Genealogy frustrations.

[jbml]

He's a great x 11 grandfather ... my mother's father's mother's father's mother's mother's father's mother's father's mother's father's father's father.

There's one weak link in the chain that I'm not 100% certain of (it is still only conjectural that John Wake and Elizabeth Wake, nee Ashby, were the parents of my great x7 grandfather Thomas Wake (1689 - 1731) ... but the rest of the chain is secure, and I reckon that's not bad for a great x 11.

Frustratingly, I've not been able to find his baptism, but a birth in about 1565 is indicated, somewhere in the region of Linton, Cambridgeshire. That is, however, close to the three-way county boundary with Essex and Suffolk, both of which are not easy counties when it comes to Parish records. When I get time I shall have another crack at finding him ... but I've got bigger fish to fry in more recent centuries first.

He married Johan Bentlye in Linton on 2 October 1586, and they had 7 children: Agnes (bapt.  3 May 1587), Mary (bapt. 6 February 1588/9), Johan (bapt. 11 March 1590/1), Richard (bapt. 5 August 1593), Bridget (bapt. 24 June 1596), Robert (bapt. 5 July 1601) and Symon, my great x 10 grandfather, bapt. 27 June 1606).

All baptised in Linton, and no doubting that they are all the children of Nebuchadnezzar and Johan!

I don't know when Nebuchadnezzar died, but Johan Ashby was buried in Linton on 21 March 1615 (I am assuming that the Johan Ashby buried on 3 June 1641 was the daughter, or possibly a wife of one of the sons ... but it might of course have been the other way around).

[coombs]

I am 99% sure that the John Newman born in Belchamp St Paul, Essex in 1759/1760 to Samuel and Hannah Newman is the same one who wed Mary Daniels in Rochford in September 1780. John Newman was baptised in February 1760, son of Samuel and Hannah Newman.

In 1783, Thomas Newman of Burnham On Crouch mentioned "My nephew John Newman of Rochford, son of my brother Samuel of Belchamp St Paul" in his will, leaving him 20 shillings.

I have looked at ratebooks and poor law records for Rochford on Familysearch for c1780 to 1811 and it appears my John Newman is the only John Newman living in Rochford at the time. Also he had a son called Samuel Newman and a daughter called Hannah Newman. A settlement examination for April 1782 says John was apprenticed as a shoemaker to Joseph Turner in Southminster when he was about 17 and they parted ways after 4 years, and is now of Rochford and is married.

[clairec666]

Also we always have to face the small chance that the man named on a birth/baptism certificate was not the real father of your ancestor. A quick roll in the hay with the neighbour, the dalliances with the milkman or temporary separation leading to a fling, or the wife seeing another man and the hubby being none the wiser. Not sure the rate of infidelity in our ancestors days, but only advances in DNA testing will give a more accurate reading.

I always wonder about my Essex family - every census the men of the family are listed on a boat somewhere, while the women are left at home. Who knows what they got up to while the men were away!

[coombs]

Also we always have to face the small chance that the man named on a birth/baptism certificate was not the real father of your ancestor. A quick roll in the hay with the neighbour, the dalliances with the milkman or temporary separation leading to a fling, or the wife seeing another man and the hubby being none the wiser. Not sure the rate of infidelity in our ancestors days, but only advances in DNA testing will give a more accurate reading.

I always wonder about my Essex family - every census the men of the family are listed on a boat somewhere, while the women are left at home. Who knows what they got up to while the men were away!

it does make you wonder why you bother doing genealogy if there is a chance that some of your beloved ancestors may not have been your biological ancestors. Some may want to just focus on their immediate ancestors as the chances of infidelity compounds every generation due to them doubling in numbers.

My ancestor Sarah Wallaker was the wife of a waterman and merchant seaman, and on the censuses she was at home with the kids in Great Stambridge, Essex, most of the time, and the censuses show that. Wonder how lonely she got while her hubby was away. I think back then women were more loyal and conservative, and in rural villages everyone knew everyone's business. But the neighbour or milkman could have popped round to have his wicked way with her when the kids were tucked up in bed while the husband was away at sea or in the army.

[pharmaT]

Also we always have to face the small chance that the man named on a birth/baptism certificate was not the real father of your ancestor. A quick roll in the hay with the neighbour, the dalliances with the milkman or temporary separation leading to a fling, or the wife seeing another man and the hubby being none the wiser. Not sure the rate of infidelity in our ancestors days, but only advances in DNA testing will give a more accurate reading.

I always wonder about my Essex family - every census the men of the family are listed on a boat somewhere, while the women are left at home. Who knows what they got up to while the men were away!

it does make you wonder why you bother doing genealogy if there is a chance that some of your beloved ancestors may not have been your biological ancestors. Some may want to just focus on their immediate ancestors as the chances of infidelity compounds every generation due to them doubling in numbers.

My ancestor Sarah Wallaker was the wife of a waterman and merchant seaman, and on the censuses she was at home with the kids in Great Stambridge, Essex, most of the time, and the censuses show that. Wonder how lonely she got while her hubby was away. I think back then women were more loyal and conservative, and in rural villages everyone knew everyone's business. But the neighbour or milkman could have popped round to have his wicked way with her when the kids were tucked up in bed while the husband was away at sea or in the army.

The way I see it it's not just about biological relatives but about the lives of our ancestor.  Even if there was a NPE the named father was probably be part of their life, the paternal figure in their life.  When you go back further there is no guarantee that you have inherited many if any genes from them.

[coombs]

Also we always have to face the small chance that the man named on a birth/baptism certificate was not the real father of your ancestor. A quick roll in the hay with the neighbour, the dalliances with the milkman or temporary separation leading to a fling, or the wife seeing another man and the hubby being none the wiser. Not sure the rate of infidelity in our ancestors days, but only advances in DNA testing will give a more accurate reading.

I always wonder about my Essex family - every census the men of the family are listed on a boat somewhere, while the women are left at home. Who knows what they got up to while the men were away!

it does make you wonder why you bother doing genealogy if there is a chance that some of your beloved ancestors may not have been your biological ancestors. Some may want to just focus on their immediate ancestors as the chances of infidelity compounds every generation due to them doubling in numbers.

My ancestor Sarah Wallaker was the wife of a waterman and merchant seaman, and on the censuses she was at home with the kids in Great Stambridge, Essex, most of the time, and the censuses show that. Wonder how lonely she got while her hubby was away. I think back then women were more loyal and conservative, and in rural villages everyone knew everyone's business. But the neighbour or milkman could have popped round to have his wicked way with her when the kids were tucked up in bed while the husband was away at sea or in the army.

The way I see it it's not just about biological relatives but about the lives of our ancestor.  Even if there was a NPE the named father was probably be part of their life, the paternal figure in their life.  When you go back further there is no guarantee that you have inherited many if any genes from them.

Yes that is true, they were still the father whether blood or not. Child took their surname, inherited their ethics, were fed and clothed by them.

A sperm donor is just a sperm donor.

[pharmaT]

I have my 3x grt gran's first husband in my tree.  He was part of my 3x grt gran's life, he was the father of my 3x grt aunts and uncles, my grt grt grandfather took on his name (long story), I also recorded her second, also became the father figure in my grt grt grandfather's life.

[andrewalston]

Nebuchadnezzar Ashby

Bet they all called him Neb for short.

Nah. They called him Nezza, thus starting the trend which resulted in Gazza, Jezza, etc.   

[majm]

Mr Ashby 's lad was probably known as Nebby-never-late-for-a-date.

JM