King, Dorchester on Thames

[Xotan]

Hello!  My name is David Monks and I am very new to researching family history. 

I have achieved a certain amount.  But I have hit a difficult patch, so I am hoping that someone will be able to advise me how to proceed. 

This is the position: the Kings come Dorchester on Thames.  In the 1851 Census the head of the household is Mary, Widow, Charwoman.   Could widow be hiding a dark secret, viz she had never been married?  It's unlikely as she bore three children.  So how to find out the name of the father?  The children's birth certificates seem indicated, but although I have a Volume and Page reference for one of them, where do I go to get the document?  My searches bring me always back to Ancestry.co.uk, and this only gives the above reference, which is the dead-end I have come to.  BTW, there is also  Josh King, 84 in the house: too old to be a parent.  Perhaps a g/parent of the unnamed husband.  The Census lists him as 'father', but at 84, father of whom?  Should I look into this cupboard? 

Can someone please help?
 

[Tati]

Welcome to RootsChat Xotan,

The references you have found are there to enable you to order the certificates from here:
http://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/

Price is £9.25

Joseph is 46 years older than Mary - quite acceptable for a father, isn't it? Then unless he's is in fact her father in law, you sure have to wonder whether she was a widow. Have you found the family in 1841 at all, to see if there's a husband?

I can see a likely family but it doesn't solve the problem right away - Joseph jr could be either her brother or her husband 

1841
HO107/880/6 5 3
Dorchester, Oxfordshire
Jos^h King, 70, Ag lab
Joseph, 30, Ag lab
Mary, 30
Mary, 4
William, 2

[Xotan]

Hello Tati! thanks for your kind welcome, and also for the information you have supplied. 

You have solved one problem that was bothering me.  Josh seemed a bit odd.  But Joseph is a name that continued down the family until my grandfather's generation - in fact, he hijacked it from his oldest brother to enlist when underage.  And even as an old man, he was known by the diminutive Josie.  The younger Joseph (30) in the 1841 Census (which I have been unable to get into) is undoubtedly 'Josh's' son.  Mary (30) hales from Swyncombe and is almost certainly young Joseph's wife, and William is their son.  It looks like Mary (4) [a new name to me] is their daughter, but she does not appear subsequently, so unless she was 'farmed out' as a young servant, she could well have passed on before the 1851 Census.  Incidentally, William called his eldest child Joseph.  So exit Josh and enter Joseph.  And I think we can dismiss any suggestion of Mary having a dark secret!   

I now (will a little confirmation to come) have the tree reaching back to 1767.  I would never have thought this possible when I started.  I am  grateful to you and to others (off this board) who have so generously helped me.

David.

Thank you also for the link to the records office

[Tati]

On the census site I use, the family are transcribed RING instead of King in 1841 - maybe the reason why you can't find them?

[Xotan]

Thank you Tati!

Ring, King...  I have yet to learn the tools of the trade, and am amazed that within the space of an afternoon so much can fall into place!  I have learnt also that the ages given can vary, sometimes widely.  And I now can see that a K can easily appear as, or be transcribed as, an R.

Now it will be necessary to strike a balance between researching, which is very exciting, and writing up the information in some kind of logical/readable form.  But that will have to wait until tomorrow afternoon.  Morning is already dedicated to a number of tasks and here the time between 12.00 and 2pm is sacred and dedicated to food.  So afternoon it must be.

I greatly appreciate all your help.  It is so kind of you.  Many thanks!

[jillruss]

Hi,

I don't know if you've managed to get any further with this, but these entries from the Dorchester PRs (from Oxfordshire FHS) might be significant -

Sep 24 1833 Joseph King married Mary Richings of Watlington
Witnesses: William Goodenough, Mary E........l [the transcriber obviously couldn't make it out!]

Baptised Feb 1 1807 Joseph King, son of Joseph & Susanna

Baptised Nov 29 1767 Joseph King , son of Joseph & Lewis [ transcriber has put Lois in brackets].

I think they could very well be the two Josephs you found in the census?

Jill

[Xotan]

Hi Jill, 

Thank you for writing.  I've been spending a lot of time sorting and annotating all the facts that so quickly became available to me.  Also current family members are making demands for attention.  Some are even about to descend upon me! 

The baptismal record of 1767 could be the Joseph in my tree.  This is not absolutely proved, but I think it just possible.  It gives further information, in the event it is reliable: i.e Joseph, born in 1767,  was the son of another Joseph and his wife Lewis (Lois). 

The Joseph, son of Joseph and Susanna, and born is 1807 again is problematic.  The 1841 Census shows a Joseph born in 1811.  That is a difference of 3 to 4 years.  However, dates of birth in the documents of this period are notoriously changeable.  I also wonder if there is a possibility that the Watlington you mention in respect of Mary Richings is possibly Wallingford; or would she bel likely to have been married in Wallingford, or is it likely as a place of registration of civil acts such as marriage?

I would be glad if you would let me know where the baptismal records are located, please.  I will be paying a visit to England perhaps later this year.  In this case I think it would be incumbent on me to look at these records and see if I can reconcile the discrepancies that are currently leaving matters in doubt.

Thank you most heartily for letting me have this information.

[jillruss]

Hi,

I hadn't realised that you were living abroad.

Firstly, I would have thought Mary Richings was much more likely to have come from Watlington, which is only about 8 miles east of Dorchester but - I have those PRs as well - and I can't see her. Of course, it's possible her family moved there from somewhere nearby.

I wouldn't worry too much about a couple of years difference in ages - especially on the 1841 census when ages were rounded down to the nearest 5. So, in effect, someone shown as age 30 could have been anything between 30 and 34.

The actual parish registers will be held at the Oxfordshire Record Office

http://www.oxfordshire.gov.uk

but the Oxfordshire Family History Service have lots of parish registers available on CD

http://www.ofhs.org.uk/

I hope that's of some help.

Jill

[Xotan]

Hello Jill,

How kind of you to write back again so quickly.

I live in the Languedoc, and short of going afew km down the road, into Spain,  I cannot get much further from England and the centre of my interest there, which is Dorchester on Thames.  However, I have made two trip to D on T already and soone enough became aware that not all of the information I was seeking would be available locally.  You have confirmed that now, so next time I get the England I must visit the Oxford R O.  In the meanwhile I will look into the Oxfordshire Family History SErvice site whose URL  you have supplied.

This searching for ancestors is quite addictive.  I am amazed at the great kindness that people have shown me.  I do recognise that I am a bumbling beginner.  So once again my thanks to you and to one and all, who have had the patience to be so helpful!

David.