RootsChat.Com
Some Special Interests => Travelling People => Topic started by: dmbtmartin on Monday 25 April 16 11:21 BST (UK)
-
Hi all,
while trying to find some evidence for an old family story (of my friend's) that his gt grandmother was descended from, as she is said to have put it, "gypsy folk", I came across one John Bowman who was born abt 1821 in Westmorland, and I then find him on the 1851 census in Kendal as a whitesmith, and in 1861 in Preston with the same trade. Was thinking whitesmith is probably a synonym for a tinker, and that he would be a good candidate for one of the "gypsy folk" alluded to.
I think he married one Agnes Inman in 1845 in Kendal, before leaving her and beginning a new family with one Alice Beckett in Preston, in about 1857.
There appear to be 2 John Bowmans born in 1821 in Kendal.
Just wondering if anyone with some experience could ascribe some likelihood to John Bowman being of gyspy stock, and, if so, whether they might have some further info, or at least nudge me in the right direction?
Thanks in advance, David. [Insert: smiley facey]
-
from the census it doesn't appear John Bowman is a traveller
on both census he is in a residence not a tent or caravan (as is usual in travellers)
Agnes is a servant at a farm in 1861 and stating she is unmarried
Suz
-
I agree with suzard.
A Whitesmith is a skilled Trade so unlikely to have Gypsy connections.
How did you trace your friends ancestors back to this John?
-
Hi guys, thanks very much for your feedback. Perhaps the gypsy story was apocryphal or its origins lie elsewhere.
John Bowman and Alice Beckett had a daughter, Hannah Bowman b. 1860 (and two other children.) On the children's baptism records John's occupation is given as 'smith'. Hannah Bowman then married one Abraham Danvers in 1885 in Preston, and they had a daughter Elizabeth b. 1885; she is the maternal grandmother of my friend - and she's the on who reported that she was descended from "gypsy folk". I thought John Bowman was the best candidate for this, as I'd read somewhere that Bowman can be a GRT name. I also suspected that Whitesmith may have been a more grandiose term for a tinker. I thought I'd found him on the 1841 census at Appleby - which has obvious GRT associations, but this was another John Bowman. I felt he'd demonstrated a certain degree of itinerancy by abandoning Agnes and moving to Preston, and his abode at Clark's Yard was more of a ramshackle slum than the residence of an skilled craftsman - and that's why I thought he was my man, as it were. But all this may amount to little more than confirmation bias on my part, and I'm seeing things that aren't really there. [insert: smiley face]
-
Hi guys, thanks very much for your feedback. Perhaps the gypsy story was apocryphal or its origins lie elsewhere.
I thought I'd found him on the 1841 census at Appleby - which has obvious GRT associations, but this was another John Bowman. I [insert: smiley face]
If the John Bowman you found in Appleby 1841 is this one
Barwise Hall Hoff Appleby in Westmorland
John Bowman 20 ag lab yes
HO107 1156 5 10
then he hadn't any "gypsy" connections either - he was working on a farm and married Sarah and later became a woodman - no signs of being a "traveller"
Very often in families there are tales of ancestors being "gypsies" - in my research it often turns out to be nothing more than a Romantic notion - or through using the term "gypsy" loosely as someone who moves around
Maybe the story was founded on John leaving his wife and moving to Lancashire to be with Alice - even present day when I was younger I moved around the country quite a lot and was told " that's your gypsy blood coming out" - all complete make believe on the family's part
Suz
-
Hi guys, thanks very much for your feedback. Perhaps the gypsy story was apocryphal or its origins lie elsewhere.
his abode at Clark's Yard was more of a ramshackle slum than the residence of an skilled craftsman - and that's why I thought he was my man, as it were. But all this may amount to little more than confirmation bias on my part, and I'm seeing things that aren't really there. [insert: smiley face]
If you look at occupations of neighbours in Clarks Yard - there is a shopman a boot & shoe maker people in various types of employment in the cotton industry - so not really " more of a ramshackle slum than the residence of a skilled craftsman"
Suz
-
I see John/Alice had Children Hannah 1860/Thomas 1861/Robert 1862
John is then Buried 18 Jan 1863 age 41
I presume this is the Baptism you have for John.
JOHN Bowman Christened 6 June 1821, Kendal, Westmoreland
Parents THOMAS/HANNAH
Siblings;
AGNES 2 March 1820
JOSEPH 17 July 1823
ISAAC 18 Dec 1825
NANCY 4 July 1827
THOMAS 6 May 1829
MARGARET 9 March 1831 (may have died)
ROBERT 12 June 1833
HANNAH 6 Jan 1836
(Familysearch.Org)
This leads to this 1841 Census in Kendal;
HO107/1165/5/Kendal
Thomas Bowman, 40, Coal Agent
Hannah Bowman, 40
Joseph Bowman, 15
Nancy Bowman, 14
Thomas Bowman, 12
Robert Bowman, 7
Hannah Bowman, 5
Jacob Bowman, 3
Elizth Bowman, 1
I cant find Baptisms for Jacob/Eliza.
The other one 11 November 1821 has Parents as JOHN/HANNAH
I havent researched this Family.
By 1851 Hannah Bowman has remarried and living in Chorlton, Lancs;
John Coward, 55
HANNAH Coward, 50, Wife, born Kendal, Westmorland**
Ann Coward, 25
Elizabeth Coward, 18
William Coward, 5
John Blackburn, 23
Jane Blackburn, 22
Elizabeth Blackburn, 2
Thomas Blackburn, 1 Mth
Jacob BOWMAN, 13, Son in Law (Stepson)
Elizabeth BOWMAN, 10, Daug in Law (Step/daug)
MARRIAGE;
20 November 1849
St John's Church, Preston, Lancashire, England
Hannah BOWMAN, age 52 (1797), Widowed, Father Joseph SISSON
John COWARD, age 52, Widowed, Father WILLIAM Coward
(F/S.Org)
MARRIAGE;
9 February 1819,Kendal, Westmoreland, England
Thos BOWMAN to Hannah SISSON
(F/S.Org)
So I can see no Gypsy connection.
Trish :)
-
1841 Census in Walton on the Hill. Lancs has a John BOWMAN, age 20, Apprentice Blacksmith;
Richard Watson, 20
John Bowman, 20, not born in County
Joseph Smith, 15
HO107/519/6/ Walton On The Hill
-
Wow! Thank you so much for your detective work, Trish! Especially at so early an hour yesterday morning. This seems a very strong case for my John Bowman indeed, and therefore the "gypsy folk" origins theory drops further down the probability ratings, and sits within a hair's breadth of total refutation.
It goes without saying providing evidence that works to negate a hypothesis is just as valuable and interesting as that which serves to support it. So I'm very much obliged indeed. Many thanks. :)
-
Suz, many thanks also. :) I acknowledge that this has been familiar and, perhaps, wearisome territory for you: another newbie to the forum, keen to give solidity to old family stories. However, I reiterate that there is a prima facie case for John Bowman having GRT roots, not a powerful one, but one that is nonetheless worthwhile investigating (on the basis of the name and occupation having GRT associations). I write this because I couldn't see how points you made against the hypothesis actually served as evidence against it, and thus left me feeling slightly confused.
To wit:
- "a residence not a tent or caravan (as is usual in travellers)". By integrating into the sedantry community it would be expected that tents and caravans have been eschewed in favour of bricks and mortar.
- in relation to the point about the John Bowman of Appleby. As alluded to, I very quickly realised he wasn't my man when I saw him on the 1851 census. But, for that matter, neither the point that he worked on a farm or became a woodsman would not be sufficient to exclude that John Bowman as a GRT candidate. Farms were, and remain, prime venues for employment. [I recall that Ewan MacColl song: 'The farmer said the work's all done/it's time that you were moving on'. I digress!] And surely, his learning how to handle an axe would not have been beyond his skill-capacity had he become settled.
- My describing Clark's Yard as more of a "ramshackle slum" was not an exercise in wishful thinking done to make John Bowman to appear more likely of GRT stock. I would submit that it shares many of the characteristics of a slum: cramped, irregular, decrepit housing, set back from a main thoroughfare by a long narrow passage, nested in darkness amongst a hodgepodge of other buildings - inns, stables, warehouses, workshops - and inhabited by poor people. The yard received sewering and paving in 1857, but a newly-built mill worker's terrace in the town must have seemed palatial in comparison. The snapshot the 1861 census provides coincides with the onset of the Lancashire Cotton Famine, and descriptions of Church Street and its environs in 1865 are Dickensian in the sense of vice and destitution conveyed. I wager that if one had to choose a place to live in Preston in 1861 you would struggle to find many superior picture-postcard examples of its squalor. The yard had existed since at least the C17th and its remaining houses were demolished in the 1930s as they were deemed unfit for human habitation; this programme was known popularly as 'slum clearance'. Winckley Square, it was NOT! It was just the sort of place that one could reasonably imagine an itinerant gispy tinman taking up residence.
Finally, on this point, I would contend that it is not reasonable to deduce that the area was "not really" slumlike on the basis that it counted amongst its residents a "shopman a boot & shoe maker people in various types of employment in the cotton industry". If we look at that archetypal mother-of-all-slums, Old Nichol's Rookery in Bethnal Green, on the census of the same year, we find - in addition to shopmen, and boot and shoemakers - cabinet makers, marble masons, carpet weavers, looking glass makers, french polishers, blacksmiths, glass blowers, tinplate workers, engineers, and silk-weavers. This was indeed the sort of place that members of the GRT community and their descendants settled, and, again, it is well to note, all of them are in a residence, not a tent or caravan.
In summary, Suz, I do not doubt that for, say, every ten family stories of "gypsy blood" nine are without apparent foundation, but we should be careful not to prematurely exclude those that are out of habit and without good evidence and reasoning; to do so is to invert the sort of confirmation bias I myself have tried to be wary of in chasing the ghost of John Bowman. :)
-
from the census it doesn't appear John Bowman is a traveller
on both census he is in a residence not a tent or caravan (as is usual in travellers)
Agnes is a servant at a farm in 1861 and stating she is unmarried
Suz
Though the census is only a record of one particular day and some Romany did live in housing through the winter. Especially in the industrial areas.
If the John Bowman you found in Appleby 1841 is this one
Barwise Hall Hoff Appleby in Westmorland
John Bowman 20 ag lab yes
HO107 1156 5 10
then he hadn't any "gypsy" connections either - he was working on a farm and married Sarah and later became a woodman - no signs of being a "traveller"...
Some Romany did work as agricultural labourers and are on the census as such.
If you look at occupations of neighbours in Clarks Yard - there is a shopman a boot & shoe maker people in various types of employment in the cotton industry - so not really " more of a ramshackle slum than the residence of a skilled craftsman"
Suz
Mill work (cotton/woollen) was not a "skilled craftsman" job. It was mostly unskilled work. More like industrial labour than a skill. "Shoe making", like tailoring, could also be very poorly paid work as well. "Yards" and courts were often dwellings at the back of other housing and many were notorious for there dingy slum conditions.
I do not know if this family were travellers or not but I would not be so quick to jump to a definite conclusion, as you seem to do. Yes there are the stereotypical occupations like "hawker" but life is a bit more complicated than that and people took work where they could find it.
I knew a family , Romany, whose grt grandfather was a very successful local business man. So successful that he sent his daughter to a private school. His brothers were coal miners and some of the aunties worked in a textile mill.
Another family lived in the centre of Leeds, itinerant "hawkers, scrap metal dealers and horse dealers". One of them went to Australia and became a civil servant, he held a responsible job, handling public funding in Sydney. I have seen a photo of this person and he was so dark that he looked like an Indian. He started life in a slum, in the 1860s
There is a topic running at the moment on the beginners board. The family are very obviously Romany on the early census and relatives are on Romany family history websites, but by the late 1800's one branch are in housing and working in the industrial woollen mills in the West Riding
Things are not always as they first appear and sometimes you have to keep an open mind and dig a little deeper
-
Hi. Martin? Just a little information on your subject. Don't know if you are from the Romany community. But for good or bad. Lol. I am. So here's a something that may be of interest. The bowman family are interrelated with lots of Romany folks. Including my own family. Mainly in Cumberland. Area. And were Olso farmers. /farm workers. In and around. Penrith. Only 26 miles from Kendal. Descendents still travelling. Also horse dealers. Still are. And international horsemen. They were 1st cousin's to my mother's family. Gypsies have allways done seasonally related farm work. Still do. Also whitemetal workers are a known term for tinkers. As to travelling folks abodes. We have allways spent time in houses. I.e in winter. So you can find us in all types of accommodation. We can/do make a living at many things. Changing occupations. Often. We have allways given mis information. To escape persecution. So odd things crop up. Not saying the people you are researching are travelling folks. But. Bowmans have a long travelling history. they are in the area. You mentioned. Are working in farming circles. And have intermarriage with gypsies. Regards Rob.
-
Suz, many thanks also. :) I acknowledge that this has been familiar and, perhaps, wearisome territory for you: another newbie to the forum, keen to give solidity to old family stories. However, I reiterate that there is a prima facie case for John Bowman having GRT roots, not a powerful one, but one that is nonetheless worthwhile investigating (on the basis of the name and occupation having GRT associations). I write this because I couldn't see how points you made against the hypothesis actually served as evidence against it, and thus left me feeling slightly confused.
To wit:
- "a residence not a tent or caravan (as is usual in travellers)". By integrating into the sedantry community it would be expected that tents and caravans have been eschewed in favour of bricks and mortar.
- in relation to the point about the John Bowman of Appleby. As alluded to, I very quickly realised he wasn't my man when I saw him on the 1851 census. But, for that matter, neither the point that he worked on a farm or became a woodsman would not be sufficient to exclude that John Bowman as a GRT candidate. Farms were, and remain, prime venues for employment. [I recall that Ewan MacColl song: 'The farmer said the work's all done/it's time that you were moving on'. I digress!] And surely, his learning how to handle an axe would not have been beyond his skill-capacity had he become settled.
- My describing Clark's Yard as more of a "ramshackle slum" was not an exercise in wishful thinking done to make John Bowman to appear more likely of GRT stock. I would submit that it shares many of the characteristics of a slum: cramped, irregular, decrepit housing, set back from a main thoroughfare by a long narrow passage, nested in darkness amongst a hodgepodge of other buildings - inns, stables, warehouses, workshops - and inhabited by poor people. The yard received sewering and paving in 1857, but a newly-built mill worker's terrace in the town must have seemed palatial in comparison. The snapshot the 1861 census provides coincides with the onset of the Lancashire Cotton Famine, and descriptions of Church Street and its environs in 1865 are Dickensian in the sense of vice and destitution conveyed. I wager that if one had to choose a place to live in Preston in 1861 you would struggle to find many superior picture-postcard examples of its squalor. The yard had existed since at least the C17th and its remaining houses were demolished in the 1930s as they were deemed unfit for human habitation; this programme was known popularly as 'slum clearance'. Winckley Square, it was NOT! It was just the sort of place that one could reasonably imagine an itinerant gispy tinman taking up residence.
Finally, on this point, I would contend that it is not reasonable to deduce that the area was "not really" slumlike on the basis that it counted amongst its residents a "shopman a boot & shoe maker people in various types of employment in the cotton industry". If we look at that archetypal mother-of-all-slums, Old Nichol's Rookery in Bethnal Green, on the census of the same year, we find - in addition to shopmen, and boot and shoemakers - cabinet makers, marble masons, carpet weavers, looking glass makers, french polishers, blacksmiths, glass blowers, tinplate workers, engineers, and silk-weavers. This was indeed the sort of place that members of the GRT community and their descendants settled, and, again, it is well to note, all of them are in a residence, not a tent or caravan.
In summary, Suz, I do not doubt that for, say, every ten family stories of "gypsy blood" nine are without apparent foundation, but we should be careful not to prematurely exclude those that are out of habit and without good evidence and reasoning; to do so is to invert the sort of confirmation bias I myself have tried to be wary of in chasing the ghost of John Bowman. :)
this has not been a wearisome territory for me - I was giving my opinion that I could find no definite evidence of the travelling community. I would research further back looking for further information.
What is great about this site is the wealth of information of the members all willing to help and all with different areas of knowledge.
Suz