http://bcconnections.tribalpages.com/tr ... =611405795
I've connected these two sisters on BCC. Definitely sisters, Married same day, the entries are next to each other and they had the same Witnesses, BUT cannot find their parents, any help much appreciated from Linell.
*Archived * Handley Connection
Moderators: Northern Lass, grangers14, admin, peterd
-
Northern Lass
- Posts: 46035
- Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:12 am
- Primary Surname Interests: Hinett, Rose, Round, Shakespear, Wilkins,
- Primary Geographical Research Areas: Black Country, Wiltshire, Newcastle upon Tyne
Re: Handley Connection
Would the witnesses help?
-
gardener
- Posts: 3273
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:49 pm
- Primary Surname Interests: Rose, Wolloxall, Wallis(ace), Downs
- Primary Geographical Research Areas: Netherton, Dudley, Bewdley
- Location: Iceland
- Contact:
Re: Handley Connection
Northern Lass wrote:Would the witnesses help?
Not a great deal
Thomas Billingham and George Smith
I see that David Billingham probably remarried at Clent the following year 18.8.1811 to Esther Shaw (off the Billinghams site) and that doesn't help much either.
"The present is the key to the past" - Charles Lyell
-
gardener
- Posts: 3273
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:49 pm
- Primary Surname Interests: Rose, Wolloxall, Wallis(ace), Downs
- Primary Geographical Research Areas: Netherton, Dudley, Bewdley
- Location: Iceland
- Contact:
Re: Handley Connection
Perhaps this is Elizabeth's burial then?
19 Mar 1811 Elizabeth BILLINGHAM 24 Worcestershire Cradley, St Peter.age 24 years
Which would make her born 1787 and David is on the 1851 census as born 1788 so that fits together.
And if it is the right couple then Mary (Attwood) was "60" in 1841, born in Staffordshire. Joseph seems to be alone in 1851 though not down as widowed.
All I see as likely are
Mary Ann Handley 1789 and Elizabeth 1786 at St Philips Birmingham parents Henry and Sarah. And that Mary seems too young to fit the 1841 census
19 Mar 1811 Elizabeth BILLINGHAM 24 Worcestershire Cradley, St Peter.age 24 years
Which would make her born 1787 and David is on the 1851 census as born 1788 so that fits together.
And if it is the right couple then Mary (Attwood) was "60" in 1841, born in Staffordshire. Joseph seems to be alone in 1851 though not down as widowed.
All I see as likely are
Mary Ann Handley 1789 and Elizabeth 1786 at St Philips Birmingham parents Henry and Sarah. And that Mary seems too young to fit the 1841 census
"The present is the key to the past" - Charles Lyell
-
linell
- Posts: 5054
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:50 am
- Primary Surname Interests: Stringer Worton Haynes Mason Reading Pratt Willetts Hackett Brown Darby
- Primary Geographical Research Areas: Black Country
- Location: Stafford
Re: Handley Connection
Hi Gardener, Elizabeth's daughter was baptised on the 19.3.1811, same day that her mother was buried then 
It could well be this Elizabeth Billingham as there are no more children listed for her and David. I will amend the dates of birth for David and Elizabeth to about 1787/8.
Joseph and Mary Attwood are missing on the 1851 Census, Mary is on the 1861, Joseph died before. Mary was definitely born later about 1795, so she would have been about 8 years younger than Elizabeth. I don't think the Baptism's at St Phillips are their's, probably Non Conformists, so it looks like the mystery of their parents will be very difficult to solve, many thanks from Linell.
It could well be this Elizabeth Billingham as there are no more children listed for her and David. I will amend the dates of birth for David and Elizabeth to about 1787/8.Joseph and Mary Attwood are missing on the 1851 Census, Mary is on the 1861, Joseph died before. Mary was definitely born later about 1795, so she would have been about 8 years younger than Elizabeth. I don't think the Baptism's at St Phillips are their's, probably Non Conformists, so it looks like the mystery of their parents will be very difficult to solve, many thanks from Linell.
-
gardener
- Posts: 3273
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:49 pm
- Primary Surname Interests: Rose, Wolloxall, Wallis(ace), Downs
- Primary Geographical Research Areas: Netherton, Dudley, Bewdley
- Location: Iceland
- Contact:
Re: Handley Connection
linell wrote:Joseph and Mary Attwood are missing on the 1851 Census, Mary is on the 1861, Joseph died before. Mary was definitely born later about 1795, so she would have been about 8 years younger than Elizabeth.
1851
Cradley Heath
Joseph Atwood 60 chain maker
Mary ditto 59
Phebe ditto 19 dress maker
Maria ditto 16 chain maker
Alfred ditto 14
all born RR
So that would give Mary born about 1792 ish. Or 1793ish by the 1861 census.
Like as not they were non conformist as you say
"The present is the key to the past" - Charles Lyell
-
linell
- Posts: 5054
- Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 10:50 am
- Primary Surname Interests: Stringer Worton Haynes Mason Reading Pratt Willetts Hackett Brown Darby
- Primary Geographical Research Areas: Black Country
- Location: Stafford
Re: Handley Connection
Many thanks Gardener from Linell.
-
Northern Lass
- Posts: 46035
- Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:12 am
- Primary Surname Interests: Hinett, Rose, Round, Shakespear, Wilkins,
- Primary Geographical Research Areas: Black Country, Wiltshire, Newcastle upon Tyne
Re: Handley Connection
Flagging to archive
so unless otherwise advised this will be moved to archived section within 24 hrs
so unless otherwise advised this will be moved to archived section within 24 hrs