​Are you are a McDougall (and all variant spellings!) with ancestors from the Border counties of Berwickshire, Roxburghshire or North Northumberland?  If so, the chances are your research will have ground to halt in the mid-eighteenth century.  If not, rightly or wrongly it is likely you have tapped into the pedigree of the McDougall families of Stodrig and Makerstoun and at some point along the way.  But are you correct?  Both myself and the McDougall Surname DNA Project are now on hand to help you discover more about your McDougall ancestors from the Borders than ever before. 

There are other benefits to joining FTDNA or a surname project too – a small fee of $19 unlocks the many additional tools such as a chromosome browser – an essential piece of kit for those serious about cousin matching.  Membership of a project also usually attracts significant discounts against all types of future testing.  ​

​My interest in the project was sparked in March this year when I was contacted by Mike McDougall in California and his paternal aunt Marty.  Mike was busy planning a trip to his ancestral homeland and wanted to ‘pick my brains’ for places to visit and information that would add context and colour to the extensive family tree that had been researched by his late Grandfather, John (Jack) Errol Malcolm McDougall back in the 1960’s.  From the point of emigration in 1833, Jack’s research into his family history is some of the best I have ever seen, and Mike and Marty have very generously made it available for members of the McDougall surname project to consult.

​Mike and Marty’s ancestor was John McDougall, who together with his wife Margaret Purves and four young children emigrated from the Scottish Borders to Quebec, Canada in 1833.  John was born on 25th July 1805 to parents John McDougall senior and Janet Wilson at Donaldson’s Lodge in the Parish of Cornhill on the English side of the border. Sadly, Mike and Marty’s earliest known ancestor John McDougall senior had been aligned to a baptism in 1782 at Coldstream to parents Alexander McDougall and Isabel Foster.  This was an easy mistake to make - right geographical area and right time frame - nor were they alone in arriving at this conclusion.  This circumstantial evidence has been incorrectly replicated in many other family trees not just those associated with the family! 

Three key pieces of information came to light very quickly during the research process that would prove beyond doubt that this connection was misplaced:

​The 1841 Census, the death record for John McDougall senior and his monumental headstone in Foulden Churchyard all point to a birth year of 1771, some seven years before Alexander McDougall and Isabel Foster were married on 22 November 1778.  So just who were John’s parents if not Alexander and Isabel?

​Whilst living at Donaldson’s Lodge John and Janet baptised a total of 9 children at Coldstream:

​Typically for this region no marriage has yet been found for the couple, however, John’s occupation of labourer was a red alert to the possibility that there may have been other children and to date two have been found.  The earliest baptism to be identified was for a son named James McDougall baptised at Yetholm on 14th June 1800 where John was recorded as  ‘Hind at Mindrum’ the second was for a William McDougall baptised at Sprouston on 1st May 1803 where father John was recorded as a ‘Hind at Pots Close’.   Clearly these two boys and a sister Isobel had died young, as children born to the couple at later dates were given the same names.  Although no death records survive for Sprouston beyond a couple of pages for 1633-37 and the headstone itself is long gone, a record of the memorial inscription remains which provides some vital information.

​Whilst further research produced several options for potential parents of John McDougall born in 1771, the registers and other available sources of information were unable to provide conclusive evidence.   What has become clear in the course of the research is that whilst John McDougall’s occupation acted as a ‘red alert’, it may also have been a bit of a ‘red herring’. 

​By the mid 1820s John senior had sufficient capital to take the tenancy of the Mill at Foulden and establish himself as the Miller. Before he emigrated his son John was a clerk at the Gunsgreen Distillery and had sufficient capital not only to fund his family’s move to Canada, but to set himself up in business. Firstly as the keeper of a general store and ‘steamboat agent’, then becoming President of the ‘Three Rivers Gas Company’, acquiring several plots of land and being elected Mayor of Three Rivers in 1855 before purchasing the St Maurice and L’Islet Ironworks in 1862.  His brothers also enjoyed a high degree of success, mostly as Millers or Merchant Millers in both Quebec and Ontario.  They may have been workers and labourers in Scotland but in Canada they were very much the business owners and employers of men.  

​Families were large, with often upwards of 8 children. A record for Gordon parish suggests at least two families in the eighteenth century had families that were even larger still.  One farmer had 15 children by one wife and another, a meal maker, had 20 children by two.   It is worth remembering that under the Scottish Law of primogeniture, the eldest son inherited his father’s interests in freehold property or land (immoveable estate), therefore younger sons would need to find, and quite often fund, their own path.  Whilst some remained in the immediate area, others often moved away to areas that afforded better opportunities.

​To help track down his correct ancestral line Mike has tested both his autosomal and Y DNA.  He also joined the McDougall surname project which has provided some interesting results.  There is most definitely more than one McDougall line who have been resident in the Scottish Borders for some considerable time!  

​There is a distinct family line which is descended from James McDougall, believed to be eldest son of Alexander and Isobel of Coldstream.  After a varied career as a Shoemaker, School Master then Pharmacist he invented self-raising agent and founded McDougall’s Flour.  As their pedigree was drafted by the ‘College of Arms’ it is almost certainly the line of the McDougalls of Stodrig and thus is believed to be linked to the family who had owned the Makerstoun Estate from the mid-fourteenth century.  Although this line is not a DNA match with Mike, theirs is also a fascinating story and like ‘sheep dip’ which was invented by George Wilson, a druggist in Coldstream in 1830 (a relative of Janet perhaps???) is another innovation linked with the Town albeit rather loosely.

​Another McDougall family not yet connected to the project but also associated with Coldstream are the McDougalls who were saddlers and leather merchants.  John S McDougall saddler appears on the Town Map of Coldstream in 1862 with premises on the High Street which was, until very recently Coldstream Post Office.  Later the business moved from the High Street to the Market Square.

A family descended from a William McDougall b. 1782 at Ednam left Roxburghshire for Dalkeith and subsequently emigrated to Ohio.  Initial test results would indicate that this is potentially a close match to Mike but to date a connection on paper has not been found. 
​
Aside from those known to have tested their DNA, another John McDougall born at Kelso, Roxburghshire in 1802 emigrated to Ontario in the 1850s - their family home is now open to the public.  But perhaps most intriguing of all is yet another John McDougall born in Berwickshire circa 1826 who also emigrated to Quebec and who was the owner of the Caledonia Ironworks.  To date researchers have been unable to determine if the two families of Iron Foundry fame, who were clearly in close contact, were in fact related.  

​Of course there are also the families who did not stray at all such as the McDougal farmers of Gordon, who are still faming the same land as their ancestors some 300 years ago.  The numerous memorials in the Churchyard at Gordon stand as testimony to the many generations of McDougals that went before.

​Hopping over the Border to Cornhill in Northumberland, there is evidence of McDougall families living in close proximity to John and Janet McDougall whilst at Donaldson’s Lodge.  A Robert McDougall recorded as a Husbandman at Melkington may well prove to be a relative of Mike – was John McDougall senior possibly working for a relative? – for an agricultural labourer to stay in one place for approximately 17 years is somewhat unusual.  There was also a William McDougall a tailor and a James McDougal and his wife Jane Sutherland baptising children there at the same time as John and Janet.

​Perhaps 21st century technology and the ability to trace family heritage through our genes will finally reveal if and how these families were connected, possibly many centuries ago.  If you are related or descend from any of the families outlined above, or more importantly the many others that have NOT been mentioned, do please get in touch.  There is a free Y-DNA test awaiting one potential tester who can prove their McDougall ancestry from either Berwickshire, Roxburghshire or indeed North Northumberland.  Even if you would rather not test your DNA the information you hold may very well prove to be the key to unlocking these complex relationships, so please do contact us

​My personal interest in where the McDougalls sit the region’s history has kicked in and I have been busy mapping the McDougalls of Berwickshire and Roxburghshire into family groups.  A not inconsiderable task but hopefully not impossible!  So just how many of them were there?

It is important to remember that for various reasons Scottish Parish Registers were also often incomplete - there may be valid reasons why you can't find your ancestor in the parish you expect.

 “The parish minister or the session clerk usually assumed responsibility for maintaining the registers, but since there was no standard format employed, record keeping varied enormously from parish to parish and also from year to year. As a result, the information may be sparse, unreliable and difficult to read. The oldest register dates from 1553 (baptisms and banns from Errol, Perthshire), but although there was a requirement from 1552 that parishes record baptisms and marriages, many did not commence until much later, and some more remote areas only have registers from the early 19th century. Some registers have been lost or destroyed and the condition of the surviving 3500 is variable.”[1]   

A detailed list of the Parish Registers and notes regarding their coverage can be downloaded as a PDF from the National Records of Scotland  - do you use it!  Also bear in mind that Baptisms and marriages outside of the Established Church of Scotland will not appear in the Parish Registers - double check records for non-conformists too.

​In the 1841 census for Berwickshire there were 138 Individuals living in 45 Households across 15 Parishes.   14 were living on their own or with other families as servants or otherwise.

​There were four parishes with a single McDougall occupant; Channelkirk, Cranshaws, Hume and Ledgerwood.
                                 
Of the 76 females - 9 were born in Scotland but not in Berwickshire and 2 were born in England.
Of the 62 males – 4 were born in Scotland but not in Berwickshire and 4 were born in England.

​In the 1841 census for Roxburghshire there were 94 Individuals living in 32 Households across 12 parishes.  13 were living on their own or with other families as servants or otherwise.

​There were four parishes in Roxburghshire with a single McDougall occupant: Jedburgh, Oxnam, St Boswells and Wilton.

​Of the 50 Females 11 were born in Scotland but not in Roxburghshire and 1 was born in England
Of the 44 Males 4 were born in Scotland but not in Roxburghshire and the birth place of 1 was ‘Not Known’.

​The above are just a few of the facts and figures I have gleaned to date.  There is a whole lot more including the outline trees illustrating the various family groups which have been researched to date.  This research into the McDougall families of the Borders will also be made available to members of the McDougall DNA Surname Project, alongside that generously provided by Mike and Marty.  If interested in the project or the free Y DNA test that is up for grabs, or have any information you think might be useful do please get in touch.  We are here to help.

​In seeking inspiration for this month’s blog I was thumbing through some old pedigrees and came across an extensive tree for a Hedley family with familial connections to both Turner and Turnbull families.  Whilst I know how the family links to my own through the Trotters of Sprouston and beyond, I am totally ignorant of its wider connections.  Being far too extensive to get to grips with in the short time I have had to prepare for this month’s instalment, plus the fact it raises issues over what is possibly the most inaccurately represented pedigree in online trees I have EVER seen, it went back into the heap.  Instead I picked up the Cargey pedigree, about whom although I know precious little more, contact between the families was still alive and well in my younger years.  I remember being told of the high excitement enjoyed by Cargey descendants who travelled by ‘horse and cart’ from Edinburgh to visit their Smith second cousins at Longhoughton.  Indeed during the early part of the 20th century the Cargey’s lived in the same roads of Harewood Grove and Stanhope Road in Darlington as their Aynsley-Smith cousins.  In my experience it is often the families that are known to us that get overlooked during the research process in favour of dim and distant cousins.  Anyway, I set off to see what else I could ‘dig up’.

​A quick Google for the name Gilbert Cargey, (as it is prevalent in every generation of the Cargey family), brought up a reference to a dish ‘a duo of local cheeses, onion marmalade, fruit, white baguette slices and oatcakes’ served in the tea room at Kiplin Hall near Scorton, North Yorkshire.  It transpires that Gilbert Cargey b. 1810 - d.1882 had been Land Steward on the Kiplin estate for 21 years to the 4th Earl and Lady Tyrconnell (Sarah Crowe).  The Friends of Kiplin Hall have done a fantastic job of piecing together the pedigrees of the four interconnected families that owned Kiplin throughout its 400 year history. [1]  The Crowe family (the third owners) are described as ‘minor Northumbrian gentry and venturers until Christopher made his fortune in Italy and married a King’s granddaughter (albeit from the wrong side of the blanket)’ and their family tree contains many familiar Northumbrian names such as Burrell, Reveley, Delaval, Grey and Collingwood. 

​Other than one or two interesting snippets, very little information is available online that can shed much light into the Kiplin Estate during Gilbert’s time of office or, the issues he dealt with in his roll as land agent there.  However, the estate archives containing documents relating to the families’ various interests are held by North Yorkshire County Record Office in collection ZBL.  Matters pertaining to the Estate and its management are held in ZBL IV and its sub folders which contain Correspondence, Leases and Agreements, Accounts, Rentals, Surveys and Valuations, Agents’ Notes and Papers as well as information relating to land holdings further afield in Surrey, Sussex, Buckinghamshire, Worcestershire and London.  For anyone with ancestors who were tenants or worked on the estate these records may hold a wealth of information!

​Reaching further back in time the archives also contain the Manorial Records for:

​Manorial records, can be rich pickings for those with the patience to scour their contents.  As well as details of its land holdings, which in turn would have been held from a feudal ‘superior’, the Manor performed important administrative functions through its own courts – The Court Baron and the Court Leet. 

​The Court Baron dealt primarily with landholdings and the surrender, succession and inheritance of tenancies.  Manorial tenants could be classified as ‘free’ or ‘unfree’.  In very simple terms free tenants paid a monetary rent for their farms and enjoyed a large degree of independence but were still expected to attend the Manorial courts as jurors.  ‘Unfree’ or customary tenants as they became known held land from the Manor according to its customs and by ‘copyhold’ which was a copy of the terms and conditions of their lease as entered in the Court Roll.  However, as the two basic types of tenure were held either by inheritance or for life or a specified number of lives, the court rolls for customary or copyhold tenants are often rich sources of genealogical information through the procedure of identifying rightful heirs.

​The Court Leet heard petty offences such as affray, nuisance, debt and failure to observe the customs of the manor.  Its primary function was keeping the ‘King’s Peace’ and as such it appointed officers to do so.  This court became obsolete with the introduction of more centralised administration systems and the establishment of parish and town officials and justices of the peace.  However, the records may still hold some juicy tales of misdemeanours perpetrated by our ancestors that would otherwise be missed!

​Following the death of Lady Tyrconnell in 1868 Gilbert Cargey branched out on his own as a Land Agent and Valuer based in Darlington.  Clearly he is still remembered at Kiplin, hence the eponymous title of this post, but for good or ill I do not know!

​Although the Cargeys were living in Edinburgh at the time of their visit long ago, their pedigree as sketched out by GAS in the 1930s stretches back in time to a burial at Ponteland in 1678.  This area seems to have been ‘their stomping ground’ for a least a century or so before various descendants spread their wings and dispersed to other areas.  Their ancestral line isn’t all that challenging to trace – Cargey is an unusual name, it is helped by the fact that the Ponteland registers have survived from 1602 and by a detailed memorial inscription on a family headstone in Ponteland churchyard.

​As it transpires the Gilbert Cargey who died in 1822 was the second of the name and had been married three times, his third wife Sarah Anderson, survived him.  Needless to say he had a fairly extensive family comprising 9 known daughters but only one son (from his second marriage to Catherine Sanderson) who lived to adulthood.  It would seem from his Will that the outnumbering by female members of his family was keenly felt, as in addition to an annual allowance of £20 and the bed she brought to the marriage, Gilbert recommends that Sarah go to live with one of her daughters!

​At the time of his death in 1822 Gilbert was farming at Stickley, at Horton near Blyth but was already branching out elsewhere.  His surviving son Gilbert 3rd was by then farming his father’s interest at Scremerston Farm near Berwick.  The Ponteland Registers suggest that the family had been butchers as well as farmers which was not uncommon. As such more information may be found in the Newcastle upon Tyne Guild Records Ref:GU.BU (part MF), 298. [2]

​Land Tax was first introduced in 1692 levied against real estate and personal property. During the 1690s the rate was established at 4 shillings in the pound and accounted for circa 35% of the national revenue to the Exchequer.  From the 1780s to the mid 1830s proof of payment of Land Tax was a qualification requirement in order to vote in elections.  As such, many land tax returns for this period can be found within the records of the Quarter Session Court.  However, Roman Catholics paid double the rate of tax at 8 shillings in the pound.  If landowning ancestors are found paying the higher rate of land tax it is a strong indication that they too were Roman Catholic.  One reason for this higher payment rate was their support of the Jacobite cause and the exiled Stuart family.  

​However, it was felt that the law was not being sufficiently adhered to and following the rising in 1715, a new law was passed that introduced a Register of Catholic Landholdings.  The register was to include their;

Therefore detailed records often exist in the Quarter Session records from a much earlier date. Copies of the certificates that made up the register for Northumberland were copied and published by the Surtees Society in 1918.  ‘Northumbrian Documents of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries comprising The Register of the Estates of Roman Catholics in Northumberland and the Correspondence of Miles Stapylton’ is freely available online at Archive.org.  (The very first entry in the book contains clues which I believe link to the Bolam family of whom I wrote in March this year – clues that are too good to ignore given the Christian names of Isaac and Christopher!)

​Pages 25 and 26 of the register contain the return of the estates of Nicholas Stapelton alias Errington of Carlton, Yorkshire and relate to the former Manor of Ponteland in 1717.[3]  Page 25 contains the names of Matthew and Edward Crow, at West Houses.  Whilst these two do not currently feature in the list of descendants of George Crow of Kiplin Hall, with a bit more digging they may well be found to tie-in somewhere with other Crow family members known to be resident in Ponteland during the same period. 

​Page 26 records a William and John Cargey along with another known Cargey family connection Cuthbert Charlton, the husband of John Cargey’s sister Ann.  A question mark remains over the identity of this William, as the father of John and Ann was buried in Ponteland Church in 1713, some 4 years before the certificate had been drafted.  However, as the tenancy appears to have been in joint names and there is no evidence of another William Cargey having been baptised, died, married or having had children of his own, it is possible his name had remained on the lease.  Sadly no other records survive for the Manor of Ponteland to verify this or indeed provide further information on the family in the late 17th century.

​ In 1750, John Cargey and his son Gilbert again appear in the declaration of the same estate returned by Winifred Stapleton alias Errington, the third wife and widow of Nicholas Stapleton alias Errington above. (See page 102 of the Register).

​The last event for the Cargey family to have been recorded in the Ponteland register was the burial of Gilbert Cargey of Stickley on 8th February 1822.  The Gilbert Cargey who gives his name to the title of this blog was the 4th of the name.  He was the son of farmer Gilbert Cargey 3rd of Scremerston and later of Lindean near Galashiels.  Although he married Margaretta Richardson Blythe in 1844 the couple had no children. Whilst there are many branches of descendants through the female lines, to my knowledge there remains only one family bearing the name Cargey still living in the UK that stem from the Ponteland line.  They descend from the nephew of Gilbert Cargey 4th, Gilbert Cargey 5th of Edinburgh who visited their Smith cousins at Longhoughton all those years ago.

[1]  Kiplin Hall Website ​https://kiplinhall.co.uk/
​[2]  A list of Guild Records for Newcastle upon Tyne available from Tyne and Wear Archives is available online as a pdf.   A William Cargey a butcher & likely uncle of Gilbert Cargey 2nd was admitted as a Freeman of Newcastle upon Tyne in 1747.  The Freemen records for Newcastle upon Tyne can be accessed online through The Genealogist.
​[3] The Manor of Ponteland was sold circa 1774 to George Silvertop of Minsteracres.  High Sheriff of Northumberland d. 1831. The advertisement for the sale appeared in the Newcastle Chronicle on the 8th October.

​Brick walls – we all have them, even experienced genealogists who have been researching their families for decades are likely to have come up against an immoveable obstacle that resolutely refuses to budge.  Although research will naturally reach a point where the records run out, those that hover around the statutory registration and census periods are particularly annoying, as one way or another a solution, or at least a theory, should be possible to find. 

​Not so with a 2 times great grandmother of my own, Ann Ross, who adamantly refuses to give up her ancestral history, and is frankly making the family tree look somewhat lopsided!  Every now and then I go back to her and do a bit more digging in the hope that inspiration will strike but invariably come away disappointed.   It may seem odd to be writing about what is essentially a failure, but I thought others in the same position may be interested in a few of the methods and thought processes I use to successfully resolve cases like these, even though in this instance it has yet to produce a result. On many occasions the devil is most definitely in the detail!

​One of the first things to consider when dealing with a ‘problematic’ ancestor is to assess the facts known about the person and the reliability of the sources.  It is also worth remembering that whilst records of life events and the census remain the foundation stones on which to build an ancestor’s story, there are many other potential places where reliable information can be found.  Some of these may even be among your family’s personal possessions, or in the possession of others researching the same ancestral lines.  They often say far more about a person and their character than an official record can too.

​In the case of Ann Ross most of what I knew before I started digging came from my grandmother’s personal knowledge.  Although Ann and her husband John Davison a printer in Alnwick, had both died before she was born, granny would often talk about her paternal spinster aunts, Sarah Ann and Mary Ogilvie Davison, whom she knew extremely well.  Following the death of their father John in 1895, the aunts together with their widowed mother moved from the printing works at St Michael’s Pant to a little house at No 2 Croft Place, Alnwick.  Of Ann herself, if my memory serves me correctly, granny spoke very little, other than imparting the fact she was Scottish, not a total surprise given her surname and the middle Christian name of one of her known daughters!  

​In terms of reliability of the source, everything Gran told me about her family history has to date proved to be ‘spot on’ – but did she know everything, and even so was some information perhaps held back? 

​One piece of information that came to light relatively recently was evidence that there had been another child, a son, who had died as a youngster.  He was distinctively named William Tulloch Davison and had been born in second quarter of 1852 and died aged 3 on 27th January 1856.  Further evidence perhaps of Ann’s Scottish heritage?   It is always worth double checking for other children born to a couple, even if they died young, as their names may hold some vital clues, or indicate naming patterns.  In this case William may well have been named for John’s father, but what about Tulloch?  Every marriage combination of Ross, Davison, Ogilvie and Tulloch has thus far drawn a blank in terms of a viable potential connection for Ann.  However, it is important to think beyond the immediately preceding generation – surnames used as Christian names often refer to grandparents or even further back still.  

​John Davison and Ann Ross had married at the Register Office in Alnwick on the 1st July 1851.  She was described as 24 years old, a spinster, of no occupation, the daughter of John Ross a Shoemaker and a resident of Alnwick at the time of her marriage.  Witnesses to the marriage were Mary Gilroy, John Davison’s married sister, and a David Geggie, possibly a cabinet maker in the town, whose wife’s maiden name was Amory.  There does not appear to have been a representative of Ann’s immediate family present.  Neither father is noted as deceased, although William, John’s father is thought to have had died before 1841.[1]

​Eking out every last drop of information and potential clues in official documentation is essential in difficult cases or where there is a conflict of evidence.  Sometimes taking a close look at the witnesses to the marriage can provide hints too, as can they place they were married.  In this case the Register Office may point to one or more of the parties following a non-conformist faith.  If Ann Ross was of Scottish descent she may well have been Presbyterian and would not have wanted to marry in an Anglican Church.

​In terms of reliability, the marriage certificate is often the least reliable of the three.  Folk tell ‘fibs’ about their ages, and be prepared for invented names and occupations of fathers!  There are many reasons why this may be the case not just illegitimacy; it can indicate the child had little or no knowledge of the father, perhaps he had died young and the child had grown up in a second family, was a smoke screen for a clandestine affair or used to invent a more suitable background – I have encountered them all and more!  Is Ann’s marriage certificate truthful?  When taken collectively with other information, her age would certainly seem to be correct, but there is a lingering question mark about her father’s name and occupation, despite her second son being called John.

​In the census records following her marriage Ann states her age and place of birth as:

Although her place of birth varies, her age is relatively consistent and suggests a birth year of 1827/28.  In terms of the reliability of census information it is worth bearing in mind that the person completing the return may not have had the specific knowledge of the birthplace of a spouse, visitor or even children if the family often moved.  Therefore at times the information in a census may be a ‘best guess’. 

​As to the reliability of post marriage census records for Ann Ross: – her place of birth is mostly given as London and her age remains consistent so on balance it would seem reasonably reliable.  

​Ann has not been identified living in Alnwick or the surrounding countryside in either the 1841 or 1851 census nor is there any sign of a John Ross, shoemaker!  For sure there are several Ross families resident in the area but none fit any known criteria beyond a common surname.  The only John Ross that has been identified living in Middlesex during this time was a dentist born circa 1816 in Scotland.  Ironically he is living at 9 Kings Terrace, Clerkenwell with what appears to be his brother James, in the same building as a William Ross, a bookbinder, and his family also born in Scotland circa 1811.  They appear to be the only Ross family living in Middlesex in the 1841 census.  William and family are still living in Clerkenwell in 1851 at 11 North Avenue and William’s place of birth is given as Kelso, Roxburghshire. From this information his parentage was traced to a George Ross, a Printer in Kelso and his wife Isabel Scott.  Whilst this couple are most certainly not Ann’s parents and the location and occupation may be purely circumstantial, there may yet prove to be a connection, and then again it may just prove to be another wild goose chase!

​As it stands Ann has yet to be found in either census predating her marriage.  There are too may variant factors to consider; she may have working in a household away from her family, one or both her parents were deceased, or she was visiting friends or relatives, which when combined with a not uncommon name make it impossible to draw an adequate conclusion.  To date it is thought that she came to Alnwick from London shortly before her marriage.  It is known that her husband John prior to opening his own print works in Fenkle Street in 1855 had worked for a Mr Pike in printing houses both ‘North and the South’ – is this when he had met Ann?  

​George Pike, Printer and Bookbinder operated at that time from 37 Market Street, the premises to which John Davison and his family would relocate in the 1860s and where they would remain until circa 1937.

​Ann Ross died on 21st April 1902 and her age recorded at death was 75.  She is buried with her husband John and their two daughters in the family plot No. A353, in a block for non-conformists in Alnwick South Road Cemetery.  (Many thanks to Ian Hopper at the Cemetery Lodge for pointing out on the location on a map and where it lies as there is no headstone marking the grave.)  This confirms that the family were indeed non-conformist and whilst I do not have the baptisms of John and Ann’s children to confirm their religion, it is interesting to note those of John’s sister Mary Gilroy took place at the Alnwick Unitarian Chapel (or Ebenezer Unitarian Meeting House) in the Parish of Alnwick. 

​Much of the information contained in Alnwick’s various non-conformist Church records is not yet digitised or available online – certainly not post 1838, but many of the records are available to consult at the Northumberland Record Office at Woodhorn. 

As Ann was born circa 1827/28 some ten years before the introduction of statutory registration introduced in 1837, (and even then registering a birth did not become law until 1874), the best record of her birth that could possibly be found is her baptism.  On the basis of her age at marriage, given in census returns, and at death, the best estimate for her birth would be the second quarter of 1828.   Needless to say no baptism record has yet been identified.  As she is thought to have been non-conformist, her baptism is also unlikely to be found in Parish records.  I say unlikely, as some parishes did record the vital events of ‘dissenters’ in their registers, but in the main the only place where non-conformist registers can be found is in the National Archives Series Code RG.  Many of these records have been digitised and are available through The Genealogist.[2]

​I can hear you asking ‘surely DNA has provided some answers’?  Well, actually as yet it hasn’t!  The biggest issue faced with trying to find clues within the DNA matches of myself and my brother is that we are the only living descendants of Ann Ross.  Furthermore, we do not know if Ann had any siblings – if she had then we are looking at mutual common ancestors in her parents, who would be our 3rd great grandparents.  This would mean that realistically the closest living relatives we could have in Ann’s line would be 4th cousins.  If Ann was an only child, or the only child of her parents to have children then we are looking a generation further back again and to 5th cousin matches and a generation about which we have virtually no knowledge.  As a result any matches that are lurking out there are potentially going to be quite small.   Whilst we both have a few known Davison matches they are no use in this particular quest as they all descend from John’s sister Mary Gilroy and therefore will not carry any Ross DNA.  In summary there is just not enough information out there at present from which to draw any sort of conclusion!

​Ann Ross left no will herself and the wills of her two daughters Sarah Ann and Mary Ogilvie Davison which were both proved in London hold no clues whatsoever.  The only will that I do not have as yet is that of Ann’s son John.  Primarily this was because until a few days ago I had no idea when and where he had actually died, only that he passed away before my father was born.  As his wife died in Northumberland ten years later I was unaware they had left the area.   Once it had been found courtesy of the British Newspaper Archive it certainly came as a bit of surprise!

​The motto here is always to expect the unexpected!

​Is it possible that Mary hold the key to this mystery?  Just where was she on the night of 3rd April 1881 when the census was recorded? – she certainly wasn’t at home!  My efforts to trace her have not borne fruit as yet – but then there are quite a few Mary Davisons listed in the 1881 census!  The images used in this blog have been taken from Mary’s personal sketch book which is now in my care and features many paintings and illustrations not just by herself but also other people.   It appears the album was begun in 1880/81 and the last entry is dated 1899.  Whilst many of the pictures are just initialled, including one by her brother John, an H.R, a P.R. and a J.G.R also feature – could the ‘R’ possibly be for Ross?  Other contributors have signed their names such as G Wilson, R Dodds, but there is one that stands out, Tom Paish in 1886 – just who was he?  

Durham Records Online database contains the burials for St Michaels Parish Church in Alnwick.
https://www.durhamrecordsonline.com
Family Search Wiki Page contains a comprehensive list of resources for researching ancestors from Alnwick
https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/Alnwick,_Northumberland_Genealogy#Noncormist_Records
Non Conformist records from The National Archive Code RG series are available through The Genealogist
​https://www.thegenealogist.co.uk

​Last month Rosemary Dixon-Smith looked at the story of the ‘Redeswire Affray’ and how stories recounting this Border skirmish may have circulated amongst her ancestors in 19th century Northumberland.  Here she was alluding to the ‘oral tradition’ which is the means by which events of the past have been verbally perpetuated into the present, particularly amongst local communities.  Many of us will have encountered it in our family history too!  However, over time embellishments and omissions often mean that the truth, although still there, has become distorted and is somewhat harder to piece together.  

​So what IS history? Simply put it is the study of past events, particularly in human affairs or a series of past events connected to a person or thing.  It is perhaps the origin of the word that provides a more practical definition.    ‘History’ as derived from the Greek ‘Historia’ – meaning  'inquiry; knowledge acquired by investigation' – is the past, as it is described in written documents.  The period before the existence of written accounts is therefore called ‘pre-history’.

​Rosemary’s blog coincided with the annual Jedburgh’s Callants Festival and the Redeswire Rideout in early July.  These Festivals and Civic Weeks hosted by many Scottish Border towns run throughout the summer and celebrate their unique identities, individuality and the roles their town played in the history of the Border.  They culminate in Coldstream with the Flodden Rideout to Branxton Hill and the service of remembrance for the men of both nations that fell at the Battle of Flodden which took place in 1513.  For those who have not heard of the Battle, it was a crushing defeat for the Scots, whose King, James IV was slain along with many of the Scottish nobility at the hands of the English.  It might seem strange then that such an event should be remembered with such passion 5 centuries on, particularly by the side that essentially lost.  But then the Borders and indeed the Battle itself remain a bit of an enigma!

I can’t remember a time when I wasn’t aware of Flodden.  As a youngster the annual pilgrimage made around Christmas time to Tithe Hill, the then home of my grandfather’s sister Mary and her husband Willie Davidson, which lies almost adjacent to Branxton Hill.  As my interest in family history grew I became aware of historic farming connections in land to the east that faced the battle site and over which the English army undoubtedly trod as it marched to meet the Scots on that fateful day.  Aside from the connection to the Greys of He[a]ton who held the estate from circa the 13th century, a paternal 5th great grandmother penned her last will and Testament at the farm of New Heaton on 5th May 1814.[1]  She was Isabella Pringle, twice widowed and the last surviving child of John Pringle of Fenton & Kippy.  Isabella had married Ralph Coxon in 1767 and following his death in 1768, married secondly, Edward Mole, with whom she had 4 known children.  Edward Mole died in 1790 and Isabella was appointed administratrix of his estate with Edward Anderson of Glanton and Thomas Vardy of Rothill standing surety for the penal bond of £560.  In 1804 Isabella’s last remaining brother John Pringle died intestate at New Heaton on 10th January 1802.  Isabella was again appointed administratrix by the court, but on this occasion in addition to Edward Anderson (junior) of Glanton, (Senior had died in 1799), Edward Pringle of Snitter stood surety to the rather heftier penal sum of £18,000, or some £1.2 million in today’s terms.  Undoubtedly there was a familial connection between the various parties, some of which are known and for others the exact details still need to be conclusively established and are therefore, the subject of ongoing investigations.[2]

​As chance would have it, I myself came to farm at New Heaton through marriage, at which point elements of my past and present collided.  It was then with my feet firmly planted on the ground that the English army may well have passed, and with the battlefield in places in full view, that my interest in Flodden was reignited.

This interest was then cemented through a project of voluntary re-examination of some of the original documents pertaining to the Battle preceding the quincentennary commemorations in 2013.  However, the project was naturally limited as to the number of documents it could cover, and therefore in many ways left more questions unanswered than it solved.  When combined with the history of area of the region in the early 16th century it was only natural that other aspects of the Flodden campaign should form the topic of my prize winning MLitt dissertation ‘Food for Thought’.  A 24 page document containing quantities of corn purchased and shipped from Hull to Newcastle for the English army formed part of the primary evidence in support of that specific ‘argument’.[3]  However, the document alone was insufficient to test the theory and required evidence drawn from other sources, such as corn imports, rent rolls and archaeological findings.

​Now that the dissertation is behind me, my interest in the history of the area and events surrounding the campaign has not diminished but rather, the evidence uncovered through the research has prompted me to challenge long established theories still further.  Mainstream accounts of the English army’s route of approach skirting around New Heaton to the east rather than either passing through it, or skirting it to the west, makes very little sense at all, armed as I am with a first hand working knowledge of the terrain.

Most accounts state that Surrey outflanked the Scottish army, and suggest his intention was to take Branxton Hill himself, and from there to engage on more equal terms with the Scots who had been dug in on the facing Flodden Hill.  Yet the approach route that is shown, which roughly follows the line of the road from Tillmouth to the A697 today, crosses land that would have a) been in view b) crosses other areas of potential bog and c) necessitates the English army navigating a second area of bog below Pallinsburn and then marching directly in front of the entire Scottish army to take its position.  

​There are many books on the market that look at the campaign from different angles.  However, a glance at the footnotes, endnotes or bibliography clearly show that the same old sources are rolled out time and time again.  More annoying still is that the majority of the sources cited refer to the ‘Calendars of State Papers’ rather than the original documents themselves.  The ‘Calendars’ are summarised extracts of document contents.  In some cases they are extensively condensed and barring a couple of salient points bear little resemblance to the full contents of the original.  Whilst useful for pinpointing primary documentary sources that may contain information of interest, they cannot be considered primary sources in their own right.  Yet, time and time again the same condensed extracts are interpreted, quoted and cited – of course it is far quicker and easier than ploughing through pages and pages of 16th century script – but by doing so, they are at the mercy of the compiler of Calendar’s own opinion as to what is important and what is not.  Furthermore, not all documents have even been ‘calendared’.  There will doubtless be more clues and evidence as yet lying undiscovered in the collections held by The National Archives.

Clearly some authors have actually visited the battle site (which is a bonus) and chapters of their books are adorned with bonny photographic plates. However, I have yet to see one that has looked at the Battlefield from the English perspective much beyond the view from Pipers Hill.  There are few with pictures taken from the hill itself looking towards the terrain of the English approach, but alternative approach routes themselves have not been considered.  The only account I have read to date to challenge this established route is ‘The Battle of Flodden and the Raids of 1513’ written by a Col. Fitzwilliam Elliott in 1911.[4]

Had the authors done so, one landmark in particular would have stood above all others and possibly prompted further investigation.  It is the hill that stands roughly in the centre of New Heaton, at the top of the ‘Noddens’ – standing at some 306 meters.  Today it is a Trig Point and more obvious because of the wood that stand on its summit.  To either side the land drops away; to the south the steading of New Heaton sits in a dip before rising up again to a ridge of 260 meters in height which runs in a similar trajectory to the hills above Branxton before sloping away just beyond Marldown and Cramond Hill.  This ridge forms a false skyline when viewed from the approximated lines of the Scottish troops; to the north of the Noddens, the land again dips away into a valley at the bottom of which runs an old By-way known as Muggers Loan, which runs along the course of the Oxendean Burn.[5]

​To my mind for the outflanking manoeuvre, as it so often described, to have been successfully achieved, the route of at least a substantial body of the army, would more likely have passed through either Donaldson’s Lodge or New Heaton.  Two possible routes through New Heaton are the line of Muggers Loan where the army could have passed unseen until it emerged around the bottom of Cramond Hill or Marldown, or, along what is now known as the ‘Thrieprig’ track, where again a body of men would have been hidden behind the false skyline, only emerging on the top of the ridge near Marldown.  A view that was clearly shared in part by Col. Elliott in 1911.  By approaching the field from this direction would also have eliminated the necessity to negotiate the boggy ground below Pallinsburn.  An approach taking any other route from the crossing point of the River Till would have been, at least in part, clearly visible to the Scots.  If Branxton Hill was indeed the objective then the alternative routes are also the shortest.

That they travelled unseen is suggested in Hall’s Chronicle by the Lord Admiral sending his ‘Agnus Dei’ to his father alerting him to the fact the Scots had changed position.[6]  This would certainly infer that both the Admiral and his father travelled with the Scottish army out of their field of vision, as it moved from its encampment on Flodden Hill to that of Branxton.  However, the same paragraph mentions the Admiral first had sight of the Scots army after crossing the burn at ‘Sandyfford’.  The only Sandyford to my knowledge lies to the east of Crookham, and if Hall is to be believed, this would contradict my earlier the theory in every way.

The Admiral’s father the Earl was reported to have been at his east again, which makes even less sense if the objective was Branxton Hill and the battle was fought on the site alleged.  The Sandyford burn runs north into the Till, to cross it from the east heading west the Admiral is most unlikely to have crossed the Till at Twizell Bridge.   Furthermore why would he?  Travelling via Sandyford would also have added approximately another mile to the Pallinsburn route.  It would however, have made (a little) more sense if Surrey’s objective was not Branxton Hill at all, but to have engaged with the Scots in their original position.[7]

​The inability of the English to see the Scottish position is attributed by Hall to a veil of smoke from fires deliberately lit in the Scot’s camp.  With a prevailing westerly the smoke could not have covered the Scots as they moved position. If not, the  the veil of smoke would surely have been between the English at Sandyford and Branxton and thus obliterated the view?  

​There are three main contemporary accounts which are referred to time and again; the ‘Articles of Battle’ although unsigned, looks to have been written by the Admiral himself, The Trewe Encounter and Hall’s Chronicle.  The battle is also mentioned in various pieces of correspondence including a letter written from Bishop Ruthal to Wolsey on 20th September 1513.  Herein lies a problem in itself as all of the accounts (with the exception of Ruthal) are attributed to the Howards, their followers, or on behalf of the King and none agree in the detail.  They were mounted (Hall), they were on foot (Ruthal), they travelled from 5am to 4pm (Hall) and 8 miles to the Battle (Ruthal) etc.  The latter is an impossibility if they travelled via Twizell as it is 7.4 miles in a straight line from Barmoor to Twizell alone, with approximately another 5 miles to the Field had they travelled via Pallinsburn as suggested.  However as the crow flies, and had the army (or part of it) crossed the Till around Etal the distance from Barmoor to Branxton is approximately 7 miles.

​Regardless of the historical project, the ability to transcribe, read and understand historic manuscripts is only half of the challenge, the remainder being the ability to interpret and contextualise their contents.  It is necessary to raise the further questions of; by whom, why, where, when and for whom each ‘document’ was written.  The ‘by whom’ and ‘for whom’ are clearly important factors when considering the various accounts of the battle.  When referring to any primary written source, an assessment of the reliability and motives of the author are of paramount importance.

​In the case of Flodden what has been left unsaid is as important as what has been ‘documented’.  There is no record of Surrey’s original intent, whether that be to station his army on Branxton Hill, or to engage with the Scots in their original position.  Then again, by not recording the aims of the manoeuvre, the leaders of the English army could not be admonished had those aims not been achieved.   A great many of the details of the final day remain unknown, open to interpretation and opinion, which is not helped by the lack of archaeological evidence.  With the exception of reports of a couple of cannon balls, one of which was allegedly found on the slopes of Marldown (what could it have been doing there?) and other unsubstantiated finds, no archaeological evidence has been found to date that places the battle in its current location.  Of course there are many reasons why this could be the case – one being the documentary evidence in the form of accounts of armour being stripped from the bodies of the fallen and sold from the field – where money is concerned there is usually more than an element of truth – the other is that prolonged agricultural activity and quarrying in the immediate area have obliterated what few artefacts that may have remained.

​I am not suggesting that my own theories are necessarily correct, but knowing the terrain first hand as I do, they must at least proffer a viable alternative.  As it stands it would appear the English Army of circa 20,000 fighting men, with their ordnance in tow, marched upwards of 14 miles, navigated difficult terrain en route, in the form of a gorge at Heaton Mill and a bog at Pallinsburn, and then began a battle at 4 o’clock in the afternoon from which, although significantly outnumbered and having had nothing to eat for a couple of days, they emerged victorious. 

​History is in the main just that – ‘his story’, after all what could a mere woman possibly know of tactics, terrain and common sense.  The history of war-fare still remains a male preserve.  However, there is a reason the saying tells us to go to the horse’s mouth and not its backend!  Speaking of which, a trick was clearing missed in failing to interview the last known survivor of the Battle – one Henry Jenkins, who died in 1670 aged 169 years!

​Now that really IS a canny story! 

(Postscript - we sold New Heaton in 2011, nonetheless I still look directly onto Branxton Hill today.  Ironically, today it is from where I receive my internet signal!)

[1] Sir Thomas Grey of Heaton wrote the medieval history ‘Scalachronica’ whilst a prisoner of War in Scotland.  Any King examines the work in some depth in his MA Thesis of 1998.  King, Andy (1998) Sir Thomas Gray's Scalacronica: a medieval chronicle and its historical and literary context, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/4842/

[2] Patience Anderson sister of Edward Anderson senior married John Grey in 1767, before purchasing Middle Ord they lived at Old Heaton.  Edward Pringle of Snitter’s wife was Margaret Vardy.  Two of Edward Pringles children married Re[a]dhead siblings.  Numerous connections between Pringle, Thompson, Hogg , Coxon and Readhead.  Only familial connection not proven Isabella Pringle to Edward of Snitter.

​[3] Accounts of Richard Gough E101 56 28.

[4] Col. Fitzwilliam Elliott, 'The Battle of Flodden and the Raids of 1513'
archive.org/details/battleoffloddenr00elliuoft/page/n135

[5] ‘Mugger’ is the old word for Gypsy or Tinker.

[6]  Hall Chronicle https://archive.org/details/hallschronicleco00halluoft/page/560

[7]  This same reference seems to have caused some confusion for the Battlefield Trust too.  See page 8.
​https://historicengland.org.uk/content/docs/listing/battlefields/flodden/

If, like me you are trying to track down your Pringle Forebears, a first step may be to contact the Clan Pringle Association where you will find more details on how to join both the Association and also the  Pringle DNA project.

​As the 2019 Common Riding season is now well underway which sees many Border towns celebrate their unique but common heritage as they ride their historic boundaries throughout summer, this month’s guest post written by Rosemary Dixon – Smith could not be more appropriate.  Initially I had thought of writing an introduction to her piece, but then thought no, and my reasons for this are tri-fold.  To begin with, Rosemary (Mole) is a first rate genealogist and family historian based in South Africa. Secondly, she will need no introduction to regular readers of my blog, as she first acquainted us with her own Smith Family of Northumberland back in June 2016.  Thirdly, her article stands so well on its own it does not require any preamble from me!  In reading it, I hope that readers will be inspired to adopt Rosemary’s principle and take some time to think ‘outside of the box’ when researching their own family history.  I have merely added some notes and links that may be of interest or use at the end.

​In the course of family history research we find ourselves delving into a pot-pourri of sources which helps to build up the big picture. The ancestor didn’t live in a vacuum and the more we discover about the context of his time, the more fascinating his story will be. Thus I was led into learning about such topics as indentured servants sent to the colonies, the slave trade, the Napoleonic Wars, everyday lives of mariners during the Age of Sail and much more. Even though a link between our own ancestor and certain significant events may appear tenuous, research often turns up surprising and colourful by-ways. Ignore them at our peril.

​Our John Smith (born 1821), a name to conjure with, was residing at Fenwick, Northumberland, from at least 1845/6 to 1854.  Fenwick was on the very edge of Stamfordham parish, almost into Matfen parish. Whellan's Directory for Northumberland 1855 (i.e. compiled about a year before) shows:  ‘Fenwick, Stamfordham, John Smith, blacksmith.’ John had married Margaret Little, daughter of Adam Little, a mason of Falstone, in 1844, at St Andrews, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. While they were at Fenwick the couple had three sons, George, Adam and Thomas. Adam did not survive past his fourth year. 

In 1857 another son, William, was born but by then the family had moved away from the Fenwick/Stamfordham border and were at Black Hill, Benfieldside, County Durham. Black Hill was a colliery and would have provided useful work for John the blacksmith. Concerned as any head of household to give his family a roof over their heads and enough to eat, it’s unlikely that John gave much thought to events which occurred in Fenwick long before he lived there. Yet he may have heard snatches of a Border ballad, the Raid of the Redeswire (Redswire in English), commemorating one of the last of the numerous Border frays between the Scots and the English.

​1870-72, John Marius Wilson's Imperial Gazetteer of England and Wales described Fenwick thus: ‘FENWICK, a township in Stamfordham parish, Northumberland; on an affluent of the river Pont, 13½ miles NW by W of Newcastle-on-Tyne. Acres, 1, 634. Pop., 103. Houses, 16. Fenwick Tower here was for ages the seat of the Fenwicks (‘gentlemen of the English Middle Marches’); but was forfeited in 1688, and has long been in ruins. A large quantity of gold nobles, of Edward III., was found at the taking down of a part of the wall of it, in 1775. The remains of it now are small, and have been absorbed into the structure of a modern farm-house. The Fenwicks were long conspicuous actors in the Border wars; and they are noticed in the ballad of the Raid of the Redeswire’:

The Raid of the Redeswire was a border skirmish on 7 July 1575 which took place at Carter Bar, the Cheviot pass which enters Redesdale. The skirmish was between (on the English side) the English Warden of the Middle Marches, Sir John Forster, with Sir George Heron, Keeper of Redesdale, Keeper of Liddesdale and Scottish Warden and (on the Scottish side) Sir John Carmichael the Lord Warden of the Marches with George Douglas of Bonjedward.  It was the last major battle between the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland before the Union of the Crowns in 1603.

​Sir John Carmichael met Sir John Forster at a hill called Red Swire in Carter Bar for a regularly scheduled Truce Day. They discussed matters associated with their two regions. Both men were accompanied by a number of armed guards.  One of the matters on the agenda was an Englishman who had stolen some items from a Scotsman and who was supposedly in Forster's custody. Carmichael demanded that the man be delivered to Scotland for justice, but Forster replied the thief had taken ‘leg-bail’ (escaped from custody) and could not be produced. This turned into an argument that involved personal insults from both parties, until members of the English contingent could no longer hold their temper and attacked, killing two men and wounding several others. The Scots were forced to retreat, but during their flight they joined up with another group from Jedburgh who were late to the meeting. This gave the Scots an advantage. They began to break the English lines and in time, the English were routed. George Heron was killed, along with his brother John and 23 other Englishmen. Forster and several other nobles were captured, and the Scots, quick to take advantage of the situation, made an impromptu raid taking 300 cattle from local farms. 

​The prisoners were brought to James Douglas who was the regent for King James VI. This soon became embarrassing for the Scots, as the prisoners had likely been taken for their ransom value, although Douglas stated that it was to keep them from being killed in the heat of battle. He wrote a letter to Queen Elizabeth describing the events, but she was outraged and sent William Killigrew to demand immediate satisfaction. Douglas was directed to meet with George Hastings, 4th Earl of Huntingdon, who was the lieutenant of the northern counties, to work out the details, and the two men were able to come to an amicable solution, as Douglas had no wish to anger Elizabeth and she wanted to avoid a war.

​The story of the skirmish was turned into a Border ballad edited and published by Walter Scott.  On the Cheviot Hills, near the place where the battle was fought, a monument known as the Redeswire Stone was built in commemoration of the battle. It reads: 

​It’s not impossible that John Smith in the relatively peaceful 1850s might have had occasion to raise a glass to the Bad Old Days of the 16th century and perhaps even to visit the commemorative Redeswire Stone.

Rosemary, by imagining herself in ancestors’ shoes has evoked a certain empathy and appreciation of time and place.  From approximately the reign of Edward the borderlands were, and are still, unique in terms of culture and customs.  They were defined or set apart from their respective nations by a set of laws known as the ‘Leges Marchiarium’ of which the ‘Days of Truce’ such Redeswire, designed for the amicable settling of differences, is a prime example.  A copy of the Leges Marchiarum available online at Google Books .   Northumberland also differed from the rest of England in the way in which land was held from their feudal superiors. The need to provide manpower for defence resulted in a unique form of land holding called Border Tenure or Tenant Right, in which land was held subject to the provision of ‘military’ service when required.  This type of landholding with the right to succession gave security of tenure and helped forge strong alliances.  Hence the ‘Fyve hundred Fenwicks in a flock’ as quoted by Rosemary.

​For the family historian Muster Rolls and later Militia Rolls can be a valuable source.  Until the 1514 Alnwick Muster Roll was recently rediscovered the earliest example dated from 1522. More can be read about these types of documents and where they can be found in ‘Tudor and Stuart muster rolls : a directory of holdings in the British Isles’ by Jeremy Gibson and Alan Dell (enter the appropriate postcode to find in a library near you) or in the relevant research guides provided by The National Archives.  In 1757, an Act was passed ‘for the better ordering of the Militia Forces … in England’ before this Act was passed troops were only ‘mustered’ when needed.  As the new law stipulated the recording of every man aged between 18 and 50 (in 1762 the upper age was reduced to 45) was recorded by each parish constable, the Militia Rolls act like a mini census albeit only of the male population.  From the list a ballot was held to decide which men would serve and these can often be found in Quarter Session records along with annual returns of serving officers submitted to the local JP’s.  Examples of these can be found on the Northumberland Communities Website such as the extract shown below for the parish of Stamfordham in 1762.  

​Some Militia records ‘Wo 96 - Militia Service Records 1806-1915’ are also available through Find My Past and these include many Scottish Militia regiments.  However, many Scottish Militia records can also be found in the papers of the Sheriff Court with the heyday for records being the period surrounding the Napoleonic Wars.  Like their English counterparts, the men were drawn from the district in which they lived, but aged between 18 and 30 (until 1802 when the age was raised to 45) and were also subject to a ballot to determine who actually served.  More information can be found through The National Records of Scotland website.  As such these records are a valuable source of information in the pre-census period of both countries.

For the lucky few (like me) who live north of the border, membership of the National Library of Scotland provides online access to the State Papers from 1509 - 1714, as well as the various Calendars such as The Calendar of Border Papers ‘Relating to the affairs of the Borders of England & Scotland’ Vol 1 1560 – 1594 which encompasses the period of the Redeswire Raid of  1575.[1]  These are also available through British History Online but a subscription is required. 

​The life and times of the Borderer resulted in a light cavalry that was second to none to Europe which proved indispensable both in the times of Anglo-Scottish campaigning, and the rather more nefarious domestic activities of the Reivers!  This riding culture lives on through the re-introduction of the historic rideouts.  Jedburgh’s Callants Festival 2019 runs from 23rd June to Sunday 14th July so there is still plenty of time to get involved should you wish to do so. The Redeswire rideout takes place on the Saturday of the first full week in July, which this year falls on the 6th .  It is the longest of all the border rideouts and this years schedule is as follows:

​It only remains for me to wish the Jethart (Jedburgh) Callant and his followers ‘Safe Oot, Safe In’ and to thank Rosemary for her wonderful blog that has, I am sure, got us all thinking of ways in which we can enrich our own family history research.

​Recently I have had cause to think about emigrant ancestors – after all, nearly all us have relatives somewhere along the line, who have packed their bags and embarked on a new life in distant lands.  To date my blogs have focused on those that headed for the goldfields and farmland of New Zealand, Australia and South Africa.  They have encompassed those who had no choice in the matter, those who embraced the pioneering spirit and forged successful lives for themselves overseas,  those that returned home and those that tried but didn’t make it!  However, barring a very brief foray into the story of brothers George Hodgson and Alexander Middleton, engineers on the Canadian railways, who returned to Scotland with a Canadian wife a piece in the shape of two Hazelwood sisters, I have done very little delving into others who made the journey to Canada, if in fact I have made the connection at all.  A quick flick through the Dictionary of Canadian Biography using place names such as Alnwick as a search term brought up an array of familiar surnames, Selby, Stamp and Donkin in particular.   

The Selby family are perhaps better known for their connections in the north of the County around Norham, Twisell, Beal and Berwick upon Tweed.  The name Prideaux Selby is more associated with the Berwick Naturalists than the military adventures of his namesake and relative, although he too was born in Alnwick.  Whilst not related to me directly, they do have links to the Younghusbands, the Wood family of Pressen and subsequently the Nicholsons of Thornton and Smiths of Windywalls of whom I wrote back in November 2016.  That article also recounted the tale of synchronised suicide and the rather bizarre custom of Deodand.  The Selbys are an interesting family – not least Frances Selby, who for her second husband married the ‘murderer’ of her first, a Captain John Hiniosi who had been stationed at Holy Island in 1689.[1] 

The other two both make it into my extended family tree too:

Edward Stamp was the son of Thomas Stamp and Mary Nicholson born circa 1813 in Alnwick.  He was a Master Mariner and ‘industrialist’ who in the 1860’s became involved in the Canadian lumber business in British Columbia.  A memorial plaque mounted on a rock in Stanley Park Vancouver reads

His biography states that ‘several geographical features in the vicinity of Alberni have been named after him, including Stamp Falls Provincial Park which surrounds the falls on the Stamp River’.[3] I can honestly say I had no idea of his business connections or timber operations in Canada as all his main ‘life’ events took place in England.

​When it comes to explaining relationships in this particular branch of the tree it becomes complex to say the least, being littered with more cousin marriages than you could shake a stick at.  For the purposes of this post it is quite sufficient to say that Mary Wood was the daughter of William Wood of Pressen, that Jonathon Middleton above is 1c4r to me, and his wife Jane Nicholson was his 1st cousin.  Thus Edward Stamp was both his nephew AND his 1c1r.  Furthermore, Jonathon Middleton was also uncle to the Alexander and George Hodgson Middleton the railway engineers mentioned in the opening paragraph.  If that wasn’t enough Jonathon was also ‘step’ uncle to Alexander Beazeley who, with his parents and family emigrated to Prince Edward Island in 1850, and from where several letters written to Nicholson family members back home have survived.  The letters  provide a glimpse of the challenges faced by emigrants regardless of wealth or background.  As Alexander writes to his cousins following his mother’s death ‘So you see that our Colonial life has not been quite such a cheerful one as we had anticipated. Sickness & death are sad destroyers of family comfort, & the gradual thinning of the family circle is not a pleasant thing to-look upon.’ 

​Well that is quite enough on that little lot – they bamboozle me at times, so how anyone else can be expected to follow the connections I have no idea.  There is a purpose to this explanation, however, and that is to illustrate how often there are ‘wheels within wheels’ and that other family connections may underlie decisions to seize opportunities, or even emigrate to far flung corners of the globe.

​Of course, Biographical works often only portray the successful and other noteworthy individuals – they rarely tell the story of the ‘ordinary’ man. The third chap on the list John George Donkin, whilst an educated, clever and literate man, seems to have become notable for a very different reason.

Born in 1853 in Morpeth, he appears to have been the 2nd great nephew of William Donkin and his wife Barbara Carnaby whose daughter, (as some may remember from early posts), was killed by lightening on the eve of her marriage in 1837. This also places him as 3 times great nephew of the happy couple at the Northumbrian ‘wedding of the century’ back in 1750.  Like his distant cousin, John George doesn’t seem to have fared particularly favourably in life either poor soul!  He seems to have been somewhat of a drifter who struggled to find his niche during his short life of 38 years.
​
His biography states that 

Copies of his wonderful book are readily available to purchase, but a copy is also available free of charge through Archive.org (see link in text above) and needless to say it proved an irresistible diversion to writing this blog!  A quick ‘google’ brings up several posts about J G Donkin including the Christmas 2015 entry of the RCMP  Veterans Association Facebook page. Tragically ‘Down on his luck, penniless and sick, he died on March 22, 1890 of alcoholism in the workhouse at Alnwick, Northumberland, England, just two years after leaving the Force.’[5]  It would seem rather conversely that this rather unassuming and observant man has inadvertently left the most enduring legacy of the three! 

​With the exception of the Beazeley family, the accounts above relate predominantly to British Columbia and The Western Provinces of Canada.  A look at the names featured when Berwick upon Tweed is entered in a search of the CDNB appear to be more concentrated to the east in Quebec and Ontario.  James Cockburn  lawyer, businessman, and politician; b. 13 Feb. 1819 at Berwick upon Tweed left for Montreal in 1832, surveyor Alexander Aitken, journalist Robert Middleton (mother thought to have been a Buglass) and Matthew Bell, leaseholder of the St Maurice Ironworks in partnership with David Monro were amongst their number.  

A number of the individuals named above could hardly be described as true ‘emigrants’ as several returned to Britain. Most could certainly not have been described as from impoverished backgrounds, and a couple it would appear saw Canada merely as a commercial opportunity linked to their UK based businesses.  They are hardly representational of the tens of thousands of emigrants that left British shores in the 19th century.  Some of whom would pay the ultimate price, but for others Canada presented opportunities and brought success that could never have been realised at home.

​Although British emigration began in the 18th century and legislation was in place to protect passengers from 1803, it was the ‘Act to Regulate the Carrying of Passengers in Merchant Vessels, 1828’ that marked the start of what would become known as ‘The Great Migration’ throughout the 1830s. 

​Emigration continued well into the the 20th century.  At times it was incentivised, either through government channels with offers of free land, or by means of parish assistance given to the ‘deserving’ poor, whilst at others it was made more difficult than it was already, e.g. in 1832 a tax of 5 shillings per adult was imposed on those leaving the UK for Canada, with children taxed on a sliding scale.   Nevertheless the majority of folks who headed for Canada in search of a 'better' life would have paid their own way.  Canada, like any other country was subject to economic highs, lows and political strife and tension.  The Library and Archives of Canada has an extremely informative site looking specifically at emigration through the ages and is a great place to start for those seeking to trace emigrant ancestors.  Donkin’s words ‘journalist globetrotters’ and promised ‘wondrous glories’ was without a doubt not a word of a lie, but this was not necessarily limited to the newspapers.  Pamphlets delivered to every farmer and blacksmith in the United Kingdom in 1897 on the instruction of the Canadian High Commissioner in London  

​The Ship’s List website is another highly informative website and although very few passengers are actually named, it holds lists of ships arriving in Quebec and Montreal in some detail from 1817.  These have been extracted from the Canadian Press, along with other articles which tell the emigration story ‘warts and all’.  The list makes interesting reading, not least for the details of imported goods the ships were carrying.  Numerous arrivals are listed from Newcastle and Shields carrying coal which is perhaps no surprise, whereas this notice which appeared in the Berwick Advertiser in April 1834 may be somewhat unexpected for some. 

It is often forgotten that Berwick’s former prosperity was largely due to its port. The ‘Port of Berwick’ is still in operation today (albeit it from the other side of the river) and cargoes are now more likely to be fertiliser, grains, cement, animal feed and timber from the Baltic and Mediterranean than people bound for Quebec!  A quick check of The Ships List for 1834, confirmed the ship departed Berwick on the 26 April and arrived on 10 June, carrying a Miss Cockburn, a Mr & Mrs Hall and family, a Mr Forster and 214 settlers plus a load of ‘general’ cargo.[8] 

​Further digging in old newspapers revealed that 20th century emigrants from the Border Region formed clubs and societies and regularly kept in touch with home.  Mr William Hogg who hailed from Berwick upon Tweed founded such a group in Toronto in 1923.

​Mr Hogg was a regular contributor to the newspapers keeping folks at home up to speed with events and news of friends and family overseas.  Nor was emigration restricted to people – the newspaper plays witness to a String of pedigree Clydesdales in 1905, 7 couple of Lauderdale foxhounds bound for Montreal in 1925, but possible the strangest item to cross the water was a ‘relic’ of former times in 1924.

​The 16th century carved bulls horn is now on display at the National Museum of Scotland, or at least it was in 2012 when this picture was taken by Kim Traynor, perhaps it couldn’t rest easy so far from home.

Should you encounter any unexpected or unusual links with Canada, do please let us know!

[1] Rev James A Raine, Pedigree of the Selby Family of Twisell Castle, Norhamshire, The History and Antiquities of North Durham as subdivided into the Shires of Norham, Island and Bedlington, which from the Saxon Period until the year 1844 constituted parcels of the County Palatine of Durham, but are now united to the County of Northumberland, London, 1852, p.315.
[2] Stanley Park Vancouver,
http://stanleyparkvan.com/stanley-park-van-plaque-captain-edward-stamp.htm
[3] The Dictionary of Canadian Biography, http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/stamp_edward_10E.html
​[4] Dictionary of Canadian Biography http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/donkin_john_george_11E.html
[5] RCMPVets Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/RCMPVets/posts/homeless-veteran-left-account-of-christmas-eve-in-the-early-mounted-police-winni/981513715243338/
​[6] Library and Archives Canada http://www.collectionscanada.ca/immigrants/021017-2111-e.html
​[7] Library and Archives of Canada http://www.collectionscanada.ca/immigrants/021017-1100-e.html
​[8] The Ships List http://www.theshipslist.com/ships/Arrivals/1834b.shtml

My DNA and that of my relatives never ceases to amaze me.  Although I have very few matches at 4th cousin or closer, (not surprising given how few immediate relatives I actually have), smaller matches that originate deep in my family's past are now providing proof of links to ancestors many generations ago.  Most of these matches are living overseas, which reinforces my theory that the sense of 'identity' is heightened by separation.  A type of 'displacement' has occurred that heightens the sense of ancestral belonging which is the driving force behind why more people than ever are testing their DNA. 

Many just want to test their 'admixture' or, as Ancestry calls it 'ethnicity', which represents the ancient migratory paths taken by our ancestors.  Others are keen to use 'cousin matching' to reconnect with lost family members.  Whatever your motives are for testing, do take some time to consider the potential downsides and the emotional upset it may cause before you 'spit'.  A while ago, Margaret Ross contacted me for a little help which did lead to a revelation which could potentially have caused a great deal of family upset.  I suggested she write about her experience so that others may be forewarned.  She very kindly agreed.  I hope you all enjoy the read.

​Susie

Like many people, I got into researching my family’s history after the death of my parents, picking up where my father had left off from his forays into the public library. My interest was especially stimulated by his story about a tree he had drawn up with his paternal great-aunts which his mother destroyed on sight. I doubt if he knew, that not only did one of her husband’s aunts have an illegitimate son, but so also did at least two of her own aunts. Such things were never spoken of ninety years ago. My mother, who died nearly 20 years ago, would most likely have cut contact with her one and only first cousin had she known that she was illegitimate. Luckily, times have changed.

As my research got under way, I became more interested in locating the diaspora than going straight up my direct lines. In the nineteenth century numerous siblings of my ancestors (mostly agricultural labourers or mariners) emigrated from the British Isles to make new, and hopefully better lives for themselves and their descendants. Others went overseas with the military or colonial service. It has been fascinating to discover how they succeeded, where their thousands of descendants live, and to have contact with far-flung family members.

Four years ago, I was given an Ancestry DNA test to help me dig deeper into my family history. I put a note on my Ancestry Member’s page to say I’d tested, including details of my GEDmatch number. I gave my closest cousins kits to help identify where my matches fitted into our tree. But there were several lines where I had to try to persuade newly-discovered, overseas cousins to take the test. As far as I was aware, this was unsuccessful.

Last month I discovered a new tree on Ancestry which had incomplete details of some of my ancestors. I left a note for the tree owner, not expecting any response. Luckily, he replied immediately, saying that he had looked at my member’s page, and was surprised that we did not show as DNA matches, because we were third cousins (3C) sharing great-great-grandparents. Nor did I match a kit he managed for my second cousin once removed (2C1R) in the same line.

Alarm bells began to ring in my head. This is one of the largest group of relations in my tree, a group which is very proud of – and partly identifies with – our shared Celtic heritage. It was one where I’d been trying to persuade cousins to test on Ancestry. I gave my new contact the names of DNA-confirmed cousins of mine in this line and a link to Blaine Bettinger’s Shared cM tool. There were too many relevant cousins in his DNA matches to list: he opened his matches to me so I could check for myself.

Instantly, I could see that I had succeeded in persuading cousins to do DNA testing with Ancestry! At least 50 of his matches were on my own paper tree at 3C2R or closer. But neither I nor my own confirmed cousins on that side matched anyone in this family. It was obvious that our shared paper trail was wrong; there was no way we were related.

Neither my new contact nor I could identify at least eight close mutual matches he had with his known cousins in this line. The mutual matches he had with each of these eight invariably included most of the rest of that group. They all had a distinctly different ethnicity from his known cousins.  My assumption was that their trees could lead me to whoever was his great-grandfather if that was not my x2 great-uncle. Given these doubts, I felt the least I could do was try to find the true parentage. I needed to identify someone of the right sex (male) who was travelling through or living in the correct isolated, rural location in the Rockies over a period of at least 15 years.

It would have been inappropriate for me to contact any of this group, and certainly my newly discovered “Not 3C” wouldn’t want to. Only one had a public tree linked to their DNA, with 21 people in it. Another three had unlinked trees with one, five and 25 people. Three had no trees but one had a locked tree of around 450. I noticed that this DNA match was managed by Susie Douglas of Borders Ancestry, a professional genealogist living here in Scotland whose blog we follow in this household. After a lot of soul-searching, I decided to contact Susie in case she was puzzling as much over her matches with my “cousins” as I was over her match to my erstwhile family.

Whilst I was waiting for a reply from Susie, I started building a “quick and dirty” tree for each of these unknown matches. I saw that the two closest, both at 3C level, had the same surname as a further possible 3C whose linked tree revealed the name behind her alias. This suggested to me that the three were siblings, maybe researching their history after one or both parents had died. An Ancestry search on their father’s name brought up a recent result in the Find A Grave Index where hyperlinks enabled me to build back several generations on both sides of their family. I had no idea to which side my “cousin” connected but suspected it was through the paternal line. Another match in this group (unlinked tree) descended from a line with that name spelled differently.

With the help of Google and comparing the two very small unlinked trees, I discovered that two distant matches for my “cousin” were themselves first cousins. I built back their shared ancestral line for several generations, once more with no idea where I should be concentrating. At that stage I could not join up the two first sets of matches.   Although my own search was not relevant to Susie’s research, she very generously worked up a few ancestral lines in a “quick and dirty” tree for this set of matches. She provided me with the surnames of their shared ancestors living in England and New Jersey, America back in the eighteenth century. Luckily for me, one of these names was the maiden name of a paternal great-grandmother of the three sibling 3C matches, suggesting that my “cousin’s” true ancestor was most likely one of her sons or, less likely, a brother.

I needed to study the census returns. The couple lived on the east side of North America and had four sons and two daughters. Based on relationship probability, I discounted the grandfather of the 3C matches, leaving three sons to research. One had died before some of the children had been born, another showed up consistently in all relevant records living in the east. However, the census showed that the second oldest son, a Government official, had moved to the Rockies sometime in the late 1880s. From that time until his death in the 1930s he lived within ten miles of my great-great uncle’s family and would have travelled extensively throughout the whole area as part of his Government duties. He never married.

I have no doubt that this man, not my great-grandmother’s brother, is the ancestor of the large group of people I hoped were my relatives. One of the children was given his mother’s first name. We shall never know which man fathered the only one of the children who was childless, and who had the same name as my great-grandmother’s mother, but they all had my ancestor’s surname.  Their descendants share great pride in the farming and engineering projects the man they believe is their ancestor carried out in the area and he was without doubt a loving and caring, “hands-on” father and grandfather after a divorce, when their mother moved away.

After careful consideration, I told my cousin what I had discovered. He was very disappointed but, given his understanding of DNA testing, not really surprised. Together we have researched deeper into the history of the area at the turn of the twentieth century. There is the possibility that the man fathered other children locally; if he did, then this could further confuse anyone in either family undertaking a detailed analysis of their DNA results.  The surprise is that none of my “not 3C”’s close relations has queried their results yet. His assumption is that finding out about ethnicity and health risks is more important for most of them. And those who do research the family do not go further back than two generations. At present, he is not inclined to share this story with them; he expects that some elderly relatives would be distraught to know the truth.

To end on a more positive note, we have now discovered that my “not 3C” is distantly related to both sides of my husband’s family, certainly through his paternal line and probably through his maternal line as well. He still has Celtic connections!  This account only serves as reminder that DNA testing comes with the following caveats, albeit often tucked away in the small print …

It was with much sadness I learnt of the passing of Robert Bolam on Saturday 30th March 2019, the very day the story of his Bolam ancestors was published online. The following blog is therefore dedicated to his memory, with sincere condolences to his son Malcolm and the rest of the Bolam family.

​Professional family historians are no strangers to being regaled with accounts from folks stating they can trace their ancestry back to Charlemagne.  It is at this point most of glaze us over and immediately lose interest.  Whilst it is true that some undoubtedly do, for the majority, even if a connection does exist proving it is another question entirely!  As many of my regular readers will know one of my ongoing personal projects is the mammoth task of mapping the farming families of Northumberland.  This month’s blog is about one such family that sits on the periphery of my own – the Bolams.   I have been promising our local butcher Malcolm Bolam that I would sketch out a tree showing his connection to this family in an organised and digestible manner, as the prolific ‘bilge’ in online trees is causing complete confusion.  Once again not a single tree is correct!

​The final prompt came whilst looking for something else which turned up the following letter written to George Aynsley-Smith (GAS) from a William James Bolam, a Land Agent living in Ravensdowne, Berwick in 1911.  

​The correspondence formed part of a communication between GAS and historian John Hodgson regarding the ever problematical Grey lineage.  Attached to the letter was a Bolam pedigree claiming descent from the aforementioned Charlemagne of which he states.  ‘I know very little about it [the tree] but if I can assist you then let me know.  My father and Uncle took a great deal of pains about the pedigree and I don’t think it can be far wrong’.  Oh dear – cue eyes skyward!  The outline tree that was attached to the letter doesn’t actually give much information about the Bolam family per se.  

​Rather, it relies on the accuracy of connections within the pedigree of the Grey family of Longhorsley and later of Milfield.  It is highly possible that the Bolam tree was based on the genealogical study into the Grey family published by Edmund Hepple in 1856, taken from the ‘Milfield Manuscripts’.  (Claire Grey has published a copy along with a transcription on her website ‘The Milfield Greys’).  However, as stated by Claire herself ‘The Hepple tree … has Charlemagne 800 at the top of it, and for that reason alone should be treated with a great deal of scepticism …  Attempts at verifying the connection between the Milfield Tree and Hepple's tree have so far proved inconclusive’.  Once again the pursuit of ‘gateway’ ancestors has obliterated a family with its own very interesting history, with links to places that will be very familiar with my local readership.  

The brother of letter writer, Mr William James Bolam was George Bolam – ‘A highly regarded naturalist of the region who published books on the birds of Northumberland and co-founded the Northern Naturalist’s Union’.  His extensive archive, which includes a family tree, (which I have not yet had sight of) is lodged at the Hancock Museum in Newcastle.  This branch of the family can be found in various census returns living in Ravensdowne, Berwick, which was the focus of a study under taken by Berwick Archives and can be freely accessed online.  Their parents were Robert George Bolam and Mary Bolam who were first cousins, both being the grandchildren of John Bolam of Tritlington and Mary Bolam of Throphill, Mitford near Morpeth.  They too may very well have been related but the exact connection, if it does exist, has yet to be established – I suspect the answer lies in the Northumbrian hills around Rothbury, Alwinton and Elsdon.

For the purpose of this particular blog, John and Mary Bolam have been taken as the foundation parents.  Mary was the daughter of Christopher Bolam of Throphill, Mitford, and his wife Jane.  Mary had three known siblings, Elizabeth b. 1758, Christopher b. 1765 d. Feb 1794 (5 months after his father) and Isaac b.1769.   Malcolm Bolam descends from Mary’s brother Isaac and his wife Jane Jobson who remained at Throphill Farm until circa 1824.  By the time their own son Isaac died in 1830 and  daughter Eleanor in 1831, although still living in the Morpeth area they had vacated the farm.  It is the Will of Isaac and Mary’s Bolam’s brother, Christopher, proved in 1796 that holds the key to unravelling the rest of the family.

​Christopher’s sister Mary had married John Bolam at Mitford on 20th May 1788.  The couple’s four eldest children were born whilst the couple farmed at Tritlington (Hebron).  John’s lease expired in 1795 when it would appear that the family moved to Brinkheugh [Brenkheugh] near Brinkburn where two further sons were born.

In 1806 the John and Mary along with their ‘five sons and a daughter’ moved to the farm of Low Hedgeley near Powburn where they stayed for 24 years and where Mary died in May 1824.[1]  She was interred at Mitford on 1 June 1824.   In 1830 John and the remaining family moved west to the nearby farms of Fawdon and Clinch which the Bolam family occupied until 1894.  John appears in the 1841 census at Fawdon with two of his unmarried children William Isaac and daughter Ann and where he died on 15th January 1848 aged 88.​

Of their five children, two, Anne and Isaac William did not marry.  Whilst Thomas married Mary Ann Young of Shiel Dykes at Edinburgh in 1853 they had no children, so the main body of Bolam descendants of John Bolam of Tritlington and his wife Mary, including the Bolam family of Alnwick stem from the couple’s remaining three sons, George, John and Christopher.  Christopher Bolam married Isabel Gibson in the mid 1820’s and together they had a large family, many of whom died in infancy as the family’s monumental inscription at Ingram bears witness.

​Christopher is known to have occupied several different farms, including Way to Wooler, Low Trewitt and Ratcheugh, where he can be found in the 1861 census.  (His cousin Isaac Milburn was living at that time in the adjacent Ratcheugh House, but the story of this extraordinary gentleman cannot be given the justice it deserves here.)  There is an interesting reference to a Bolam family at High Trewitt in the 1816 survey of Households possessing Bibles in Rothbury. 

​A search in the press of the day finds a John Bolam listed amongst other bankrupts in 1815, followed by a dispersal sale of farmstock and household goods.  (Note the term fieri facias confirming the sale was to settle unpaid debts)

Exactly where this family of High Trewitt sits in the family equation is undetermined, as it is deemed that the children of John and Mary would have been marginally too young at the time, and the entry mentions two sisters, not one.  However, it has not been totally ruled out and the names would certainly suggest a familial connection.  When combined with the interests at other farms mentioned in the area, this small piece of evidence may prove invaluable in tracing the family back in time.  

​To date the only confirmed descendant of Christopher Bolam and his wife Isabella Gibson to marry and propagate this branch of the tree was their grandchild Ellen or Eleanor, daughter of their son John Christopher.  Christopher died at Ratcheugh and was buried at Ingram in March 1863.[3]

​Christopher’s eldest brother George married Ann Liddell at Rothbury on 16th June 1825.  The couple had 5 known children, 4 of whom survived until adulthood.  Sons John and George and daughters Mary and Ann.

The two brothers would make quite a mark on the agricultural landscape of Northumberland.  The country was in the grip of the Post Napoleonic depression and the Corn Laws introduced in 1815 were having a crippling effect of agriculture.  Farms were frequently changing hands as many farmers unable to make it pay left the industry.  The Diaries of William Brewis of Mitford 1833 – 1850 includes frequent references to farms coming up for rent, and the general plight of the agricultural markets.  However, there are always those who manage to prosper despite adverse conditions, and  in Northumberland John and George Bolam were amongst their number.

​It appears that John focused his attention on farms in and around the Shawdon, Rothbury and Alwinton areas.  In 1861 he can be found visiting his brother George at Low Hedgeley, the second time the family had taken the tenancy.   On 20th January 1865 he married Ellen Thompson, daughter of William Thompson of Little Ryle at Rothbury and in July the following year their daughter Ann was born.  Just weeks later tragedy struck and John was killed in a riding accident.

(Please note Bolam researchers that this John Bolam was NOT the head of the farming family with interests in Alnwick!)
​
In 1866, his brother George was farming at Horton Grange, but as a result of John’s untimely death relinquished the tenancy to concentrate on the family’s interests nearer home.   George, aged 45 married a Catherine Hall in Edinburgh on 1st August 1873.  Together the couple would have three children, George b. 1879, Catherine Annie b. 1882 and Johnina Jane  b. 1885.  In 1881 George was ​living and farming at Alwinton but by 1891 had taken up residence at the family farm of Fawdon.  In 1893 George too met with an accident that would ultimately cause his death.

​However, the full extent of this family’s farming interest becomes even clearer in an obituary that appeared in the press preceding the dispersal sale of his various interests and makes impressive reading, particularly in light of the prevailing economic climate in which it was achieved.

​The obituary also provides significant proof of George's lineage, which on its own should prompt the re-evaluation of the majority of online family trees.  It also highlights that at the time of his death the only member of the family still to be farming was John Bolam at Bilton.  This is NOT his brother, but his cousin, the son of his uncle John Bolam and his wife Mary Proctor who was born at Wooler in 1825.  It is he who was the renowned farmer, seedsman and miller of Alnwick, and whose family established the shop on the cobbles in Alnwick, which many local readers will remember.

​As for the writer of the letter in 1911 William James Bolam - he was the nephew of John Bolam of Bilton.  He was the son of Robert George Bolam who married his first cousin Mary Bolam.  Mary was the daughter of George Bolam and Ann Liddell, and one of the sisters of the eminent farming brothers featured in the press cuttings above, thus also connecting this branch of the Bolam family to the Greys.  

Whilst this family may not be the easiest to accurately follow through the records, it is certainly not the most challenging.  The skeleton facts behind this blog were pulled together in less that 48 hours.  It is just a combination of applying the correct research techniques, knowing where to look and the application of a modicum of common sense.  If you find yourself struggling or bogged down by what appears to be conflicting evidence or facts, I would urge you to seek professional advice, rather than place information that has been ‘made to fit’ in the public domain where it can be copied all too easily.

Although the extent of farming activities of the Bolam family was undoubtedly exceptional, they do provide a fascinating indication of the mobility of farming families of Northumberland in the early 19th century.  They also illustrate how these successful families adapted to challenging economic conditions and changed their farming practice to meet demand and command higher market prices.  The Bolam family has many more familial connections not covered here, but the door has been opened to establish their earlier origins.  For now at least, I hope I have managed to steer researchers of this family in the right direction and provide a solid foundation on which to build.  Malcolm Bolam and his family will now be able to indulge in a spot of #AncestralTourism and enjoy a day out visiting the numerous places associated with his extended family, both those featured in this brief outline and others who have even more fascinating stories to tell!

[1] Obituary of George Bolam 1893;  Freereg
​ https://www.freereg.org.uk/search_queries/5c9f66b5f4040b7459219d64?locale=en
[2] Rothbury Bible census https://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/NBL/Rothbury/Rothbury1816
[3] Bishops Transcripts for Ingram ​

​Just because something is written in history books does not mean it is correct. It should be noted that this is an observation and not a criticism!   Many historians and genealogists have done excellent work in laying the foundations for understanding our families past on which we can build.  However, as the authors were or are only human they, like us, can only draw conclusions based on the information they have before them, or the sources they chose to consult.  The same applies for some of the pedigrees these histories contain.   For many researchers they are the first port of call for information, particularly in the pre-census and statutory period.  For those trying to piece together earlier generations where non-conformists baptisms and marriage information does not appear in parish registers and is in short supply, these printed pedigrees provide an easy ‘one stop shop’ of seemingly credible information.  However, they remain secondary sources.  They are not always as reliable as their reputation would suggest which is perfectly illustrated by the case in question.  It relates to three branches of the Carnaby family of Northumberland, some of whom were known to be ‘recusants’ or adherents to the Roman Catholic faith.  

The Carnaby Pedigree which appears on pages 19 – 21 in ‘A history of Northumberland’ Volume 4, published in Newcastle upon Tyne in 1893 is irrefutably incorrect in several details. Most importantly, it is missing a whole generation preceding the marriage of Ralph Carnaby to Ann Dobson at Longhorsley in 1719.  Resulting hypotheses drawn from this pedigree are therefore questionable, and researchers of this family are missing a group of descendants that may just provide the link they are seeking.
​
Below is an outline of the Pedigree as published, supposedly linking the Carnaby families of Hexham to those of Great Tosson and Todburn:

​The Northumberland History is not alone in making this fundamental error either.  Dr Annie Forster whose extensive research into the catholic families of Northumberland in the 1960s, has also failed to spot the missing generation.  It is somewhat incredulous that such eminent historians should have either missed the Will of Ralph Carnaby of Todburn dated 25th April 1702, along with annexed inventory and bond, or have chosen to ignore it.  Researchers then as now appear to be pre-occupied in establishing links with titled or landowning classes, in this case the armorial family of Carnaby of Halton.  By doing so they are missing out on vital information regarding their own family and its place in history.

When Ralph Carnaby’s Will and administration of 1702 is taken into account a very different picture of familial relationships to that recorded in Vol IV emerges.  It reads:

In the name of God amen first I commend
My soule to Almighty god and body to be bu-
ried in Rodbury [Rothbury] Churchyard and I dispose
goods as followeth
 
I give to Ralph Carnaby son to Francis Car-
naby what house and lands I have in Rod-
bury at the tutoring of his father till he
come to years
 
I give to my daughter Cissely Pringle at
the end of the leas of Todburn five yeows
and lambs for her legacy
 
I give to my daughter Jane hardy at the
end of the said lease one why stirk[1]
or thirty shilings of money for her legacy
 
I give to Ralph Pott one yeowe and a lamb
at the same time for his Legesy
 
I give to Jane Pott one why or forty of
money whether the executors hath a mind
to give her for her legacy
 
I give to Ane Carnaby wife to franke Carnaby
one yeow and a lambe at the same time
for her legacy
 
I give to franke Carnaby and Raiph Young
what husband worke geare is at the end
of this time to be equally divided be-
tween them
 
I leave Raiph Younge the farme
which I nowe injoy with what
Stocke theire is paying my debts
and Legacys afore mencioned and
to be my soll executor
 
This is my last will and Testament
being in perfect memory
his mark and sealle
Witnes our hands
 
Robert Errington
Francis Carnaby
Edward C Errington[2]

​The inventory taken shortly after his death (below) is typical of a yeoman farmer of the day with the majority of his moveable wealth being on the hoof rather than in the hand.  What is most unusual, however, is the first entry.  Whilst it is commonplace to list a horse and apparel, to make the point of itemising a sword is not! 

The appended bond dated June 1702 clarifies the relationship between the testator and Ralph Young:

The Northumberland History claims a relationship existed between the Carnaby family of Hexham and those of Great Tosson and Todburn, citing the Will of Roger Carnaby in 1713 as proof of the familial link.  Whilst this Will undoubtedly proves the link between the families of Hexham and Great Tosson, I am struggling to see how and where it verifies a link to the family of Todburn.

​Roger’s Will of 1713 tells us that:

• His wife at the time of his death was called Mary
• He was owed money from a Francis Carnaby and Richard Carnaby both of Hexham by bond
• He had a mortgage on a house at Green Harbour Court, London.
• His nephew was William Carnaby of Tosson who had a wife named Barbara.
• He had a niece called Isabella by his brother John
• He had a sister called Mary who benefitted from money owed to him by a John Carnaby, plumber in Carlisle which on her death would benefit John’s children.[3]  (Was this plumber another relation?)
• He had a niece called Mary (no father named) and a niece called Jane the daughter of his brother Richard.
• He had a sister in law called Frances who was the wife of Thomas Liddell a Glover in Hexham.
• He leaves money to a Thomas Beadland of Haggerston but no relationship is given – possibly a servant as it closely followed by a bequest of '£10 to my black boy Wandoe', his present manservant.
• He was due money upon a South Sea bill.  This was to be paid to his cousin Jane of Hexham, widow, for her children.  He also had a cousin called Elizabeth Lisle, a nephew James Winsellow, (who had a daughter called Mary Winsellow) and a cousin called Barbara Ord a spinster

What it does NOT tell us, NOR confirm, is any relationship between Roger Carnaby of Hexham’s family and the Carnaby family of Todburn.  Nowhere is the mention of any of the Todburn descendants.  The only potential ‘stray’ is his niece Mary Carnaby to whom he bequeaths £20.  This cannot be Mary granddaughter of Ralph Carnaby d. 1702 (as per Vol IV) as;

1. Ralph Carnaby junior did not marry Ann Dobson until 1719 six years after Roger’s death
   
2. The surviving Mary of this union who married Lionel Aynsley was not born until 1735.  

​It is therefore currently believed that the Mary mentioned in Roger's Will must be another daughter of Richard Carnaby of Great Tosson baptised at Rothbury in 1695, (the most likely - a baptism of another child, Richard, at Rothbury in 1700 has also been missed) or his brother John about whom very little is known other than he had a daughter named Isabella.  A familial relationship between the families has not been ruled out but nor, as yet, has it been proved.

Roger’s Will of 1713 also provides evidence of trade connections, possibly with the Carolina’s – was Wondoe his black manservant named for the Wando River in South Carolina - and what exactly is meant by the ‘South Seas’?  Is this a reference to the ‘South Sea Trading Company’ formed in 1711 which became known as the South Sea Bubble before its collapse in 1720?  Certainly the presence of Wando would suggest evidence of Roger’s involvement in the Slave Trade.  A bit of digging in the newspapers within the ‘Burney Collection’ uncovered possible evidence of trade with Virginia.

​Whilst there is no evidence to confirm this is the one and the same Roger Carnaby it is certainly possible, particularly when it is known he also had a house in London.  It is tempting to speculate that Wando was also aboard the shipped that docked in 1703 and was bequeathed £1 for every year of service until Rogers death in 1713, however, without firm evidence, speculation is what it must remain.

The above is just an extract from a much larger piece of research, which at present is set to rival if not exceed the 18,000 words of last years Master's dissertation! I must thank Archivist Sue Wood and Paul Ternent of Northumberland Archives at Woodhorn for their assistance thus far, no doubt I shall be imposing myself upon them again in the not too distant future.  Forewarned is forearmed as they say!  If you are interested in acquiring a copy of this research or indeed would like to contribute to it then please do get in touch.

[1]  A Why or Quey Stirk was a young cow or heifer.  When written in Scots the ‘qu’ is often used in place of a ‘w’.  Origin – Danish.
[2] Members of the Errington family were also recusants and known Jacobite activists.  This particular branch farmed at Old Park, Netherwitton. 
[3] Appointed plumber at St Mary’s in 1687, undertook leadwork on Tullie House, Abbey St in 1689.  Dismissed by St Marys in 1713 for substandard work, reinstated in 1721.  Son in 1717 worked on Carlisle Castle Downpipes.  Father died 4 Oct 1742 aged 87.  His children are mentioned in will of Roger Carnaby of Hexham dated 1713.  Descendants of this Carlisle line married daughters of George Hare and Elizabeth Wright of Ingram.  Is this Hare family related to the Hare family that married James Carnaby, Thomas Brewis and Thomas Collin in late 1700s and also potentially linked to the descendants of Francis Carnaby of Todburn?

​I am really enjoying the Beeb’s latest offering the ‘Victorian House’ which delves into the traditional skills and ethos that formed the basis of the ‘Arts & Crafts Movement’  and puts them into practice in the restoration of traditional Victorian country house.  Think of the colours and patterns of William Morris, the art and vision of John Ruskin and iconic stores in London such as Heal’s and Liberty and the picture will start to emerge.  

​It ran in my mind that a branch of my own family had been involved in the artistic movement of the age, but unsure as to the extent set off to investigate.  What emerged was a family surrounded by artists and artisans who were enmeshed in the social reforms of the late Victorian period to an extent more far-reaching than I had previously realised.  Added to this is an interesting back-story of loss and family that has not only been missed by all other family history researchers to date, but where it appears in online trees their history has also been portrayed inaccurately.  It appears to be a typical case of records and dates being made to fit without corroborating the evidence.  It is a sad fact that if there are 14 trees with the same information and one that dares to be different, human nature is (often mistakenly) drawn to the consensus of opinion.  This blog is intended to illustrate how some fairly basic research techniques can help avoid these pitfalls, fill the gaps in knowledge, and to share the parts of this family’s story that appear to have been missed.

​The starting point for this research was my 4th times great aunt Mary Ann Eliza Egerton, the third of 4 children born to 4th great grandfather James Egerton and his wife Alice Spriggins.  In Nov 1840 Mary Ann Eliza married artist Henry George Hine at St Marks, Kennington, Surrey.  Henry George Hine began his career as an illustrator for Punch magazine but became most well known for his landscape paintings of Sussex and Northumberland.  He the son of Hampshire born William Hine who worked his way up from an agricultural labourer to become a Coach Proprietor on the London to Brighton route until his death in 1846.

​Mary Ann Eliza Egerton and her siblings were all christened in London between 1814 and 1826.  Although their parents address, and father’s occupation is different each time, family activity prior to these dates appears to be centred round the ancient church of St Giles, Cripplegate, London.

​Of the 14 online public trees that appear on Ancestry – only 1 has spotted the 4th child!  This is probably due to the the age that appears in the transcript attached to her marriage record in 1862 to William Henry Huckwell.  Checking the original document it reads ‘age 21 and upward’.  This along with the phrase ‘of full age’ is fairly typical of marriage records at this time and should not be taken literally.  A simple check of the census records following her marriage confirms her date and place of birth and that her age at marriage was actually 39.

The Egerton children’s father James is recorded as a ‘Trimming Maker’ in 1814, a ‘Boot Maker’ in 1815, a ‘Traveller’ in 1817, but by 1823 he was a ‘Coachman’.  By the time of his son James John’s marriage in 1840 his father’s occupation had risen to that of ‘Coach Proprietor’.  Of the same 14 online trees 8 give no date of death for James and 6 state it to have been in 1829.  This date is wrong – although his demise was still before the advent of Civil Registration, a check of the newspapers graphically describes the tragic circumstances in which his untimely death occurred.

​James was buried in Maidstone, Kent on 13 April 1832.  The above account indicates that in addition to his 4 children James was survived by a wife, although his will, fortuitously written at Maidstone in 1831, makes neither mention nor provision for her.  Instead, James entrusts the administration of his estate ‘whatsoever and wheresoever’ to his elder brother John whom he makes both the ‘sole guardian’ of his children and sole executor of his will.  This would suggest that papers may have been mistaken, and lets face it, it wouldn’t be the first time!  This theory is corroborated by a notice placed by John in the press on 1st May 1832, where he refers to his brother’s children as orphans.

​No death, burial or alternative marriage has been identified for his wife Alice, nor has she been found in subsequent census records.  As such, the outside possibility remains that the couple had become estranged.

​James was also survived by his father James Egerton snr, who contrary to popular opinion did not die in 1810 and was not buried at Little Gaddesdon, Hertfordshire!  17 of 18 online trees contain this incorrect information, with the other, also incorrect as it gives the date as 1828.  James snr, a Cordwainer (or Shoemaker), described as a Gentleman in his Will also written at Maidstone 14th September 1833, actually died in 1834 and is described of Pollard Row, Bethnal Green!  He makes his only surviving son John his sole executor and residual beneficiary after making further bequests of £500 to his daughter Jane Hudson the wife of John Hudson, and £50 to his son in law John Cannee, the husband of his daughter Elizabeth Egerton.   In all James Egerton Snr and Lucretia Wood had seven known children all baptised at St Giles, Cripplegate, and possibly an eighth, Susannah baptised at St Giles in May 1776 indicating that Lucretia Wood may have required ‘a big bouquet’ at her marriage the previous September.  She is believed to have been named for Lucretia’s mother whose surname was possibly Saunders but this is unverified.

​All the children were baptised at St Giles, Cripplegate, to James Egerton and wife Lucretia.  Susannah is the exception in that the father’s name is recorded as John which has subsequently been struck through, but not amended in the original register.  Their father's occupation is consistently given as a Cordwainer – or shoemaker.  Cordwainers were one of the Livery Guilds of London and produced artisan footwear made from soft kid leather from Cordoba in Spain.  The Guild records are housed within the London Metropolitan Archives but have not been consulted as part of this research.  Several children including Jane and Elizabeth mentioned above were married at St Lukes, Old Street, as were their parents, which was built to relieve the church of St Giles, Cripplegate, as the population of London expanded in the eighteenth century.

​Six of their children are known to have survived into adulthood.  Of Susannah there is no further trace and eldest son  Thomas died in infancy and was interred in Spa Fields burying ground Clerkenwell in 1779.  Spa Fields would later became the subject of a particularly unsavoury and rather gruesome scandal.

The ‘Countess of Huntingdon Connexion’, and record set RG4 referenced in Thomas’ burial record may indicate that the family followed at some point at least, the Calvinistic movement within the Methodist Church.  This may in part explain the group baptisms of four of the Egerton children at St Giles in 1798.  It should also alert the researcher to possible non parish baptisms and references to non conformism in the parish registers for earlier branches of this particular Egerton family.
​
James’ older brother John was also a coach proprietor at the time of his brother’s untimely death.  By 1827 he had moved from London to Brighton and was running a coach from the Spread Eagle Inn to Hastings.

​Although he was good to his word and took over his brother’s business, the ‘Reliance’ coach had changed hands by May 1838.

John, then turned his hand to dealing in Corn and keeping Livery Stables from his premises in Waterloo Street, Brighton.  He married twice, and passed away at the grand old age of 90 in 1881. ​

All the children of his brother James Egerton junior’s children, had married before the 1841 census, except for the youngest Elizabeth Caroline, making it difficult to assess the John’s level of involvement in the upbringing of his nephew and nieces.

​However, Elizabeth Caroline can be found in 1841 living with her cousin Elizabeth Amy Egerton, John’s daughter by his first marriage, who in 1839 had married Frederick William Woledge, another artist of the day well known for his depictions of Victorian Brighton.  The Woledges would go on to have 11 children, 10 of whom would survive until adulthood.  (Caution should be exercised over a possible 12th child Eliza E born 1857, who appears on the 1881 census return.  As there is no record of a birth marriage or death for an Eliza E to the correct parentage, and her age is the same as that of Percy, (look at original, not transcript which is wrong), this is believed to be Percy’s twin sister Florence.)

​Although 11 children may be considered a large family even back in the day, it pales into insignificance to her cousin Mary Ann Eliza Egerton, the starting point for this research, who, together with her artist husband Henry George Hine had an eye watering 15 children, 11 of whom survived into adulthood.

​Artistic talent was strong in the Hine family to which the 1988 Christie’s Sale Catalogue bears witness, with a total of 81 lots spanning 42 pages, sadly illustrated internally in Black and White.

In terms of the ‘Arts and Crafts’ movement it was their two youngest daughters Ethel and Maude who were the most influential.  Although the quotation that the sisters came "on the one side from peasant folk and on the other from old aristocracy"[1] which is uncited, leaves me somewhat rubbing my chin as to it’s origin, there can be no doubt that these two women and their husbands were the driving force behind the establishment and running of the ‘Peasant Arts Society’ based in Haslemere, Surrey.  By the time of its inception in 1894-97, Ethel had married artist Godfrey Blount in April 1887, and Maude, Jospeh King, later the same year.  The couples together with King’s cousin Greville MacDonald, shunned mass production instead believed in ‘practising their radical beliefs of creating art for ‘love not money’ and restoring ‘country life, its faith and its craft’.[2]

​A most informative website about the movement, its work and connections to the wider ‘Art & Craft Movement’ can be found at the Peasant Arts Blogspot, together with biographies and obituaries dedicated to members of the Hine family and other prominent persons.  Needless to say the women were also passively active in the Suffragette movement of the day, and amongst other matters were the exponents for comfortable dress for women.  I am eternally grateful to the role by Ethel Blount, my 1st Cousin 4 x removed for the role she played in the removal of the corset as an item of necessity from the female wardrobe!  More can be read on the sisters and indeed the Society’s wider involvement in the Suffragette movement, at Peasant Arts & Suffragettes

​Being a little more serious, none of the sources that I have used to compile the history of this Egerton family and its story requires specialist knowledge or skills.  The records used are readily available online.  The difference between my research and that of others, is that time has been taken to cross reference the facts, and read the ORIGINAL documents rather than relying on the transcripts.  Incorrect information in family trees does in fact have far reaching implications, particularly since the advent, and exponential growth in DNA testing.  This is leading folks to believe that as they DNA match others with the same named ancestors in their trees it proves that connection, when in fact the DNA is sometimes pointing to a relationship which is either further back, or, in a different line entirely.  I myself have 2 DNA matches out of 12 with hints which suggest a connection to individuals that simply cannot be.  This is a problem that I can only see getting worse as more people test and speedily create trees copied from others without verifying the information they contain.

​
[1] Arts & Crafts Network https://www.accn.org.uk/Ethel-Blount-Maude-King/
[2] Peasant Arts http://peasant-arts.blogspot.com/p/introduction.html