Author Topic: 1736 Baptism  (Read 395 times)

Offline bleckie

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,674
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
1736 Baptism
« on: Monday 21 February 22 12:39 GMT (UK) »
Hi All

Can anyone point me in the right direction with this one (From Gargunnock) or confirm my thoughts which I will keep to myself for the moment,

Yours Aye
BruceL

Offline Ruskie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 26,198
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1736 Baptism
« Reply #1 on: Monday 21 February 22 13:59 GMT (UK) »
Andrew Leckie is (the father) Robert’s son.

That implies that Robert was either married previously, or Andrew is an illegitimate son, or he is the older son of Robert and Janet.

Andrew doesn’t necessarily need to be an adult to be a witness.

Offline Forfarian

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 15,085
  • http://www.rootschat.com/links/01ruz/
    • View Profile
Re: 1736 Baptism
« Reply #2 on: Monday 21 February 22 15:08 GMT (UK) »
I agree.
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 bleckie

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,674
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1736 Baptism
« Reply #3 on: Monday 21 February 22 15:51 GMT (UK) »
Hi All
I didn't know that you did not have to be an adult to be a witness I have all the children that I can find from this couple listed below I did wonder If Robert had been married before as this family has mostly used the Scottish naming pattern this couple throws a spanner in the works also I cannot find Banns for this couple anywhere.
MARGARET ROBERT LECKIE/MARGARET TURNBULL FR135 (FR135)   F   16   06   1728   
HENRY   ROBERT LECKIE/JANET TURNBULL FR149 (FR149)   M   14   03   1736   
WILLIAM   ROBERT LECKIE/JANET TURNBULL FR150 (FR150)   M   28   03   1737   
JANNET   ROBERT LECKIE/JANNET TURNBUL FR163 (FR163)   F   11   07   1745   
ARCHBALD   ROBERT LECKIE/JANNET TURNBUL FR164 (FR164)   M   05   04   1747
ADAM   ROBERT LECKIE/JANNET TURNBUL FR167 (FR167)   M   29   07   1749   

Yours Aye
BruceL


Offline Ruskie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 26,198
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1736 Baptism
« Reply #4 on: Monday 21 February 22 23:52 GMT (UK) »
Do you think Robert might have been married to Margaret before he married Jannet? Alternatively the couple might have had children together without being married.  :) Or an irregular marriage?

There are a few years between Margaret’s baptism in 1728 and Henry’s baptism in 1736. Have you looked for more births in those years with father Robert, or perhaps a death for mother Margaret?

There’s a big gap between William and Jannet too, so perhaps additional children and/or deaths. Might missing children have thrown out your naming pattern?  :-\

There is also the possibility that mother as Margaret was an error on the original or in transcription, and mother should be Jannet.

Doubtful that you will get further information, but have you looked at all the children’s baptisms?  :-\

Offline bleckie

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,674
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: 1736 Baptism
« Reply #5 on: Tuesday 22 February 22 09:05 GMT (UK) »
Hi Ruskie

I have looked through all of Scottish OPRs and I cannot find any Banns/Marriages for a Leckie and a Turnbull during this period only the Baptisms I have listed above.

Yours Aye
BruceL