RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => Somerset => England => Somerset Lookup Requests => Topic started by: lanerob on Friday 28 July 06 22:12 BST (UK)
-
Pitminster Confidential: Better than Fiction: Not a Nott? 25 Years a Lane, Remarried to a Rochester (and one for 41 years), Daughter of William Hartnell???
My 4xGGrandfather (Robert Lane b. abt. 1800) married Ann Nott (b. abt. 1804) on 15-10-1823 in Pitminster, Somerset, England. This was the name on her marriage license. They proceeded to have at least 6 children (all sons) John, James, George (my 3xGGf), Robert, Charles and Mark born between 1826-1842. I have a great deal of information about George’s family and a little about Mark.
According to my records (Pitminster), Robert (the elder) passed away in September 1845. Then Ann Lane married Richard Rochester on 3-9-1848. On Richard’s marriage document (according to Pitminster records) he is a widower son of Joseph and Ann is the widow daughter of William Hartnell.
I cannot find any reference to an Ann Hartnell born around 1804, I think there is one in 1809, but wouldn’t that be too young to get married in 1823? Plus, the 1881 census lists the year of birth as 1804 and birthplace as Pitminster. Was she married to a Nott before married Robert Lane? Was she simply an illegitimate child born to her mother’s name? But I can’t find her mother? I have to assume that the William Hartnell reference is correct, but I don’t know. What else could explain its appearance?
I am not concerned with the social implications of these matters, I would just like to know who is who and build my family tree back for my own personal benefit.
Any help in these matters (including what happened to her sons) would be of great help, if there is interest, I’d gladly share the information that I have. She was too old to bear children by the time she married Rochester, and the 1881 census shows her living in Blagdon Hill (Lane home for decades) as a pauper with two elder lodgers and the Death Index that she passed away in Q3 1889. Sounds like a very sad story.
-
Being born in 1809 would not make her too young to marry in 1823. The minimum age for a girl was 12 until 1929 but parental consent was needed if under the age of 21.
One explanation for the Nott/Hartnell situation is that William died and Ann's mother remarried a Mr Nott. I think that if she was a widow when she married Mr Lane, the parish registers should say widow rather than spinster. Have you found Ann's baptism?
-
Thank you for your reply.
I have not been able to find her baptism, but I am very sure now that she was born in 1804. Also, my records show that William Hartnell lived until 1847, so that's another reason why this is so confusing.