Hayter family of Putney, Surrey England
Hi folks - was wondering if anyone can help with a brick wall
Richard HAYTER GSRX-DSZ m Ann (possibly BOULD) both born about 1761-1762 with a POSSIBLE marriage 1787 Chelsea
They appear on the rent books for Biggs Row, Putney circa 1800.
They attend church St Mary, Putney where children are christened , and family members are buried
Children
Mary b 1790
Sarah b 1793
Hannah b 1795
Anne B 1797
James Hayter aka Jimmy Jackson of New Zealand b 1801for those that are familiar with the story
Harriet
Richard b 1806 my direct relative
William b 1809
There is a Richard HAYTER bap St Luke, Chelsea 1760 - I do not believe this is my relative as a Richard HAYTER is buried just after this from St Luke Chelsea. I believe although cannot prove he died as an infant I don't think he is a relative . Also there is a Hayter family associated with Chelsea but again I do not believe this is my family sought- one of the children was called Noah and he was quite well to do when he died. His will is available and there is no mention of my Richard. My HAYTER family were anything but well to do. Also there is a Hayter family at Bagshot, Surrey with commonality of forenames (Richard, Jemima) but this family cannot be proven to be related. Certain names though are quite prevalent in the overall HAYTER family - Richard, Francis, Jemima, William but what this means is debateable. A Y DNA test shows matches to James HAYTER JACKSON proving the tree is valid back to 1800 and the DNA is linked to Devon/Cornwall, and Sussex/Kent. There is a small French/Belgian inclusion but I don't think that's of any relevance.
So in conclusion the family, Richard & Ann "appear" in Biggs Row, Putney circa 1790 or thereabouts. Before that I have no idea where they lived. Wiltshire is a hotspot for HAYTERs (with Richard being a name used often but then so is London, ie CHUBB, GOODENOUGH, etc. Neither show as a DNA hotspot on Ancestry.
Anyone able to break this wall in Putney?
Happy Christmas🙂
의견
-
Don't think that I can help much, if at all. It looks like you have done a pretty thorough job!
A few thoughts
- There are two Richards in FT. You mention GSRX-DSZ but there is also Richard Hater LZCP-YRC with the same spouse but many more children. You have been contributing to the latter.
- The marriage to Ann Bould in 1787 looks a strong possibility. As I am sure you know, Chelsea is very close to Putney. Unfortunately the image gives no clues - both stated to be of this parish.
- Have you checked the parish register of Chelsea in the period immediately after the marriage to check for any children of Richard and Ann? The gap of almost four years between marriage and first child in Putney is unusually long. I have looked briefly without success. The batch number for the period is C067053 and the film itself can also be viewed. The lack of children in Chelsea does support Richard and Ann not staying there post marriage.
- From your comments, it looks like you have already checked elsewhere. I tried a search in FMP Middlesex and Surrey baptisms for any other children of Richard and Ann and also for Richard around 1761 without success.
- For DNA to work, you need both someone descended from a sibling of Richard (1761) and that person (or, perhaps, a third party) to have traced a link back to that ancestor. This, I suspect, is an unlikely combination especially that far back.
- The Richardt Hayter from Chelsea in 1760 fits very well. You say that you do not think this is correct because a Richard Hayter was buried there a short while later. You say that you believe that he was an infant although you cannot prove this. Why do you say this? Was it that the burial register only gave a list of names with no other information? If so the Richard that died could easily have been an adult.
Regards
Graham Buckell
1 -
That's not a bad review at all. Many thanks Elder Buckell.
No 1 two Richards - have merged them into the correct Richard with ordinances etc on the correct side.
No 2. Ann BOULD - yes - have looked at this a few times and feel Ann BOULD is the correct person.
No 3. Chelsea Parish Register - I think I did indeed review for missing children but to no avail. However the Banns for the marriage depict them both "of this parish" !!
No 4. They came from somewhere but they are hard to find. The results of the Y-DNA test have returned NO HAYTER matches other than the James HAYTER JACKSON question - which indicates he was a HAYTER and took the name JACKSON at some stage.
No 5. As mentioned above. Although Ancestry shows no matches at all and Family tree DNA indicates a lot of Irish links- but- I have no Irish people in the tree at all. Another conundrum - why the Irish hits? If the family lived on the west coast of Wales or Scotland I could understand that one but they didn't, the closest was one Cornwall family who moved to London.
No 6. The 1760 Richard HAYTER - he does fil very well - my problem is the parentage/family of this Richard have children whose names do not appear in any generations after this - Noah Paul HAYTER being the obvious case in point.
A classic case of more information required!
Many thanks for the review and we'll just keep chipping at the wall.
Thanks EDH
0
