Five Peter Bowers

[Phoenix]

There were in excess of five Peter Bowers in Titchfield, Hampshire




Peter Bowers i m Mary Lock in 1713. He died in 1764 and his youngest son was Thomas
Peter Bowers ii, son of Peter i bp 1727
Peter Bowers iii b c 1754 and died 1842 (shown as aged 90on the 1841 census, living in Park Gate, presumably father of the Edward Bowers with whom he is living)
Peter Bowers iv bp 1774, son of Thomas Bowers above
Peter Bowers v bp 1776 son of Peter Bowers iii

Are you with me so far?


There are three candidates for Peter Bowers iii, but that is another problem.


I am descended from a Peter Bowers who married Catherine Cossens in January 1797. Both were illiterate and the witnesses were Mary Westbrook and Geo Bartholomew (I think the latter was a serial witness)
They had children:
Mary 1798
Peter 1800
Ann 1803
John 1805
William 1806
I suspect that possibly Catherine also had a son Richard as a Richard is buried 15 April 1810 and Catherine 18 April 1810.


Peter iii
had children
Peter 1776
Moses 1779
John 1781
Richard 1785
Edward 1787
James 1791
Charlotte 1793
Fanny 1797
Mary Ann bp 3 Aug 1800.


Now we had two marriages:


Peter Brown m Ann Smith 20 March 1800
Which cannot be either of the two Peters above (I have no note of this)


Peter Bowers m Ann Mersh 12 September 1811
Again I don't have the details, but they must be the family in 1841:
Peter 60
Ann 50
Sarah 25
James 15
Eliza 15
Henry 12


and in 1851:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/8860/images/HAMHO107_1661_1661-0531?ssrc=&backlabel=Return&pId=5839874
Peter aged 76 b Fareham etc


When he dies, his age is given as 85:
BOWERS, PETER 85 GRO Reference: 1854 D Quarter in FAREHAM Volume 02B Page 309


Note that Fareham is the RD. Titchfield was a huge parish and my people appear to have lived in Stubbington, using Crofton church once it was erected.


So, for the last thirty years, I have been happy that the Peter who married Catherine was Peter iv the son of Thomas.


Every Ancestry tree has him as Peter v the son of Peter iii.


On the face of it, I can see no reason to disagree with them (there are Peters buried in 1797 and 1805 without any clues to ages)


The only way I can make any sense of my idea is if that 1800 marriage is demonstrably of Peter v. I think.


(The other way might be to look at the manorial records, if they survive?)


Thank you for reading!!! All suggestions gratefully received.

[Phoenix]

Mutter, mutter. I have found an old tree showing Peter v marrying Ann Smith in 1800. But no reason why. :rolleyes:

[kiterunner]

Just going by the fact that his eldest son was named Peter and he didn't name a son Thomas (as far as we know), I would think that the one who married Catherine is likely to be Peter v?

[Phoenix]

That's probably the logic they have followed. Geographically, Stubbington is diametrically opposite Park Gate and status wise I get the feeling that mine are slightly lower down the scale.

I need to find the paper notes I made thirty years ago :o having spent a lot of time looking at the original registers (generally pitifully uninformative) but particularly the marriage registers. Somewhere I have notes of literacy and witnesses.


I also spent a whole week in the RO, looking at manorial records, which is how I know that Thomas was the youngest child of Peter i.