A Small DNA Match at AncestryDNA Leads Back to Potential Ancestor Mary Fielding Born 1739

I and some of my siblings recently had a match with Brian. That match suggested a common ancestor of Mary Fielding Born 1739. I thought that it would be interesting to try to figure out if this connection seems likely or not. Herre is the connection:

This is the connectioin with my sister Lori. She matches Brian at 9 cM. I match him at 8 cM, so these matches are quite small. Brian’s main tree is private, but he has this tree on the Hargreaves side:

This tree is consistent with the Ancestry connected genealogy above except that Brian’s tree stops with John Hargreaves. I do see this tree at Ancestry:

However, I see many other trees with different parents for John Hargreaves.

Slogging Through Some Hargreaves Genealogy

Brian’s genealogy is quite thorough. He has the wedding certificate for Elizabeth Hargreaves:

She was married in a Methodist Church in Nottingham. Her father was Alfred Hargreaves. Here is Alfred’s baptismala record from Burnley in 1880:

Alfred’s father was a mason.

I’ll move on quickly to Richard Hargreaves. The 1881 Census indicates that Richard was born in Brierfield, Lancashire.

In 1871, we see Richard is in Bacup:

Here is Brierfield:

This seems to be a good guess for a baptismal record for Richard Hargreaves:

A Collier is a coal miner. It appears that the younger Richard was a Miner in 1861:

This appears to be a likely marriage record for the elder Richard Hargreaves:

The elder Richard is listed as being from Roughlee in the 1861 Census. In the 1861 Census, he is from Pendle Forest:

Here is Roughlee and Newchurch in Pendle:

I believe that Pendle Forest or the Forest of Pendle would be to the North of Newchurch-in-Pendle.  This marriage differs a little from Brian’s as he has Richard marrying Ann Isherwood:

The problem with this is that this marriage takes place in Bolton and both parties are shown as being from Bolton which I feel is less likely than the Forest of Pendle scenario above. Also Ann would have been on the older side – about 31 at the time of her marriage – which may have been unusual.

Here are Richard and Ann in 1841:

They apparently have a son, John who was 12. That would mean that John was born in about 1829 – before the 1833 wedding of Anne Isherwood.

It is beginning to seem possible that the connection may be more from Colne than from Bacup:

The Hargreaves, from what I can tell were from the area of Brierfield which is closer to Colne than Bacup. I have ancstors from both the Bacup and Colne area.

Who Was the Younger Richard’s Wife?

I never established this:

The 1871 Census says she was from Sabden:

In 1871:

Ann has a daughter who is 4, so they may have married 1867 or before:

Here, Richard is a mason and his father a collier. This agrees with Brian’s tree.

Genealogy Before 1800 is Difficult – A Different Hargreaves Connection

Beforeee 1841, we don’t have the advantage of the Census. I have another ThruLines connection here:

I match Anne and Louise whose ancestry goes back to George Hargreaves.

My ancestry James Howorth married a Mary and had several children. Their first known child was Betty:

If we back up 9 months, that brings us into the end of April 1788 for a marriage:

Based on spelling of Howorth and date, James appears to have married either Mary Holt or Mary Eastwood. In a previous Blog, I favored Mary Holt as the mother.

Summary and Conclusions

  • I didn’t follow the genealogy as far as I could, but it seemed like neither line was leading me to the same common ancestor the way Ancestry showed it
  • It seemed like Brian’s ancestry may have been closer to my Colne ancestry than to my Bacup ancestry
  • I would like to check out other ThruLine ancestors for ancestry
  • The small the DNA match and the further away the common ancestor, the less likely it is of being accurate.
  • Even though these ThruLines may be innacurrate, there is still the effect of ‘where there’s smoke there may be fire’. That means that there may be another meaningful connection.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *