Family Tree branch getting wobbly.

[Dargie]

I will try to be concise, unfortunately not my strong point!

My 4xgreat grandfather Joseph Leeks(b 1745 Preston,Suffolk) was an illigitimate child born to Christian Leeks.
Christian later married Joseph Amos. She had numerous children but did not name any of them Joseph to honour her new husband until
1769.
In 1769 Joseph Leeks (b1745, Preston, Suffolk) married Mary Peck in Grt Finborough.
Baptism 18/6/1769
Marriage 9/7/1769

It has been suggested to me that the Joseph mentioned above (to whom I have developed a strong attachment)|hug| may not be the right Joseph.He thinks a different Joseph may have married Mary.

The marriage register says Joseph is from Buxhall. I realize that is not necessarily his birthplace. Would it be feasible for him to have travelled from Preston to Buxhall? (He would most likely be an ag lab, they all were!) I live in Oz so can only guess the distance to be ten miles or less.
I have checked Buxhall parish register and cannot find any Joseph Leeks born in the correct time span.

The person who has posed this question to me says he has never seen the renaming of a child whilst the first child is still living and thinks my Joseph may have died in order for her to rename a child Joseph.
I can find no record of his death young or old.

Others have told me that they have certainly seen this happen especially in the case of a new husband or illigitimate child.

Could marriage be a suitable cut off point, as death would be, for using the same name? After all he was always Joseph Leeks not Joseph Amos.

There are several fellow Leeks researchers who share my research findings.

So.....I am pleading with the clever people on this forum to help me on this one. I don't want a different 4xgreat grandfather, this one is very satisfactory!
:D
Thanks
Marj.

[Sandyhall]

Hi Marj

Looking at the info you have given could it have been an Adult Baptism so they could get married in the Church.
Have you found another earlier Baptism/Christening just after he was born in 1745.
May be he changed his religion.
Wouldn't a 2 child be Joseph Amos not Joseph Leeks as you say.

Sandy

[Dargie]

Hi again Sandy!
Thank you so much for your interest and suggestions.
I have found the baptism in Preston Register for both Joseph 1745 and Joseph 1769. The register states Joseph No 2 was the child of Joseph Amos and Christian. I also have data about Joseph No 2, he married Jemima Beeston in 1891 and died in 1813.
He was definately a different person from my Joseph 1745 who married Mary Peck.
I think that although uncommon, this could have happened unless there is very convincing evidence to the contrary.
I think that when Joseph No1 married the situation may have changed and maybe it was even considered a compliment to him that the new baby was called after him........sort of a wedding gift! |laugh1|
At 25 he was more like an uncle than a half brother I would think.And definately one was Leeks and one was Amos.
Thanks again I must solve this dilemma!
Marj.

[Sandyhall]

Marj this is bugging me now it may even drive me to |5cups| (only tea LoL)

Was the one born in 1769 called Joseph Leeks or Joseph Leeks Amos.

Sandy

[Dargie]

|sad1|Hi Sandy
Sorry I have been offline since your message. I had to drown my sorrows in Desperate Housewives! Appropriate!
The one born in 1769 was only Joseph Amos.
My 4xgreat grandaddy was only Joseph Leeks.
It seems like the person bugging me about this (not in my tree) is saying that 1. Because we cannot find a death for my Joseph he could have died young.
2. That noone ever, ever named a second child in the family by the same name unless the other had died.

Quite a few people on my Suffolk forum have assurred me this did happen especially when the first child was illigitimate and did not take on the step father's surname. One person had a family with 5 Charles in it all living.

I'll never sleep tonight!:confused: Just got another email from the "helper" and he is so adament that I must have the wrong Joseph. Oh dear, this is driving me to distraction.|5cups||5cups||5cups||5cups|and it soon will not be tea!! It is not nice to lose a 4xgeat grandfather.

[Sandyhall]

|
The one born in 1769 was only Joseph Amos.
My 4xgreat grandaddy was only Joseph Leeks.
It seems like the person bugging me about this (not in my tree) is saying that 1. Because we cannot find a death for my Joseph he could have died young.
2. That noone ever, ever named a second child in the family by the same name unless the other had died.


I'll never sleep tonight!:confused: Just got another email from the "helper" and he is so adament that I must have the wrong Joseph. Oh dear, this is driving me to distraction.|5cups||5cups||5cups||5cups|and it soon will not be tea!! It is not nice to lose a 4xgeat grandfather.

I've been away off line for awhile as Daughter has just got back from her weekend music festival 2nd day of rain so they came home, good job it was only a couple of miles up the road so they walked home but every thing is wet wet wet....

What is this "helper" giving you to prove what he is saying is true...

If you have a gut feeling about it being right stick with it and don't listen to him, I had someone sending me nasty e-mails telling me I had pinched his tree even when I sent him copies of my evidence to prove I hadn't he still wasn't having it so I stopped all access for him from seeing my trees.

Sandy

[SeaCopRimmer]

I can assure you that I have several documented cases of second children being baptised with the same name as elder siblings! It usually happened when the first named had left home for employment so the house was without a William, Henry, Anne, Jane, etc. Wonder if they thought a specific name was 'lucky':)

[mary elms]

I'm with Sandy here. This is YOUR hobby and we all have different requirements of proof. We can never be 100% sure we've got it right.

If you're satisfied with the evidence you have then I'd just make a note in the file that this link has been disputed so that if some other evidence comes up then there's a note there to remind you. Then I'd move on.

If you're not satisfied then that's another story ............


Mary.

[v.wells]

I agree with SeeCop and mary elms. I have 2 families with living children with same name, usually one is born much later than the first. Gut feelings and instincts are the only way to go. Second guessing yourself creates a minefield of uncertainty about the rest of your tree :eek:

[birdlip]

Me too Marg, you poor thing; its not nice to have someone wobbling your branches! Mary Elm's advice is very sensible... just make a note that someone has queried it.

(Insomniac replying at 2.35 am!)

[Dargie]

Thank you so much Sandy, Seacoprimmer, Mary, Vanessa and Birdlip for your interest and encouragement.
In the light of a new day and with your help I have this in perspective.

This "helper" probably means well but only got into this because I was asked by a closer cousin to send him my data. He is not actually anything to do with my Joseph. I think his connection to my Leeks family tree probably starts with the Anglo Saxon invasion!

Your combined wisdom has really helped.
His evidence is all negative ie cannot find a death registration for Joseph, therefore he could have died young and the renaming of the child as Joseph which he said never happened.
I now have proof it most certainly did.

Last night I trawled through every village in the "Cosford Data Base" (parish register transcription), a district which contains both his birth village and the village eight miles away from where it is said he came on the marriage register. Only found three other Josephs. One died at birth the other two were not in the right time frame for marriage in 1769.

I will make a (small!!) note in my tree but as it stands now I am convinced that I and my cousins (distant but real) are correct.

I now have plenty of evidence that renaming did certainly occur.
Seacoprimmers comment about leaving home is completely relevant and just as I had reasoned. The baby Joseph Amos was baptized three weeks before Joseph Leeks was married. The fact that baby Joseph's father was called Joseph makes it all the more reasonable. In fact it is perhaps surprising it did not happen earlier considering that my Joseph was only a half brother and had a different surname.

Thank you again, I really appreciate your support. One must always have an open mind but beware of unqualified strangers who want to shake your tree!!

Marj.

PS Birdlip, I hope you were able to sleep in until lunch time!
It is a proven fact that coming on line to this forum after 9pm will always result in insomnia!!:)
Maybe I should give you my late night phone number!!:D

[birdlip]

Well, not quite lunchtime, but I must admit I was still wandering around in my dressing gown at 10 o clock...

I'm glad you're feeling better!

cheers Jan

[mary elms]

:) Glad you're feeling better about things.

He's done you one favour at any rate. That trawl through the database wasn't wasted. You can be much more confident about this part of your family history than you were before. |jedi|

Mary.