Genealogy Chat

Marjorie It is a sad hobby but at least comfort yourself wondering what Jane would think if she knew you were so upset about her after all this time. Debby

Unshriven meant she had died in a state of mortal sin, a double whammy in her case, as 1) No one had heard her confession before she died. 2) She had not been 'Churched' after the birth of her stillborn child. Some hardline Vicars would have forbidden her burial in the Churchyard proper - its unclear what happened in her case, but I think the marginal note of 'unshriven' must be significant, I didnt see it anywhere else in this Register. Olde Crone

very sad story. pardon my ignorance but what did unshriven mean at that time??

Tina I'd already DONE that story, in my head, which is why I was sobbing..... I think it was the final insult 'unshriven' which did it - poor Jane, did she get buried at the edge of the Churchyard, did they bury her dead baby with her? I really am far too sensitive for this hobby. Olde Crone

So sad indeed. But think of all the people here in her future, full of concern and compassion for her and the baby. (Not so many for Big John, however. Well, innocent or not he did live to fight another day.) Maybe I'm nuts but I like to think the fact that we care adds a few positive vibes to the universe...

Thanks for sharing this. An interesting and tragic story. Kinda reminds me of a Thomas Hardy novel (Tess of the Turbevilles). As another poster said, I think this type of thing wasn't at all uncommon.

Whatever the explanation really was, it is still a little tragedy. I often come across snippets which make me wonder what had happened. Occasionally almost an entire family is buried within weeks of each other, presumably from a contagous illness. Mother and baby buried, a child killed by being run over by a railway wagon, an itinerant found dead in a ditch, the list is endless. I have to do this research to keep my natural cheerfulness in check.

This just goes to prove that you can use the same facts to produce wildly different interpretations. Who can tell now if John Potts was the father of Jane's child, or whether she trapped him into a promise of marriage and he jilted her when he learned he wasn't the father? Maybe his actual wife was richer than Jane? Maybe upon the Banns being read the 3rd time someone came forward with an objection to the marriage? nell

I like it- I like it - boils on the bum for life, I think piles up his bum will be more painful. Sad story and I also like the story with the twist. I cried more when I found out that my ancestors had 3 daughters. one a cripple and 2 blind from birth and when their Mum died their father put them all in the asylum, I never did like that ancestor after that. I expect he had to work to look after the other children but can you imagine the shock to those girls after being cared for by their Mum and having their siblings all around them. Regards Irene

What vivid imaginations you all have, I think you could make a living writing novels. lol Have you ever thought that some of us may be tracing the wrong father, unknowingly of course? June xx

Far be it from me to take the man's side in this, but I feel this poor chap is being vilified without sufficient evidence. Poor John, there he is, madly in love with his darling Jane, she promises to marry him, they have been a tad previous in their passion and Jane is up the spout, but John doesn't mind. He loves Jane. He loves their baby. The banns are read. Then, shock horror, he catches Jane (already 6 months pregnant), in flagrante delecto with some other chap. In tears, she confesses that she has been carrying on with the other chap for months and the baby may equally well be his, not John's. Jane can't actually be sure! John is heartbroken. He rushes off and cancels the marriage. Jane, in desperation turns to the other chap (handsome, personable, an absolute rat), he laughs in her face. Jane is devastated. She wanders away from the village and lives hand to mouth, only returning when the baby is due and she has nowhere else to go. But, alas, she leaves it too late and cannot make it home in time. The baby is born in a field. It's a cold night (September can be very chilly). Jane bleeds to death and the baby dies of exposure. (Do we know if the baby died?). John is struck with remorse. He feels responsible for the deaths. Desparate for comfort, he turns to some floozy with an eye for the main chance, who makes damn sure he marries her first. No, I reckon the one who deserves the boils is the unknown putative father, who probably married a rich shrew and drank himself to death. We can but hope. Tina

Old Crone - You are too too kind to John Potts. Surely it should be boils, bum, eternity. Rita

Olde Crone That is very sad. In a small village though, everyone would know why the banns were read and when this poor girl and her baby were found dead I bet the tongues wagged. nell

Oh what a sad story. Be interested to know about the sudden marriage to someone else though - just in case he deserves the boils on his bum LOL Jan xx

Ooh You Nasty Olde Crone. We haven't yet established whether he had wart on his thingy. Ah yes, nose, that's it.

I hope John Potts had boils on his bum for the rest of his life. Olde Crone

very sad but fascinating reading all the same

poor soul. Yep, that sad. Jess

maybe the child wasnt johns?? given that the banns were read in June and they were bueried much later............. then he married somebody else very quickly...........probably turn out to be her sister I shouldnt wonder!! Ooh its like an olden day Bella magazine!

Very Very sad! Unfortunately I would imagine this was a very common thing! :(( Lib