Muddle over Muddle Ancestry in early 1700's

[artifis]

The Marriage Index has Thomas Mudle (transcribed spelling) marrying Mary Dodswell on 26 June 1705 at Withyham both of that parish.

Thomas and Mary obviously moved to Rotherfield post their marriage.

Looking at the marriage date and their children baptised at Rotherfield there is room for a child older than Thomas born in wedlock.  Wonder if they went to another parish from Withyham before settling at Rotherfield but if it is them why two Sarahs unless one of the other girls had Sarah as a second forename and preferred that.

Rotherfield burials:

Mary bap 1711 bur 11 May 1713 d/o Thomas
Thomas 27 Mar 1756 clocksmith
Mary 27 Dec 1756 widow
Thomas 16 Feb 1785 clocksmith - presumably s/o Thomas & Mary bap 1707
Edward 10 Apr 1788 - presumably s/o Thomas & Mary bap 1709

[artifis]

There is a Sara Muddle bap 18 Sep 1714 at Maidstone in Kent d/o John & Mary.

If it is her it would explain the licence as she'd have only been 15y/o.

Mudle/Muddle seems a pretty uncommon surname so were John and Thomas related - no record at Withyham.

[Little Nell]

Have you checked out this site?

http://www.muddlefamilies.info/buxted/030js.htm#MUDDLEsarah1718

It might provide some clues or other possibilities to check out.

Nell

[artifis]

What a fantastic site, wish there was something similar for some of my ancestors.

A lot for Mumfy to research.  Seems the family was wealthy so would explain how Thomas was trained as a clocksmith which must have involved an apprenticeship and significant cost to set up a shop on Rotherfield, metals used in clocks not cheap especially as good quality ones would be needed plus cost of the cases.  I would imagine that a clocksmith at that time was a highly respected 'trade' selling to the gentry of the area and also 'servicing' their clocks so well connected.

[Mumfy]

  Several thank you's! 

John - after initial problems I gained access to the microfilmed copy of the Withyam registers; wonderful to see the original document online. I probably need to do the same detailed search on the Rotherfield registers.

Artifis - thank you for taking the time to do the searches and for your valuable suggestion that one of the couple might have been a minor. I'll keep in mind the Sarah from Kent.

Little Nell - thanks for the Muddle family website which is truly wonderful.

Sarah Muddle, daughter of Thomas the clockmaker, who inherits ten pounds from his will, is I'm sure the 'second' Sarah who is baptised in 1718 and still single at the time of his death. She can't have married in 1729 and I can't see that there would have been a late baptism when all her siblings appear to have been baptised not long after birth.

The website http://theweald.org doesn't attribute any parentage to the Sarah Muddle who marries William Hider.

However, the Family Search website has trees that attribute Sarah Hider (née Muddle) to the clockmaking family, as do several trees on Ancestry. On the latter this Sarah is sometimes referred to as 'Sarah Elizabeth' but no source documents are noted. I suppose it is possible there were two children named Sarah...

I'm left wondering if there are clues in the names of William and Sarah's children: their first three children are named Sarah and Edward and Mary.

Also wondering if a marriage by licence would have determined the church? A Joseph Hyder (sic) and Mary Ralph, both of Rotherfield, are married in Withyam by licence on 13 Jan 1730. Perhaps once again a minor involved in the marriage?

Cheers
Mumfy

[artifis]

Hi Mumfy,

I'm sure you're aware that family trees on line frequently contain wishful thinking links that are not substantiated by documentation, best to treat them with a deal of scepticism until you can verify their claims through your own researches.  On two such they had listed one of my ancestors still having children in her sixties!  The later half of the children listed were in fact her eldest son's who had the same forename as her husband and had married a girl with the same forename as hers.  A few simple checks with actual records revealed the truth.

Couple of thoughts. 

In Thomas Muddle's will did he refer to Sarah just as Sarah or did she have a second forename?

Did he leave anything to the remainder of his children and if so how did he describe Elizabeth, i.e. did she have a second forename of Sarah - could lead to the Sarah Elizabeth you've seen.

If you've not seen the full will it might be worth getting a copy.

[Mumfy]

I have truly found some most fanciful trees online: a second marriage whilst first husband still alive, sudden uprooting of fictional children to far flung countries etc etc.

With regard to the will for Thomas Muddle that was proved in 1756, it would appear from the muddle families.info website that Thomas bequeathed money to his wife Mary, his son Edward, his daughter Ann who was the wife of William Foreman, his daughter Elizabeth, his son Nicholas and to his daughter Sarah.  In addition to leaving his son Thomas the residue of his personal estate.

I think I will write to Derek Miller,  the author of this website, to see if he has any idea who the Sarah who marries in 1729 might be, although the website makes no mention of her.

Cheers
Mumfy

[swebby]

And do remember a baptismal date is not necessarily a birth date, all the children could have been baptised late, I did have a family who made a habit of it.
I have had a look at poor law records for the Muddle names, all of them seem to be situated around Rotherfield. None for the lot in question though.

Sean

[artifis]

A good point about the baptism-birth dates Sean, I found a number of my Hastings' ancestors having their children 'done' in batches and the same for other families I've helped with the research on.  With sea side towns where the fathers were fishermen you can understand it if they were away from home for extended periods or couldn't commit to times due to the nature of the fish 'runs' - pilchards, sardines etc. - when they just had to drop everything to go to sea.  I've also come across the same batch baptisms with a few of my inland ancestors and further research indicated that there wasn't a full time incumbent at the parish church, one incumbent spent pretty well all of his time teaching theology at one of the Oxford unis so when he did visit the parish there were a lot of baptisms and marriages to catch up with, not sure how they dealt with burials, maybe a priest from an adjacent parish visited for such.  He did have a curate at the parish from time to time but I'm not sure if he could officiate at baptisms and marriages or whether it was the absent incumbent who dictated that only he would officiate at such events - he appears to have been a kindly, caring and benevolent  person but a little bit of a dictator coming from a wealthy landed gentry family, his wife then his daughters after her death lived in the parish rectory whilst he was away.