| Text |
Subject:
More from Marske Parish Records
Date:
Fri, 7 Nov 1997 18:23:43 +0000
From:
(Les Bowser)
To:
Hello everyone,
I have delved deeper into the Marske Parish Records and there's good news
and bad. First the bad news: There is a serious gap in the records from
about 1625 to about 1643. There are no burials from 1623 to 1642; no
marriages from 1629 to 1643; and no baptisms for 1637, 1638, 1641, with
very little between 1632 and 1642 As the editor of the modern record has
written: "From 1632 to 1642 the Registers are very deficient." This is
unforturnate for us, since John Watson, father of Margaret, is listed in
the Mormon records as born in 1641, but nothing appears of his baptism. I
think I can see how they placed him where they did, but it is not confirmed
unless they were privy to other records. His most likely burial date is
July 21, 1709. Also there is no marriage date for his parents.
The good news is that there are so few Watsons from 1570 when the register
begins, down through the first 100 years, that it is fairly clear just who
is who. Here is my suggested lineage starting with John Watson the father
of Margaret:
John Watson, b ca 1641 was the son of George Watson b. December 10, 1609
(Mormon records show Dec 10 1612) George was a son of Robert Watson
possibly b. January 9, 1574/5 (Again there is some speculation here on
incomplete records.) and Jane Blackburn(e) b. July 19, 1579. They were
married on June 9, 1599, He is the only Robert Watson in the record married
before 1800). Jane was a daughter of Thom(e)as Blackburn(e) who d. either
May 5, 1585 or Sept 4, 1587, and Anna Hudson. They were married on Oct 26,
1578.
Robert and Jane (Blackburn) Watson had at least seven children. The second
child, b. 1603, was John and he is described as 'filius Robertus Watson
Jr', implying that Robert was a son of Robert Sr. There is a Robert Watson
who died Apr 11, 1607 who does not seem to otherwise fit into the family,
so perhaps this is Robert Watson Sr. our oldest Watson ancestor. All of
which does not not explain whythe 'Junior' was dropped for the rest of the
children. It should be obvious that more work is needed here.
The early records are latinized as well as sometimes abreviated, thus
Thomas becomes Thome, etc. Latin was used in the baptism records up to
1636, and from 1642 to 1684 (records between 1636 and 1642 are missing);
baptism, marriage and burial records were consistently Anglicized after
1685.
I hope I have everybody in the right place at the right time; There are
serious gaps and missing information in the available records, so that the
originals, plus some wills, are really needed to authenticate our early
Dobson/Watson familty tree.
On Thursday I plan to travel up country to Acklam, Thirsk, Hawnby, and
Marske. I feel like I have come to a nice ending point with my searching
here in York, and there may be an interlude before I get to look at more
records, but I'll try to write whenever I can.
Bye for now,
Les |
