Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

thoughts?

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

  • thoughts?

    i'm looking into a family called usually spelled puleyn/pulleine in the parish of harewood in yorkshire. i have the cd for bmd's 1614-1812.

    well i have only one generation confirmed, and i googled the family to see what anyone else had. i found a book called the pulleyn's of yorkshire by catherine pulleine 1915. after mush googling, i found a chapter online about the puleyns of dunkeswick in other words, the family im looking into.

    it had a tree and some detailed information, but there are gaps in the registers and no wills etc, so a full tree is not possible, and she only really paid attention to the family in early 17th century. though the drawn up tree had my ancestor b.1702 on it. her mother and grandmother are unknown. the maiden names of all the women preceding her are unknown also. it is very plausible, there are names that are common in her immediate family as well as distant cousins.

    i guess im asking, would you believe the tree, and enter it? or would you try to find more information? she has done a thorough job, so i dont know if i could anything she has missed? the book was compiled about a 100 years ago!

  • #2
    Sorry Kyle, but you know the rules!

    No sources = no proof = no tree.
    You can work it backwards and see where truth parts company from what she surmised. Also, there may be resources available to you which weren't available to her 100 years ago.

    If you need any help, stick it on here.

    OC

    Comment


    • #3
      Were any of them "Friends?" (Quakers)
      I have a "married in" Norfolk/Suffolk link with Pullyns in the 1700's - they were Quakers and in trade. The name Pullyn was then used as a middle name in that branch of the family for the next two hundred years.

      Jay
      Janet in Yorkshire



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

      Comment


      • #4
        thanx oc. i am wondering what sources i could use to verify her thoughts or add some flesh. the marriages seem to be missing from the registers earlier than 1640 i think. i can't tell if she means the family is missing from the registers, because im sur i've seen entries from the mid 17th century. there is certainly a generation missing from the baptisms. and there isn't any wills for those generations i seems. im inclined to think she is likely correct, but i don't know really what sources aparts from parish registers and wills i could use.

        when she did research, no body could locate the manor rolls for harewood? maybe they have surfaced since 1915?

        Comment


        • #5
          Kyle

          I've had a very quick look at the book you have found and the bit I looked at IS sourced - she gives information like "Hearth Tax Rolls" and so on.

          You are right, she has certainly attempted a scholarly and proper research and on that basis, what she has found is very likely to be correct. You need to read it very carefully, then decide whether to put it in your tree or not - if this were my family, I would certainly pencil it in as being very likely but NOT PROVEN.

          One thing which slightly puzzles me is her long dissertation about the origins of the name Pulleyn. Not once does she mention MY first thought, which was that it was a corruption of Bulleyn!

          OC

          Comment


          • #6
            sorry janet i didnt see your post! i dont think they were quakers or any form of independants. the time i need is admittedly the civil war, but there are entries during that time, so i dont know if they got missed because of the civil war, or if they left the parish and returned with children or wives. she certainly seems to think the family pre civil war is the same as the ones after it.

            hi oc, yes my thoughts were similar. i would have thought it was also a corruption of boleyn/bulleyn. i would doubt a link with that family though. i am looking at it too pencil in i think. she has done a really good, scholarly job. but there are too many gaps i feel. she does explain a lot in the earlier generations why she thinks they all match, but after the civil war, there is less discussion. im just not sure whether the family is missing from the records full stop, or if they went elsewhere for the period?

            Comment


            • #7
              The civil war period is difficult. Some of the records were recreated afterwards but of course many were lost altogether and there seems to have been a bit of score-settling by the clergy. If a family had made it plain that they weren't interested in the church during the interregnum thn the clergy would "forget" to enter them in the records afterwards.

              Another reason - for my family anyway - is that they were secret Roman Catholic and those records never existed anyway, except in private papers.

              Remember that the work she has done was nearly 100 years ago and a lot of stuff has popped out of people's attics since then! You are fortunate that the name is so unusual because everything you do find is likely to be connected.

              OC

              Comment


              • #8
                i have considered that maybe they weren't entered, but if you go by catherine pulleyn's book, they seem to have been quite well off, so i would've thought that they'd be in the registers. unless they lost their fortunes in the war? she didnt mention wills for the mid-late 17th century, so i guess they didn't have much to leave.

                hmmmm makes it so much harder haha

                Comment


                • #9
                  Have you found them mentioned in any heralds' visitations? You may find the Visitations of Yorkshire on archive.org. You can't take them as gospel, but they can be a useful guide.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I don't think being well off had anything to do with record keeping during the civil war. (Nor at any other time, actually - church records are records of ALL, not just the great and the good.)

                    Some records were deliberately destroyed after the war, although from what you have said, the registers still exist, it is your family who are missing from the records!

                    Have you examined all versions of the records? I mean parish register and bishop's transcripts - these often vary in content and I notice that on the LDS library, Bishop's Transcripts cover different dates from the parish registers.

                    You haven't found Wills...where have you looked? My Lancashire Wills pop up all over the country and weren't necessarily proved in Lancashire.

                    I found a similar book to yours about my family but I was worried about the accuracy of it all. So I put it all onto a separate tree until I could actually prove it - most has been correct I have to say, with a few very minor mistakes. I use Tribal Pages and it is very easy to keep a separate tree on there and even easier to link it into the main tree when it is proved!

                    OC

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      mary, i've never heard of herald's visitations.

                      oc, admittedly i've only used the transcripts of the actual registers. ancestry has harewood in their west yorkshireparishes, so maybe a look at them would help. wellif they did leave wills, they would be at york wouldnt they? its just catherine didnt mention them in her research, so i would have thought they didnt leave any. she has done amazing research. im just wondering why she didnt have much evidence to back up her assumptions for the family after the 1650's.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        A brief guide to using heralds' visitations and the records of the College of Arms to research medieval English genealogy


                        There are quite a lot online on archive.org and Google book search.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          very interesting mary, but i doubt my family ever had a right to bear arms. the only references from googling i could find were to catherine pulleine's book.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I have just found this post and wonder if you got any further in your proving the Pulleine connection in your family Kyle? I am also a descendent of the Pulleine's of Harewood / East Keswick. I have read the Pulleyns of Yorkshire by Catharine Pullein quite extensively to find her sources to check for myself. So far I have "proved" most of her sources and have used them in my tree. I believe she was a professional historian before she wrote the book?
                            My direct line is through Hannah Pullein marrying Francis Shires in 1713 in Harewood.
                            Corinne

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              hi corinne,

                              my line is from anne pulleine (1702-77) wife of thomas hill (b.1699), daughter of henry pulleyn of dunkeswick. all in harewood parish.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X