View Full Version : place names
Hi , I am looking at a area of birth and it states corna-roe ,i can't find the name on google , it may be a slang name for the place . i think it's in lancashire . someone may have come across it before ,any ideas . I thought of clitheroe , but it doesn't look like the same place ? thanks
Where are you seeing this?
Is this to do with the Quakers, William Eccleston and Rebecca (Weaver) Eccleston?
on my eccleston tree done by my relative in aus . that's how they have put the place name . i've sent him a email . i don't know where is resource was from . maybe his reply will give me more info ?
yes it is r because weaver . father richard weaver and sussanha of middlesex
Corner Row is near Fylde. William and Rebecca had a son, Isaac, born at Freckleton, which, as I'm sure you know, is the same area, all near Preston/Blackpool.
How do the Quaker Ecclestons fit in to your tree?
yes it is r because weaver . father richard weaver and sussanha of middlesex
What does this mean?
I thought we had been through this before , with rebecca . but i know that the tree owner is dogmatic when it comes to research . I have asked him if rebecca weavers birth etc is correct , as someone else has a tree with the same couple having a rebecca weaver in london not lancashire and having a brother john also
The place would fit into the tree as a few people were born in singleton ,and woodplumpton which isn't far away , i live on the fylde coast so the areas are close to one another . they have rebecca marrying william eccleston in 1741 in kendal .
yes that's the william they have got born in 1743 freckleton
The place would fit into the tree
I don't mean how does the place fit in to your tree, I mean how do the people fit in to your tree?
I thought we had been through this before , with rebecca .
Yes, so if you could explain what happened last time that would be great.
Are you looking for the birth/baptism of Isaac Eccleston who married Ann Naylor in 1763 at Winwick? Haven't we done this before?
yes we went into this all before grandfather st. helens post 55 onwards . you said that rebecca's family were wealthy merchants , does that ring a bell ? and that the ecclestons worked in the colliery . So we didn't think the person was the right one . It's all coming back to me now . I'm sure i told john the tree owner , and he's still got it all on ancestry . it's confusing i think richard and suzannah were quakers . That's correct . I'll look through the tree again as it goes back to the sixteen hundreds . on the eccleston side to westmorland and lancaster .
It only rings a bell because I had to search all over this site to find out what you were talking about!
you said that rebecca's family were wealthy merchants , does that ring a bell ?
I said someone else had researched Isaac Eccleston, Rebecca's son, and their research demonstrated HE was a wealthy merchant in Antigua.
So we didn't think the person was the right one .
If you mean Isaac, then no, the Quaker Isaac is not your Isaac.
i think richard and suzannah were quakers . That's correct .
You think they are, or you have proof they are?
If you mean Quaker Richard and Susanna who had a daughter in 1707 in London, then that daughter died in 1708, so she isn't going to be the mother of Isaac in Antigua.
I'm not sure why you are troubling yourself with the Quaker tree when you don't appear to have any direct connection to them.
hi i've seen this , it's written about william he was born in corner row in 1716 his father was isacc age 26 and his mother mary age 21 . he married rebecca weaver in 1741 in kendal westmorland he dided age 68 in whitehaven . that's their facts written on the tree
Yes, I can see that here:
https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Eccleston-416
Explain why you are telling me though, as I don't understand.
the tree owner displayed richard and suzannah has being quakers . or so it seems on the files they show i haven't gone into everything they have displayed . but it certainly says quakers . the tree owner who is part of my tree through george eccleston is displaying that our ancestors are rebecca weaver . and william eccleston .
Post 58 grandfather st. helens 1871 you say that the son isacc is highly unlikely to be their son . born in freckleton
i've looked at the quaker birth and death and its dying that rebecca was a recorded quaker birth and her burial .
Rebecca Weaver and William Eccleston are the parents of the Isaac Eccleston who was a merchant in Antigua. He is not your ancestor. We have not found a baptism for your ancestor so we don't know who his parents are.
And for what it's worth, I've already said Rebecca Weaver's parents are not Richard and Susanna as their daughter, Rebecca b 1707, died aged 13 weeks.
I looked at the marriage record for Rebecca Weaver and William Eccleston in March 1741/2 and the first witness is Julian Weaver.
There's a Quaker birth record 6 Aug 1708 for Rebekah Weaver the dau of Daniel and Julian Weaver in Poulton, Lancs, so I would imagine these two records are for the same person and Julian is the mother in both cases.
i've looked at the quaker birth and death and its dying that rebecca was a recorded quaker birth and her burial .
I don't understand what you are saying there, but yes, she had a Quaker burial in 1785 and yes she had a Quaker birth record (see my last post). Not the dau of Richard and Susanna though.
And, no, none of them are on your direct line.
yes i agree totally with your assumption about the rebekah weaver , definetly not the child of richard . i'm going on what's there on the tree i totally agree with you . we have been through all of it and i'm sure i've told the tree owner our thoughts,but i think he's just ignored the facts . but on one hand he says he's dogmatic . so i may be wasting my time even looking and do my own tree . with the correct people . I will look up the record you have found thanks
Olde Crone
09-01-22, 15:13
Dogmatic isn't a good thing in family history! Facts are much better. I gave up trying to correct other people's trees years ago, it rarely works.
OC
your right olde crone , there's lots of trees for different parts of my ancestors , and none of them are the same . they just put the first person they find without any research . which is silly . i don't want to follow the wrong person like anyone else .
when will we able to see the new census , i'm not a member of ancestry etc ? any idea ?
Olde Crone
13-01-22, 08:47
It's open now. Only on FMP - searching is free, results are pay per view. You don't have to have a sub.
OC
kiterunner
13-01-22, 09:33
Or you can visit (I mean physically, not online) The National Archives at Kew in Southwest London, or Manchester Central Library at St Peter’s Square in Manchester, or the National Library of Wales in Aberystwyth and get free access to the 1921 census records and images there using Findmypast.
vBulletin® v3.8.7 PL3, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.