Moore of Motcombe - part 4

Brothers William and John Moore had an Uncle James Bartley (see Moore of Motcombe - part 3).  Exactly how was this uncle related?

• Father's brother?  No - their father was William Moore and his brother would share that surname.
• Mother's brother?  No - their mother was Anna/Hannah Parsons and her brother would share that surname.
• Father's sister or mother's sister was Aunt Bartley?  Most likely.  (Less likely would be that someone had an unexpected surname, different from the other members of their family.)

So what was the birth name of Aunt Bartley, wife of Uncle James Bartley?  The events we are learning about took place before civil registration so we are relying on church parish registers.  I am very thankful that the registers for baptisms, marriages and burials have been transcribed and are freely available on the internet (Dorset OPC (Online Parish Clerk) Motcombe).  Another advantage is that the extended family stayed in the same parish for many years.

From the Parish of Motcombe register transcriptions (Marriages 1672 - 1836 and Baptisms 1753 - 1812) we can see that:

• James Bartlett married Harriet Parsons (Nov 1806).
• Harriet Parsons (baptised Dec 1780) was the daughter of Joseph and Mary Parsons.
• Anna Parsons (baptised May 1775) was also the daughter of Joseph Parsons (register only shows father's name at that time).

Also,

• James and Harriet/Hariot had a son Walter Bartley (baptised Nov 1807) and a son Stephen Bartlett (baptised May 1809).

Selected family members related to John Moore and his Uncle James Bartley

So the relationship between nephews and Uncle can be established from the parish registers - with the acceptance that Anna and Hannah are the same person, Harriet, Harriot and Hariot are different spellings for the same name, as well as Bartley and Bartlett being variants for the same family name.

21 siblings - part 3

Recently I reviewed the census records for the Moore family to remind myself about the various members and perhaps follow-up what happened to the younger generation when they themselves had their own families.

The records for 1841 did not include family relationships - just a list of names, ages (with each adult's rounded down to the nearest multiple of 5) and "Profession, Trade, Employment" with an indication of whether each person was born in, or out, of their present county.  However, based on the ages, it seemed reasonable to conclude that the household consisted of father, mother and four children.

For 1851 onward the census records showed that there were various combinations of sons and daughters in the household of William Moore.  My attention was caught by some unexpected lines on the 1871 and 1881 census pages:

• In 1871 there was a granddaughter Eliza age 7, still there in 1881 age 17. 
  I tried to make sense of the relationships and ages: my great-grandmother age 16 was a year younger than Eliza but was actually her aunt!

• In 1871 there was also a boarder (lodger) Charles Parsons, age 22, unmarried.  By 1881 he was head of the next household down the page, age 32 and married with a wife called Mary, also age 32.  In fact in 1881 the household of Charles Parsons included a step-son called Ernest Moore age 12.
  To summarise my surprising conclusions: the 1871 household of William Moore contained his unmarried daughter Mary age 22, a grandson age 2 and boarder Charles.  By the 1881 census Charles and Mary had married and their family comprised three children including what turned out to be Mary's son.

Eventually, I noticed the address column on the left of the 1881 census page.  The top of the page showed that William was (still) living in Commercial Road, Bournemouth (see NLS Historic Maps).  The line for his household said "No 94" ("No" being a short form of "Number"), an improvement on the previous census which had no street numbers.  Then, to my further surprise, I saw that his daughter and son-in-law in the next household were actually living at "No 94a".  This was an extended family where generations overlapped in time and space!

Therefore, if we count Eliza who was part of William's household, and his other grandchildren who were also living right there, then the total number altogether reaches 21.  No exaggeration, no poor memories, no counting miscarriages - just a close family where all those under William's roof over the years may have considered themselves as brothers and sisters.