Moderator Control Panel ]

James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

A problem shared is a problem halved. Post your brick walls here and see whether you can offer advice to others

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby rfitzgerald1963 » Fri Aug 26, 2016 3:28 pm

Yes on his marriage record his father is James Rawes Parker Travelling case maker same as his son& his son is living at 18 Old fish street, same as on other records

http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/1623/ ... 9248/facts
rfitzgerald1963
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:11 am

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby jimbo50 » Fri Aug 26, 2016 4:46 pm

Hi again. Sorry I don't have an ancestry sub. so couldn't see record.
Well I would confidently assume that James was 'Rawes/Raws' and Mary Ann was 'Parker' going from the earlier baptism records.
Maybe there was a marriage under those names somewhere, but both were from outside county.
There was maybe a hint of financial trouble creeping in, with the partnership and fire, I don't know if that's relevant and might have caused the use of a slightly altered name by the time of William Henry's marriage. Cheers. Jim
jimbo50
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2016 3:36 pm

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby rfitzgerald1963 » Fri Aug 26, 2016 4:52 pm

Thanks Jim, going to have t just keep digging and hope something comes up
rfitzgerald1963
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:11 am

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby ksouthall » Fri Sep 02, 2016 11:31 pm

jimbo50 wrote:Hi again. Sorry I don't have an ancestry sub. so couldn't see record.
Well I would confidently assume that James was 'Rawes/Raws' and Mary Ann was 'Parker' going from the earlier baptism records.
Maybe there was a marriage under those names somewhere, but both were from outside county.
There was maybe a hint of financial trouble creeping in, with the partnership and fire, I don't know if that's relevant and might have caused the use of a slightly altered name by the time of William Henry's marriage. Cheers. Jim


I'm not sure if I have misunderstood what you are saying here or if you have misunderstood the baptism record for William Henry Parker, especially as you said you haven't seen it.

If I'm reading your post correctly, it looks like you think that Mary Ann Parker had married James Rawes and that William Henry was using his mother's maiden name, Parker, as his surname.

However, I've looked at the record on Ancestry and these are the entries in the following columns:-

Parents' Christian Names - James Raws and Mary Ann
Parents' Surname - Parker

So William Henry Parkers parents were James Raws (sic) Parker and his wife, Mary Ann (maiden name unknown).

Unless James had changed his surname to that of his wife, then it seems clear to me that his surname was Parker and that James Raws Parker is probably linked to the 1786 marriage between George Parker and Elizabeth Rawes in Coventry.

Also, on another note. Have you considered these possibilities:-

1) James Rawes Parker married one Mary Ann, had a couple of children, she died and then he married another Mary Ann? It's not impossible as Mary Ann was a common combination of surnames.

2) James Rawes Parker and Mary Ann X had a couple of children then got married and had some more?
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby jimbo50 » Sat Sep 03, 2016 10:16 am

jimbo50 wrote:Although looking again at the 1st and 3rd baptism records, parents they are quoting James Rawes and Mary Parker, their surnames are different. Not Mr and Mrs 'James Rawes Parker'.... Confused ?
Was this a typo ianbee ? Jim


Your assumption is correct ksouthall, I was just able to see the replies on the query and assumed, because of the date, that the record was in the manner of a statement rather than a form with columns.
jimbo50
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2016 3:36 pm

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby sdup26 » Sat Sep 03, 2016 5:40 pm

When George and Mary Ann were baptised in Lambeth in 1814, the record says George was born in Oct 1810. Assuming he was the first-born, and born within the marriage, in theory a marriage record should be around early 1810. But there doesn't seem to be a marriage for a James Rawse Parker. Is it possible James 'adopted' Rawse as a middle name only after he produced a legitimate son, because a female Rawse relative wanted the name carried on for at least another generation?

What about Mary Ann after James's death? Have you found her in 1851, when the census may give her place of birth?
sdup26
 
Posts: 1483
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 4:34 pm

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby ksouthall » Sat Sep 03, 2016 8:45 pm

Perhaps the marriage took place in a non-conformist church. Alternatively, there was no marriage or it took place after some, or even all, of the children had been born. So the Chelsea marriage could be correct even though the baptisms took place in Lambeth as the couple may not have wanted to the vicar to know that the children had been conceived/born before marriage.

I haven't checked all the baptisms or the Chelsea marriage to compare the dates but could have a look later.
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby ianbee » Sat Sep 03, 2016 9:54 pm

I never said his surname was Rawes! Sorry if I gave that impression. That is how I write up baptisms on here.
He may of course have added the middle name himself, as has been suggested.
And I do find it hard to believe that there was more than one James Rawes Parker around at that time.
ianbee
 
Posts: 2292
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:51 pm

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby jimbo50 » Sat Sep 03, 2016 11:23 pm

Sorry ianbee for my record ignorance. I'm so used to Scottish records where the minister records the parents with their original surnames, where wives retain their family's surname on the registers

sdup26 wrote:Is it possible James 'adopted' Rawse as a middle name only after he produced a legitimate son, because a female Rawse relative wanted the name carried on for at least another generation

sdup, I wondered about the books auction, were they an inheritance, and was a name a condition/request of inheritance ? Cheers. Jim
jimbo50
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2016 3:36 pm

Re: James Rawes Parker - 1788-1843

Postby Sylcec » Mon Sep 05, 2016 12:28 am

sdup26 wrote:When George and Mary Ann were baptised in Lambeth in 1814, the record says George was born in Oct 1810. Assuming he was the first-born, and born within the marriage, in theory a marriage record should be around early 1810. But there doesn't seem to be a marriage for a James Rawse Parker.


The most likely possibilities to me are:
a) that George (1810) was born out of wedlock or
b) that their parents, father at least, was not living in the preferred parish because he may have been travelling (selling his pocket books?) or in a period of military service and even out of the country?
Of course James & Mary Ann may simply not have bothered about getting their children baptised - it wasn't important to all! If we don't have any intelligence on James Raws[e] Parker's whereabouts prior to 1810 - then anything is possible.

The possibility of a non-conformist marriage is NOT a possibility at this time - unless they were Quakers (or Jews) - to be legal all marriages had to be celebrated in the C of E.
User avatar
Sylcec
 
Posts: 2509
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:36 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

PreviousNext

Return to General research queries


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests