any thoughts please

[garstonite]

the earliest member of my OAKES direct family are as follows..
Ralph and Mary Oakes had 3 children....I have learnt over the last 7 years that you HAVE to have official records but this is now puzzling me..just so you know,Backford is a little village about 6 miles outside Chester...the first Oakes on record in Backford is
Elizabeth Oakes babtised 12th march 1776 -parents Ralph and Mary
Peter Oakes babtised 17th october 1779 - parents Ralph and Mary
DANIEL OAKES babtised 26th January 1782-Ralph and Mary my DIRECT relly

Ralph Oakes buried 13th february 1800....no age stated
Mary Oakes buried 29th May 1808 - aged 72

so there is no other possible death for Mary-Ralphs wife- except the one mentioned...BUT...if she was 72 in 1808 , this would make her b in 1736...that`s 40 at Elizabeths birth- 43 at Peters birth and 46 at Daniels birth...
I know I have posted about the elusive Ralph and Mary before- I KNOW they are my 5 x g grandparents,,,,but....do you think maybe this recorded death is NOT my Mary and maybe she moved out of Backford after Ralphs death ?...if so and the FIRST record of Oakes in Backford is Elizabeths babtism in 1776...where did this other Mary died 1808 Backford come from.....help....lol...allan:confused::confused::c onfused:

[kiterunner]

Couldn't the Mary who was buried in 1808 be Ralph's mother or some other relative? It seems unlikely she was Ralph's wife because of her age, though of course it is possible. Have you found Ralph and Mary's marriage?

Maybe Mary remarried after Ralph's death. Also she may have died in Backford and been buried somewhere else, or, as you say, moved away from Backford, perhaps to live with one of her children? Or did they all stay in Backford?

[kiterunner]

FamilySearch RecordSearch has a burial listed at Backford for Hannah Oakes, daughter of Ralph Oakes, 18th April 1790. Was she your Ralph's daughter?

[kiterunner]

And they have a Mary Oakes marrying William Hayes 30 Dec 1810, doesn't say on there whether she was a widow or not, though.

[garstonite]

Thanks...let me check the csc records for Hannah and also Mary Oakes marriage to William Hayes....back in a mo....allan:)

[garstonite]

apologies...I had forgotten about Hannah...yes she is in my tree...but she was born and died in 1790...so wasn`t registered in my rather vacant head....lol.....Mary Oakes who married William Hayes was a spinster...one of the other Oakes family who came after Ralph and Mary....all related...
so , thanks again but no joy as such....I still think that burial in 1808 is not my Mary......allan:)
just checked...the Mary who married William Hayes was probably the daughter of William and Margaret Oakes (formerly Griffiths) who was babtised 2nd jan 1785....allan

[Merry]

I hear what you are saing about Mary's burial/age etc, but it wouldn't seem so extreme if those were her last three children of 10 or 12 babies - it seems less likely to be right because you only have three children for her. Plenty on my tree had their last child around 45 years. (still a few months left for me!! pmsl!). Maybe they had other children born earlier, in a different parish? Or maybe this was not Mary's first marriage?

So, I'm not saying that burial is or isn't her, but I don't think you can say it 100% isn't.

[Merry]

I presume none of them left a will?

[Joy Dean]

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were other children born to them before those three, and wouldn't be surprised, too, at her bearing children well into her 40s :)

[Merry]

If those were her only children you might expect to see the names Ralph and Mary cropping up.

[Joy Dean]

Just sidetracking slightly - expect you have seen this?

http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~cprdb/Notes/Parish/BACK.html

[garstonite]

I think you are absolutely right - BUT I can`t find any other children for them ...as Elizabeths babtism is THE FIRST OAKES in Backford in 1776 they could well have had plenty more children prior to Elizabeth....it`s sssooo frustrating....even my direct ancestor Ralph and Marys son Daniel b 1882 is frustrating...he married Elizabeth and their first son Thomas was born 1817...got all the family but CANNOT find Elizabeths maiden name....allan:(

[Merry]

Have you investigated the Oakes born to a Ralph and Mary at Middlewich? They are all submitted IGI entries though - the first one is 1758 (when your Mary would have been around 22) and the last one is 1774, two years before the first baptism at Backford.

[kiterunner]

Should be possible to check those on familysearch recordsearch, but I can't do that just now cos I'm on the pocketsurfer.

[Phoenix]

As everyone else has been saying, many families then would have had children with the parents' names.

I would be looking at all the other records that are floating around for the period: wills, land tax, manorial, poor law etc etc etc to pick up references in other sources. Ralph and Mary came from somewhere else - and it's possible that the Ralph who died was a son or grandson. Have you followed through the other children to find out where they went? Just in case there are burials in a neighbouring parish?

[kiterunner]

Yes, the Middlewich baptisms are listed on FamilySearch RecordSearch, so they are genuine:
William 11 Jun 1758
John 27 Jan 1760
Thomas 7 Oct 1761
Ralph 16 Mar 1764
Joseph 27 Nov 1765
Mary 13 Nov 1767
Richard 16 Apr 1770
Hannah 29 Apr 1772
Samuel 4 May 1774

Even a Hannah, to match the child buried at Backford. The Mary burial looks much more likely to be your Mary if she had all these children before the 3 you listed; sorry, I thought originally that you were saying that those were their only children.

[kiterunner]

And if Over is near Middlewich then there is a likely marriage for Ralph and Mary at Over - Ralph Oakes married Mary Trelfa 2 Jan 1758.

[kiterunner]

FamilySearch RecordSearch also has an index to Cheshire probate records but there is no entry for Ralph Oakes 1800 and the only Mary Oakes 1808 who is listed lived in Cranage, though there is no Mary Oakes listed as being buried in Cranage. The Backford burial gives Mary's residence as Backford. Might be worth getting the Cranage will, though, just in case? One of my ancestors has a different residence shown on his will from the one on his burial.


(Link for searching and ordering Cheshire wills)
http://www.cheshire.gov.uk/Recordoffice/Wills/

[Merry]

Nice one Kate! I never think to look at Family Search Record Search as I don't have any lines from the right areas on my own tree!

I saw that will this morning and wondered if their might be a connection.

[garstonite]

WELL THANK YOU ALL....I have gone in a full circle in the last 3 years...would you believe that I had Ralph Oakes marrying Mary Trelfa 3 years ago in my tree but I didn`t have all those children for them......AND AFTER 2 YEARS I DELETED THEM because I wasn`t positive they were MY RALPH AND MARY.........so do you think I should put them back in my tree...it was in fact through not being 100% sure but I did have Mary Trelfa as my 5 x g grandmother...........I`m cracking up here...lol.....what do you think ??
allan:confused:
ps thanks Joy -Smiler......I didn`t know that Ralph was the churchwarden in Backford....;)
and the big bonus is there are a massive amount of Oakes Family from Over area.....I`m excited about this now....could be adding another 10 names to my tree??
ADDED...just checked out the Will of Mary Oakes in Cranage......it`s expensive....45p ?.....have I read that right ? ....allan

[garstonite]

And if Over is near Middlewich then there is a likely marriage for Ralph and Mary at Over - Ralph Oakes married Mary Trelfa 2 Jan 1758.

Hiya Kiterunner......if this is my Ralph and Mary I have just googled Over,Cheshire ...the church is St Chads
http://www.thornber.net/cheshire/htmlfiles/over.html
it is a beautiful church...and may well be visited tomorrow and then Sunday lunch....it`s only 34 miles from where I live......allan:):):)

[kiterunner]

It says on the main Cheshire wills page that the cost of a will is £3 plus postage, and then on the other page it says £3.5 plus postage, and the postage is 45p for 1 will so the total cost is going to be under £4. If you put it into your basket then it will show you the total cost before you go to the checkout anyway.

If it does turn out that it's your Mary's will, then hopefully it will have enough info to confirm that Ralph and Mary had those other children, if not then we still need some evidence to be sure it's all the same family.

[garstonite]

Thanks Kiterunner.......I will order the will............allan:)

[garstonite]

OK...so look at post 6 and post 16....am I thick or am I being a little presumptious..MERRY..is William Oakes who married Margaret Griffiths in Backford in 1779 THE SAME William Oakes who is Ralph and Marys eldest born in 1858 ...in fact, there are marriages for Samuel Oakes and Mary Oakes as well....it would appear I have been really dumb...if these are the children of Ralph and Mary , there are roughly another 16 members of my family...I always get carried away with findings like this...what does everybody think:o William oakes / Margaret Griffiths 12th october 1779
William Williams / Mary Oakes 9th nov 1790
Samuel Oakes to Jane Rowlinson 2nd September 1797 all Backford
help please....I have to say I think these are definitely the children of Ralph and Mary, anyone agree?
allan
just found Joseph Oakes with children babtised in Backford also...and Thomas Oakes

[kiterunner]

Did you ever order Mary's will, Allan? If so, then didn't it list her children, and the daughters' married names?

[garstonite]

No Kiterunner...I`m ashamed to say I never...just went out of my head...it was only because I had time on my hands that I went back to Ralph and Mary today.....:o:o:o allan

[kiterunner]

I still say the best way to find out if they are all the same family is to get that will, then.

[garstonite]

Of course...I WILL send for it tomorrow....thanks....allan;)