Author Topic: Roger/Duff union  (Read 610 times)

Offline JohnRodgers

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Roger/Duff union
« on: Friday 14 January 22 22:19 GMT (UK) »
Hello all.  I have traced my ancestry to a William Roger and Jannet Duff, who were married in Little Dunkeld, Scotland on 6 Nov 1791.  The first of their 8 children was James Roger, who was born in Little Dunkeld in 1793.  The last of the children was Peter Roger, born in Little Dunkeld on 29 Mar 1811.  I have found about 8 Jannet Duff's born in the 1764-1770 range and about 6 William Roger's born in the 1762-1767 timeframe.  I have certificates for all of the childrens births and also a marriage certificate establishing this union.  I cannot, however, find out the information on which of the William's or Jannet's is in this union.  Can anyone help with this?

Offline ColC

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,629
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Roger/Duff union
« Reply #1 on: Saturday 15 January 22 11:55 GMT (UK) »
I note the family you mention, you say you have the certificates but I guess you are referring to the church marriage/baptisms from SP. The information is usually limited but occasionally you get the odd comment, did these records give any additional information?

WILLIAM ROGER/JANET DUFF - Little Dunkeld

JAMES 1/01/1793
ELIZABETH 9/09/1794
JOHN 1/09/1796
THOMAS 12/09/1798
ALEXANDER 1/01/1805
MARY 10/12/1806
DAVID 9/07/1809
PETER 29/03/1811


Colin
Clarke, Trickett, Orton, Lawless, Norton, Detheridge, Kirby, Goodfellow, Wagstaff, Lowe, etc.

Offline JohnRodgers

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Roger/Duff union
« Reply #2 on: Saturday 15 January 22 12:06 GMT (UK) »
No additional comments found.  I have really hit this hard from all angles and that is why I am now reaching out for help.  I originally posted a William Roger (1762) from Scoonie, Fife, Scotland but the marriage date of 1791 doesn't support those dates very much as I see most folks were married around age 20-21.

Offline ColC

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 5,629
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Roger/Duff union
« Reply #3 on: Saturday 15 January 22 12:33 GMT (UK) »
There are 14 Janet’s with spelling variations born Little Dunkeld 1761 – 1777, if they followed the naming pattern, (not all did) her father would be John and there are 6, however the mother would be Elizabeth there are none. So of those 6 below is a maybe.

JANNET DUFF      JOHN DUFF/MAY BROWN    25/03/1772   Little Dunkeld

Assuming the father of William would be James, the only one I can see in the County below.

WILLIAM RODGER      JAMES RODGER   25/04/1762   Meigle

JAMES ROGER   Married    ANN DEUCHARS   05/04/1760   Meigle

Little Dunkeld, Perthshire is 19 miles W of Meigle, Perthshire.

However without further records it will be difficult to prove. Sadly no death records prior to Statutory Registration in 1855, it may have helped to narrow down the ages.

Colin
Clarke, Trickett, Orton, Lawless, Norton, Detheridge, Kirby, Goodfellow, Wagstaff, Lowe, etc.


Offline Forfarian

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 15,103
  • http://www.rootschat.com/links/01ruz/
    • View Profile
Re: Roger/Duff union
« Reply #4 on: Saturday 15 January 22 15:49 GMT (UK) »
I see most folks were married around age 20-21.
I don't think that is true. I'd say most were around their mid to late 20s when they married, and women tended to marry a year or two younger than men.

You'd need to find some compelling independent evidence for William Roger from Scoonie being the one who married in Little Dunkeld. In 18th century terms these two parishes are quite some distance apart. The Meigle one is much more likely.
Never trust anything you find online (especially submitted trees and transcriptions on Ancestry, MyHeritage, FindMyPast and other commercial web sites) unless it's an image of an original document - and even then be wary because errors can and do occur.

Offline JohnRodgers

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Roger/Duff union
« Reply #5 on: Saturday 15 January 22 16:42 GMT (UK) »
Jannet Duff’s born in Little Dunkeld, Scotland
25 Nov 1764
22 Jan 1768
11 Sep 1770
25 Mar 1772
29 Dec 1770
28 Feb 1772
12 Jul 1761
William Roger
4 Apr 1762   Ceres, Fife, Scotland   William Roger / Margaret Kirk
23 Feb 1762   Scoonie, Fife, Scotland   Andrew Roger / Helen Wilson
Feb 1762   Scoonie, Fife, Scotland   William Roger / Margaret Lennie
William Rodger
25 Apr 1762   Meigle, Perth, Scotland   James Rodger
I also found 6 more William’s with the last name Rodger, that were born in the 1760’s.  That spelling does not match the 8 birth certificates or the marriage certificate.

Offline JohnRodgers

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Roger/Duff union
« Reply #6 on: Saturday 15 January 22 16:50 GMT (UK) »
The spelling of the Meigle family is Rodger, not Roger.  I know they changed the Roger name quite often.  The marriage document is Roger while the birth certificate for William is Rodger.  The marriage date does sound very good though.  I have spent time looking up the William from Meigle and the William from Ceres but have found no additional documentation.  I have sent emails to the parish in Little Dunkeld to see if they have additional information.  I realize Scoonie is quite a bit further away and I admit that has bothered me.
Bottom line is, I am enjoying doing this and plan a trip to Little Dunkeld when the COVID era passes.

Offline Forfarian

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 15,103
  • http://www.rootschat.com/links/01ruz/
    • View Profile
Re: Roger/Duff union
« Reply #7 on: Saturday 15 January 22 16:59 GMT (UK) »
The spelling of the Meigle family is Rodger, not Roger.  I know they changed the Roger name quite often.  The marriage document is Roger while the birth certificate for William is Rodger.
Don't ascribe any significance to spelling. Make sure to check Roger, Rogers, Rodger and Rodgers, because at that time spelling was just how the clerk writing it down thought it should be spelled. The people themselves would not have had any concept of 'correct' spelling.
Never trust anything you find online (especially submitted trees and transcriptions on Ancestry, MyHeritage, FindMyPast and other commercial web sites) unless it's an image of an original document - and even then be wary because errors can and do occur.

Offline JohnRodgers

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Roger/Duff union
« Reply #8 on: Saturday 15 January 22 17:08 GMT (UK) »
Thank you for the quick response.  I assume that by your response time, you are in Scotland.  If so, might you know where I may reach out to find additional/better info?  I assume the parish in Little Dunkeld is one area.  Are more records kept by the government in Perth?  I have already exchanged information with folks in Dunkeld but they could not find additional data.  They looked at the digitized data that was uploaded this past spring/summer over there.