|
Post by toolelips on Mar 23, 2009 20:12:35 GMT
Hi to the list. Gail and Woody had answered some questions about my LIVINGSTONE family posting earlier. In it was mentioned the Thomas FLETCHER family from 1851 Hazelgrove, Torkington. The wife is named Harriet FLETCHER, age 51. There is also Ann LIVINGSTONE who is listed as "Mother-in-Law". I am beginning to wonder if this is the correct Ann LIVINGSTONE that I am trying to trace. On Harriet FLETCHER'S burial record it also gives her birth as around 1800. The problem is that the Ann LIVINGSTONE I am following was married in 1803. And I can't find a birth record of this Harriet as a LIVINGSTONE. I know that ages can be off in records. Could someone check marriage records they may have access to to see if there is a Thomas FLETCHER married to a Harriet? The eldest daughter in 1851 is listed as 20yrs. and born Stockport. So marriage around 1831?
Thanks, Margaret
|
|
|
Post by Gay J Oliver on Mar 23, 2009 23:02:41 GMT
Hello again Margaret,
I have just checked my North East Cheshire marriage index and Thomas Fletcher married Harriet DANIELS 30 December 1822 at CHEADLE.
This seems to fit with everything else so far, including the burial records Woody found for you saying that Anne Livingstone was aged 79 when she died in 1857.
GAY
|
|
|
Post by toolelips on Mar 24, 2009 1:50:42 GMT
oooooooohhh!! Does it look to you like what it does to me? Well, maybe because I am more familiar with the tree. It looks now like maybe Ann LIVINGSTONE was married prior to Alexander LIVINGSTONE to a DANIELS?? Because Harriet is her daughter so..Harriet's maiden name is DANIELS so if Ann is her mother her maiden name would be LIVINGSTONE if Alexander was her father?
|
|
|
Post by toolelips on Mar 24, 2009 1:53:52 GMT
Gail.......sorry too excited. Forgot to say a BIG THANK YOU!
|
|
|
Post by toolelips on Mar 24, 2009 1:54:54 GMT
Gay.......sorry now I spelled your name wrong. (
|
|
Woody
Full Member
Posts: 241
|
Post by Woody on Mar 24, 2009 8:02:53 GMT
Hi Toolelips There might be more good news for you. I did a bit of checking into the two witnesses to the marriage of Joseph TAYLOR to Mary Anne LIVINGSTONE in 1830, William MACGUAY and John LOWRY, and into your mention of the lack of birth record for her ancestor, Lydia LIVINGSTONE. There's a listing on the IGI website for a marriage between Henry Daniel and Lydia Brereton at Cheadle on 24th March 1778. Lydia isn't the most common of first names and your family seems to have a history of passing names down the generations. It's just possible that there's a connection to explore between Lydia Brereton (Daniel) and Lydia Livingstone. A John Lowry married Betty Bickerstaffe on 24th March 1778 at Cheadle. There's nothing obvious for William MacGuay, but could his second name be a phonetic interpretation of either MacGee or MacKay ? I don’t pretend to be a historian, but you asked in one previous message about people who signed their name with a 'X'. Historical research into levels of literacy has usually been based on the number of people who signed marriage certificates with their mark. Using this criterion, as late as 1841, 33% of all men and 44% of all women fell into this category in England. However, trying to determine why some people in the 1800s were literate and some weren’t can be a highly complex business because of the nationwide variability of all the factors involved. Whatever, as the Industrial Revolution gathered pace towards the 1800s, mass literacy improved significantly. Equally, although we now accept the term ‘literacy’ to mean a dual ability both to read and to write, in earlier centuries, the term ‘literacy’ refers predminantly to the single skill of reading. Until 1870, following the introduction of compulsory education, the skill of writing was generally given little attention, especially where the poor were concerned. While the elite had always had the opportunity to gain other skills and knowledge, schooling for the masses concerned itself mainly with learning to read - and reading meant reading the Bible. Moreover, it wasn't until 1844 that it became illegal to employ children under 9. In the 1800s, the term 'semi-literate' usually meant that the person could read quite well, but only write a little - their name, for example. Should you want to research this topic further, an easy starting point is Dave Gillard's website at www.dg.dial.pipex.com/historyWoody
|
|