Hannah hooper dating outdoorsy guys dating site
There are still others whose lines do not tie in to date but may become evident when other evidence is brought in.
Although very much information has been supplied by Marshall Mossop and George K.
From my own research I believe the above to be the more likely scenario for reasons below.
There are other mistakes in this chart which was very well compiled but before the benefits of IGI and other records being available) I believe that the children of Richard and Thomas probably married each other, i.e. So there were two sets of cousins married, both William and Margaret, one of Rackes and one of Bankhouse, Gosforth.
Even so, it is circumstantial that her maiden surname was Moscrop and that she was William’s cousin.
THOMAS Baptised 2 July 1598 buried 16 April 1668 Married Dorothy 6 children of which 2 died young.
I have looked in every imaginable place for a will of William of Bankhouse without success.
Instead of using two people living in Gosforth itself, William obviously had to attend from the parish of St. I think this makes it almost certain that William and Barnard were also children of William of Bankhouse but I have no proof.The initial research came to me through George Kendall Gillberry who had collected papers passed down through Ruth Geldart (a founder member of Cumbria F. S.), Arthur Brewin (grandson of Clement and Martha Mossop (neé Coulthard ) of Rottington, Dr. This input would not have been possible without the contributions of Marshall & Jean Mossop, George Kendall Gillberry, the late Grant Dixon, Maggie Blyth and all the other persons who have added their own family line. Mossop who was descended from the Seascale/Lincolnshire branch.In December 1619, William of Rackes died and his administrator was his widow Margaret.In December 1622, Margaret, widow of Ponsonby died (presumed widow of William of Rackes). It therefore appears that William of Rackes and his wife Margaret had no children, which the above mentioned chart showed them as having and this is why I think the parentage should be reversed.
The above covers the known lines of those researching so far and linking back to William of Prior Scale.