RootsChat.Com

Cant help it if the Griffiths link won't work (should have rechecked it before posting - will see if I can fix it) but given the name and location its not rocket science to retrieve from Griffiths. 

Also, if you read my last note, I do provide (albeit indirectly) his landlords, Earl Fitzwilliam and the Earl of Meath - hence the comment to dig into their records if I can - was under the impression that most of these are not actually online, correct?  i.e. I'd have to physically go to the records offices?

You're next suggestions are indeed good and had begun to dig into wills/deeds but to date without success - will keep trying for sure.

Have you clicked on the link you posted? Useless!

Of note he had 1500 acres lease but you don't say from Whom?

Maybe check for Wills, Deeds, Marriage Settlements etc??

Hi,

I have been through numerous loops on nailing down my 5th generation ancestor James Byrne - I believe from a number of circumstantial bits of evidence that I have the individual located in Griffith's evaluation in Ballymanus but for the life of me I cannot find a single hard record to link this Ballymanus-Killaduff James to any other life event record that might yield his spouse and children.  I am working on one of his sons being my 4th generation grandfather Hugh Byrne married to Margaret Keegan.  The only candidate ca. 1815 baptismal record for Hugh is listed in Baltinglass (which seems a stretch but not impossible) to a James and "Wife", witnesses a Patt Byrne and a Mary Doyle (a James Doyle and a Peter Byrne are witnesses at Hugh's later marriage).

So to the point - is there any way to definitively associate a Griffith's valuation land lessor (James Byrne) to a familial record of the same era (1850;s).  Of note, he had a huge land lease, ca, 600 acres in Killaduff, another 400 in Ballymanus (includes the famous "Ballymnaus House") and another 500+ in an adjacent townland to the east)? 

Suspect not, but could use any advice you have to offer at this stage as have hit a wall (looked at numerous James Byrne candidates and grave stones etc etc. with no luck linking to a son Hugh - there is a James and Sarah Connor with a Hugh as a son but separate family tree on Ancestry definitely rules this Hugh out 100%).

Link to the Griffith's record:
http://griffiths.askaboutireland.ie/gv4/z/zoomifyDynamicViewer.php?file=289035&path=./pix/289/&rs=1&showpage=1&mysession=2587556584232&width=&height=


Have my fingers crossed!
Cheers, C.

Here's a cool link - in the baptismal 1846 record for Arthur Byrne son of Hugh and Margaret Byrne (my candidate great great grandparents) one of the witness's is a Pat Lambert.   I tracked down what appears to be Hugh Byrne's home/farm lease in Ballymanus in the National Archives and lo and behold his next door neighbor is listed right there as a Pat Lambert.  Nice when this stuff works !

LINK to land records (need to get a map of the actual properties - next task! - thx for the pointer from MyLuck!):

http://census.nationalarchives.ie/reels/vob/IRE_CENSUS_1821-51_007246936_00970.pdf

LINK to Hugh and Margarets baptismal record of their son Arthur (my great grandfather) with Pat Lambert listed as a witness (7th from bottom left entry - thx to prev poster for this):

https://registers.nli.ie/registers/vtls000633994#page/23/mode/1up

Can anyone hazard a guess as to what could be written in the red circles in the attached screen dump - tried various ways to enhance the text but pretty much the same result - MyLuck! mentioned that there may be additional info in the offline church records (including stating Arthur was remarrying and from Ballinglen) which would be great to see if possible - assume the notes added later on the side to entry 9 might refer to this.
LINK:  https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1888/10784/5932891.pdf

So in respect the Arthur Byrne who married Elizabeth (nee) Byrne in Ballymanus in 1871 being the same Arthur that married Elizabeth (nee) Nolan in Baltinglass 1888.
 
Asside: Does seem a bit odd that Arthur a farmer would live in Ballymanus in 1871 then in Baltinglass in 1888 then back in Ballinglen prior to 1901 i.e. Baltinglass is definitely the ‘odd out’ location w.r.t. farmland lease/ownership - maybe just co-dwelling prior to marriage

REVIEW OF WHAT RECORDS WE HAVE:

As poster MyLuck! pointed out, both Ballymanus and Baltinglass Arthur’s share a Hugh Byrne as a father - seems highly probable they are the same person.  If we carry that, again as MyLuck points out, there is also a baptismal record of Arthur born to Hugh and Margaret Byrne which indicates Arthur is born in 1846 - this matches Ballymanus Arthur’s age in the 1871 Ballymanus marriage certificate (at 25), so all consistent.

Further Ballymanus Elizabeth dies in 1885 age 35.
Arthur then marries Baltinglass Elizabeth in 1888 - this timing works.
_______________________

So the remaining uncertainty for me is whether Arthur son of Hugh or either of these Elizabeths are in fact related to the 1901 Census record of an Arthur and Elizabeth Byrne in Ballinglen - we do not have anything to 100% directly link them as yet other than area and sharing two sons names Denis and Arthur.

Ballinglen Arthur born 1848 - note there is one baptism/birth in Tinahely of Arthur Byrne born to Charles Byrne and Anne (nee) Murphy - no certainty if the same Arthur but the date does match his later reported age.
Ballinglen Arthur recorded as age 53, wife Elizabeth 40 in 1911 census
Ballinglen Arthur dies in 1907 (2 sources), is notably a widower, but death record says 55 - should be 59 based on 1901 census!  Note Arthur son of Hugh should be 61 in 1907!!
Ballinglen Elizabeth dies in 1905 age 63 - big problem with this age is the Ballinglen Elizabeth in the  1901 census is 40!! - which age is correct (if we assume the same woman)?


POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS:

1) One possible way to link the Elizabeth (nee Nolan) in the 1888 Baltinglass Arthur Byrne marriage certificate is to read her age as 46 and not 26 (even though it looks more like 26 it is a very poorly preserved image - cracking this may be key).  If we make it 46 then Elizabeth (nee Nolan) would indeed match in respect age to the death date for Ballinglen Elizabeth at 63 in 1905. This solution would still need the 1901 Ballinglen census age of 40 to be (significantly) wrong - perhaps a typo and should have been a 6 instead of a 4?

2) Alternatively, as MyLuck! earlier suggested, if 26 is correct then Elizabeth (nee Nolan) would be approx 40 in 1901 matching the census and implying the death record of 63 is an error and perhaps should be 43.  I am leaning towards this for now.

3) That Arthur/Elizabeth in 1901 Ballinglen are not connected to Arthur (son of Hugh) nor his two wives.

Sorry ciaranob I have commitments and no time today to go through everything here
.........