GENERATION -1:
Surname : BODENHAM
For Antecedent(s) For Descendant(s)
see Page Ref. No(s) listed below:-
Parent(s):- Children:-
Husband’s Name: William BODENHAM
(His P. R. No: BOD -2/1)
b. 27 Nov. 1782
at Gloucester, St. Nicholas.
d. 15 Mar, 1809 William BODENHAM
at Gloucester, St. Nicholas b.”Gloucester’ (ch. 18 Jan. 1807 at Cardiff?)
married 15 May 1805 d. buried 27 Apr. 1807 at Radyr, Cardiff
at Cardiff, St. John (which seems to suggest that at that time the family lived in Cardiff area)
Wife 1 Ann JONES *
Her P. R. No: ?
?
at ?
?
at ?
And had a son by:- Jane (?) Also named ——William BODENHAM (P.R.No. BOD 1/1)
b. ? (christened 20 Dec. 1807 at Cardiff)
d. 1891(4) at Parkend, Lydney
NOTES.
Only recently (2005) have I discovered that the first son called ‘William’ died as an infant, which means that the above surviving ‘William’ must be the one who turned up in Gloucester, and eventually acquired the trade of ‘forge man’.
It is my belief that William senior plied his ‘mariner’ trade between Gloucester & Cardiff, and lived/passed through Cardiff on a semi-regular basis, perhaps even living there for a short while. He married Ann Jones & they had a child called William, who died after living for about 2 months. At about this time William must have been closely associated with a lady called ‘Jane’. Who became pregnant. Perhaps his wife Ann suffered from post natal depression, and rejected him? Anyway, William senior, himself, did not live long, dying in Gloucester in 1809. (The thought occurs that his death so soon after becoming an illegitimate father might be a bit suspicious).
William senior is described as a ‘Mariner’ in both baptisms, adding credibility to the idea that he could have come from Gloucester. If this assumption is correct, then as William the mariner is shown as dying in 1809, Jane would then have become a single parent in earnest, and burdened with an illegitimate child. This might explain little William’s lack of both formal education and father-influence. If there was any family tradition of having aristocratic ancestry, it would have ceased right then Perhaps also, his further errors as an adult, such as bigamy, were not therefore so surprising. However, he was not stupid.
*Ann nee JONES could well; have been a relative of William BODENHAM’ s stepfather, William JONES. (BOD -2/ 1) There is one baptised on 1 June 1792 to John & Sarah JONES at Gloucester St. Nicholas, but I cannot be sure because the surname ‘JONES’ is so plentiful.
This surviving young William is approximately the same age as William BODENHAM the mariner / waterman, living in Arlingham ss shown on sheet .BOD -1/ 2 (indeed, because that progenitor was a ‘waterman’ I had originally thought sheet BOD -1/ 2 represented the family of the first baby ‘William’ above (on this sheet), until I noted recently that the child had died in infancy). The earlier confusion has thereby fortunately reduced or disappeared.
‘There is no obvious way of discovering the identity of ‘Jane’ Perhaps the vicar mis-heard the informant and it was in fact ‘Ann’, having a second son and calling him ‘William’ in memory of the first one who died earlier that year,
Monmouth registration district is confusing because it seems to contain parts of Herefordshire and Gloucestershire.
This Page Ref No BOD -1/1