Author Topic: Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet  (Read 3118 times)

Offline lucymags

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
  • Slowly but surely...
    • View Profile
Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet
« on: Friday 19 January 18 07:32 GMT (UK) »
Working up the Siffleet tree in Sussex, I came across this wonderful mine of information in the will of Thomas Siffleet, "signed in Dec 1806" - obviously quite a wealthy landowner.
http://www.sussex-opc.org/index.php?n=siffleet&t=will&k=105&l=102
Firstly (almost as an aside), there is this burial record https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:KG8P-93M:
Name Thomas Sifflet
Event Type Burial
Event Date 03 May 1806
Event Place Streat, Sussex, England
Age 74
Birth Year (Estimated) 1732
- which looks like a perfect fit until it dawns that his burial apparently took place 7 months before the will was signed. A bit strange because the name is unusual (even when misspelt). So is there any chance that the signing of the will could refer to a date after the death of the man who made the will?  ???

Just trying to stick with what is already known, the nephew Thomas (1761-1843) referred to in the will, married to Ann (unknown birth name), has children Thomas, Sarah, Josiah, William and Michael DOBs between 1790 and 1802 and Elizabeth. Here in the will a James and Stephen are mentioned (and there's a Robert born later).

As far as I can see, the will refers to 3 nephews - Thomas, Michael and Josiah - c. 1760s.

The only brother mentioned is the late James, leaving a daughter Jemima. Brother-in-law Soper is presumably a sister's husband? (I'm still a bit confused about the Sopers, but will come back to them.)

Not mentioned, as far as I can see, is the name of nephew Thomas' father (who may be the John who pays land tax in Stockbury in Kent in 1798 and married to an Elizabeth Redman, but that marriage is only on an Ancestry tree and I've so far been unable to verify this).

Nephew Michael has sons James, William and Michael, and daughters Hannah Collins (married to Thomas in Worth, 1802) and Elizabeth Siffleet.  I found records for Ellizabeth and Hannah Siffleet, baptised in Worth in 1803 and 1802 respectively, daughters of Michael and Elizabeth - these must be the then infant daughters of the nephew Michael's son, Michael?

In the meantime, I found the record of an Elizabeth Siffleet who dies in Worth aged 52 in 1803 (b.c. 1751) - no idea where she fits in. Seems a bit late to be mother of the 1802-3 girls - unless the age is a bit out and she died in childbirth... [Will ignore this for now.]

There's a number of other Siffleets on FS, but I'm just concentrating on the relationships in the will for now. This one is not for the faint-hearted, but if anyone has the time and will to have a look and confirm or disprove any of my assumptions, I'd appreciate it. My main interest is in the nephew Thomas' line, but having encountered this information, thought I'd attempt to fill what I can in of the others. But I think that I'm going to move on to trying to establish the father of "John", Thomas the elder and James when I come back to it next.

(I did also find some 1798 land tax payments by Thomas for land in Newick and Chailey, and noticed that the land called Trick in the will is actually ffrick/Frick.)

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Online Barbara F

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,690
    • View Profile
Re: Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet
« Reply #1 on: Friday 19 January 18 09:20 GMT (UK) »
I will have a look at the details of the will a bit later unless someone else can help earlier. 

However so far as the date of the will is concerned the body of the will shows it was signed in 1805. So there is a discrepancy with the header.

Of course, to be absolutely sure of the date it would be best to obtain a copy of the will rather than a transcript.

Barbara
Joy, Larkin, Twort, Baker, Whibley - Brenchley and Horsmonden area Kent
Fewell and Speller - Essex and London
Headington and Bateman - London
Feltwell - Norfolk and London
Lewin - India and NZ
Evan-Thomas - Wales and London
Purser and Cook - Hunts

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline lucymags

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
  • Slowly but surely...
    • View Profile
Re: Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet
« Reply #2 on: Friday 19 January 18 09:47 GMT (UK) »
I will have a look at the details of the will a bit later unless someone else can help earlier. 

However so far as the date of the will is concerned the body of the will shows it was signed in 1805. So there is a discrepancy with the header.

Of course, to be absolutely sure of the date it would be best to obtain a copy of the will rather than a transcript.

Barbara

Ah - thanks so much, Barbara! This is why a second pair of eyes is so valuable. I don't know how many times I must have read that bit at the bottom and just not noticed "seventh Day of December in the Year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and five"! :)

Well, at least that confirms that those records are matching. I will let the transcriber know. (I don't know if it's possible to get a copy of the original.)

It's all a bit headache-inducing, but I think I'm slowly teasing out the bits that matter to my tree, so I certainly don't expect anyone to spend hours on this. I'm nearly done for the day now, but will come back to it on the weekend. (I have found a possibility for a father/brother called John but it needs more work.)

Online jonw65

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,720
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet
« Reply #3 on: Friday 19 January 18 11:56 GMT (UK) »
You can see the original will here, it is very long. You must be signed in
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HT-DRN9-RZ5?i=372&cat=685691

Thomas Siffleet of Newick, gentleman
Registered will with grant of probate, 12 July 1806
Date of will 7 Dec 1805
Value under 2000
Archdeaconry of Lewes
ESRO reference PBT 1/1/69/763

Offline lucymags

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
  • Slowly but surely...
    • View Profile
Re: Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet
« Reply #4 on: Friday 19 January 18 12:14 GMT (UK) »
Oh, thanks for that, Jon! I will have a look at it on the weekend.

How did you manage to find it on FS, btw? It didn't seem to pop up on any of the searches I was doing for the Siffleets.

Online jonw65

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,720
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet
« Reply #5 on: Friday 19 January 18 13:37 GMT (UK) »
Hi
Details of the probate from The Keep
http://www.thekeep.info

then found the microfilm from the LDS catalogue on FamilySearch
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01ldh/

(select Probate records)
John

Offline lucymags

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
  • Slowly but surely...
    • View Profile
Re: Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet
« Reply #6 on: Saturday 20 January 18 06:03 GMT (UK) »
Hi John

Thanks so much - those are both very useful things to know. I can see other Siffleet records on the Keep site (and I have other branches in Sussex), and might be able to use the FS link to the Canterbury PC for another will I was working on in Bath a couple of weeks ago - will have to come back to that!

Mel

Edit: If anyone can think of a way of linking this person to Thomas who made the will, it would be great.
A John Sifflett [sic] baptised in 1744:
Name John Sifflett
Event Type Christening
Event Date 01 Jun 1744
Event Place Framfield, Sussex, England
Gender Male
Father's Name John Sifflett

The only way I can think that they could be in the same family would be if John is a much younger brother of Thomas the landowner, and the father of nephew Thomas, in which case he would have been only 17-18 when he fathered Thomas. (No John Siffleets are mentioned in the will.)

In the meantime, I have lots to get on with looking at the relationships and records I already have!

Offline Guy Etchells

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,633
    • View Profile
Re: Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet
« Reply #7 on: Saturday 20 January 18 07:35 GMT (UK) »
Sorry I don't have time to go through the 7 pages of the will at present but I would mention never get too tied up on relationships shown on old documents. The meaning of relationships is quite fluid.
I.E. Brother-in-law may be as you say sister's husband but it could also mean a brother of a wife (his or even his brother's wife).
A nephew could even mean a brother-in-law if the writer is using older terminology.

Cheers
Guy
http://anguline.co.uk/Framland/index.htm   The site that gives you facts not promises!
http://burial-inscriptions.co.uk Tombstones & Monumental Inscriptions.

As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

Offline lucymags

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 291
  • Slowly but surely...
    • View Profile
Re: Brainteaser trying to work out relationships from a will - Siffleet
« Reply #8 on: Saturday 20 January 18 10:13 GMT (UK) »
Ah - thanks for that, Guy. Useful to know.

I think that I've worked out a likely or possible structure, which will do for now (with copious notes for the bits awaiting further evidence). I've also found a few of the places he mentions in the will on the map (e.g. Frick, The Rough, etc.), which is quite interesting to see.

I will leave the will for now and work on documenting all the people I have, before heading up the tree again.

Thanks again to everyone who has helped me with this. Much appreciated. :-)