldn't find it on FreeReg but I did on the other 2. Family Search did not indicate gender but Ancestry has now pointed towards it being a female. I'm now thinking Phyllis instead.
I changed the location on FreeReg to the whole of the UK and involving the name Philip Peacock between 1600-1700 any record, family members name etc and there's another possible hit. Philip Peacocke in 1630 Northamptonshire. Now is it possible for a 52 year old man to move that far in location, have a child to a random woman but still be put down as his Surname because I cannot for the life of me find an eligible looking marriage. I have found one in 1629 for his parents though. I haven't even found a Yorkshire death for Philip Peacock which is his last known location through the birth of his child.
I've been using a mixture of Ancestry, FreeReg and Family Search for my Peacock's this weekend. I had previously already gotten up to Richard Peacock in 1750, Horton IN Ribblesdale and his father was named Joseph who I found an hour away in Grinton 1717. That of course led me to his Father Thomas in Kirkleatham 1682. Now this is the tricky part. The name of Thomas Father is coming up as Philip and so I had a fight to find the next Baptism. 1 came up in 1646 as Philes Pacocke and at the time I had assumed that it could have been an odd spelling of Philip. Transcription error. I couldn't find it on FreeReg but I did on the other 2. Family Search did not indicate gender but Ancestry has now pointed towards it being a female. I'm now thinking Phyllis instead.
I changed the location on FreeReg to the whole of the UK and involving the name Philip Peacock between 1600-1700 any record, family members name etc and there's another possible hit. Philip Peacocke in 1630 Northamptonshire. Now is it possible for a 52 year old man to move that far in location, have a child to a random woman but still be put down as his Surname because I cannot for the life of me find an eligible looking marriage. I have found one in 1629 for his parents though. I haven't even found a Yorkshire death for Philip Peacock which is his last known location through the birth of his child.
Comment