GENERATION -3:
Surname : BODENHAM
For Antecedent(s) For Descendant(s)
see Page Ref. No(s) listed below:-
Parent(s):- Children:-
Jane BODENHAM
b. 28 Aug. 1743 at Newnham
d.
John BODENHAM
b. 9 Dec 1744 at Longhope
d.
Husband’s Name: John BODENHAM Mary BODENHAM
(His P. R. No: BOD -4/10) b. 18 Dec 1748 at Taynton
b. 29 Apr. 1716 d.
at Taynton
d. ? Nance BODENHAM
at ? b. 23 June 1752 at Huntley
married 2 May, 1742 d.
at Huntley, Glos.
Jane BODENHAM
b. 21 Dec. 1755 at Huntley
Wife 1 Mary JONES d.
(Her P. R. No: ?)
b. ? Robert BODENHAM (P. R. No. BOD -2/10)
at ? b. c.1757 at Huntley?
d. ? d. 10 June 1824 at Huntley (Will)
at ?
Hannah BODENHAM
b 30 May 1761 at Huntley
d.
NOTES
Subsequent research indicates that the sheets BOD -3/10 and BOD -4/2 ought to be assembled as shown on BOD -4/2A which in effect combines both families under the same progenitor, John, who remarried.) J.B. August 2008.
Earlier conjecture:-
These events are listed together although the thought that they constitute just one family can not yet be proved. Nothing is known of the parents other than their given names. Whether it is correct to assume that all these locations are correct is not known. If Robert 1757 fits in here is pure conjecture, except that this is where he lived and died, and the parents shown above are by far the most likely ones to be his, because:-
‘John & Mary’ (above) are having children in the correct location and their family neatly brackets the correct date, but,
‘Robert & Hannah’ had their own son Robert born in 1761 who died in 1778, and,
‘Richard & Sarah’ at Awre/Newnham are in the wrong, more distant location, and are the family ancestors of Bob Everett of Churchdown who has meticulously researched his family there, and,
‘Thomas & Jane’ lived in Minsterworth and all their offspring were listed in the Minsterworth register, which in any case, would lead the family trail back into Minsterworth where it would fit into the system, but is the wrong location at this time and in this context, and,
‘Humphrey & Mary’, also of Minsterworth, (wrong location again) were essentially too old, having had their family from 1731 to 1745.
There are no other known candidates, so Robert 1757 must fit into the above family..
His will is located behind the tentative sheet which enumerates his family (BOD -3/ 10), and, if there is any continuity in the use of any similar given names he might have chosen for his children, it can be checked therein. It is odd that the name of the first child, Jane, 1743, is used again in 1755, but it is possible that the first one died young.
In any case, only ‘Robert’ and his elder brother(?) ‘John’ could have carried on the family surname, their other siblings being all female.
This Page Ref No. BOD -3/ 10