Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Help & opinions needed please

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Help & opinions needed please

    I think I have made a break thorugh on my Drake family, but would appreciate some help please.
    Thomas Drake was born c 1804, although his age varies greatly over the census. I've found a baptism in Rockland St Peter, Norfolk, 11/4/1802 s/o Thmoas & Ellen, which looks hoeful. There are no other Thomas Drakes born around that time. There are no other children for Thomas & Ellen, but 20/2/1609, Thomas Drake (widower) married Mary Lincon (widow) & they then go on to have 8 children upto 1824 & then another in 1841. I have previously found Thomas senior in the census, up until he died in 1855, but had not kept the details, as I hadn't thought he was a relation.
    The problem is that, although I am fairly sure that he is the same Thomas, I have been unable to find the death of Ellen. Also Thomas & Mary did have a son Thomas as well, is this likely or not?
    Any help would be appreciated.
    Lynn

  • #2
    Hi Lynn
    Just bumping this up as nobody has replied to the thread.
    I am just wondering if the vicar made a mistake or the transcriber has made a mistake & the parents of Thomas born c 1802 should be John & Ellen because there are several baptisms of children of this couple born around this time at Rockland St Peter.
    Can your confirm that YOUR Thomas Drake was the one that lived with a Charlotte Chilly from c1841-1881 & admitted (as per census) to being the father of lots of Chilly children.
    Moggie

    Comment


    • #3
      Yes that is the one Moggie, although I took it as the children being hers as they were listed daughter/son after her name had been listed. I have looked at the prs previously & all the Chilly children are baptised under just her name.
      The idea of a mistake does seem to be quite reasonable, but it would have been easier if it hadn't been for this Thomas a widower remarrying.
      Last edited by Lynn The Forest Fan; 24-02-10, 06:02.
      Lynn

      Comment


      • #4
        Thomas' first wife Elizabeth, died in 1828 & he remarried the following year to a Maria Chillystone, the witnesses were Charley Chilly & James Drake. I think this could be Charlotte who later went onto live with Thomas, after Maria died later that year & the son of John & Ellen Drake, probably his brother.
        I'd really appreciate some opinions as to the likeliness of this being the correct senario
        Last edited by Lynn The Forest Fan; 24-02-10, 13:58.
        Lynn

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi Lynn
          I am sure that Thomas was the father of all the Chilly children. He lived with Charlotte for over 40 years. I don't know if you've noticed but in 1871 Charlotte is down as Chillystone & possibly the reason why they never married was because she was Maria's sister & it would have been an unlawful marriage at that time although it did happen often. I think her death was also recorded as Chillystone. I've just looked at the image for the 1802 baptism for Thomas & it does give the parents as Thomas & Ellen although it could still be a mistake on the part of the vicar. I think Thomas & Mary (Lincoln) had 4 sons that they named Thomas, the last one baptised in 1819 who possibly survived.
          Moggie

          Comment


          • #6
            Is this link for the images of the registers of Rockland St Peter any help, or have you already perused them?

            Discover your family history. Explore the world’s largest collection of free family trees, genealogy records and resources.


            Jay
            Janet in Yorkshire



            Genealogists never die - they just swap places in the family tree

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi Janet
              I don't know if Lynn has had a look on there but that was where I was able to look at the 1802 baptism image. It also highlighted a mistake on FreeREG because on the 1829 marriage entry for Thomas Drake & Maria Chillystone they have him down as a batchelor but the image says that he was a widower.
              Moggie

              Comment


              • #8
                Good point Moggie, I hadn't thought of that! I had already made a note that Charlotte's death was registered as Chillystone & in the 1881 census, they were shown as being married, although as they were lodgin, it is possible that was an assumption on their landlord's part. I am getting very tempted to buy Thomas' death cert, as neither he or Charlotte are buried at Rockland St Peter
                Thanks Janet, the Familysearch site is where I had been viewing these records, although I have got some micro fiche that I got some births & deaths from. I think I might have originally seen the Free Reg marriage as I hadn't been sure about it being the right Thomas but I am now I have seen it shows him as a widower.
                I think the fact that Thomas & Mary had 3 sons called Thomas one who I think is still around in 1841, suggests that my Thomas is not Thomas' son. It would really make kmore sense for his parents to be John & Ellen rather than Thomas & Ellen
                Last edited by Lynn The Forest Fan; 24-02-10, 16:14.
                Lynn

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi Lynn
                  They were both buried at Rockland All Saints with St Andrew. Thomas on July 6th 1884 age 86 & Charlotte on Oct 12th 1884 age 75.
                  Moggie

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Wow thanks Moggie! The ages are interesting though, as that makes him born 1798!
                    Lynn

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hi Lynn
                      I think you have to make up your own mind about the John/Ellen v Thomas/Ellen scenario. If you are happy to accept that the vicar made a mistake albeit on an "off day" or a senior moment then there is a possible marriage for a John Drake & Ellen Payne in 1791 at Scoulton. Payn & Payne was given as the maiden name on a couple of the John/Ellen's children's baptisms.
                      It's quite sad when you think that Thomas & Charlotte lived together for nearly 50 years & died within a few months of each other but possibly couldn't legalise their relationship for reasons given earlier. Had they been cousins & blood related they could have legally married.
                      Moggie

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Thanks Moggie, I do agree that it is going to be more or less impossible to prove, but I also know that it is a very easy mistake to make. I am trying to find any other possible marriage for Thomas & Ellen & then if that seems unlikely, then I will accept this as being the right ones. Thanks for finding the John & Ellen marriage, do you know where Scoulton is in relation to Rockland St Peter?
                        Lynn

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          They are contiguous.
                          Glen

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I am looking at things from all angles Glen
                            Lynn

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Hi Lynn
                              Sorry made a mistake about the John Drake/Ellen Payne marriage. It was at Scarning & not Scoulton.
                              Moggie

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Thanks Moggie
                                Lynn

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X