Paul to St Just Journey

[maria]

Hi,

What a great site. Thanks for having me!!

Any help would be really appreciated. I have a Thomas Arundell who was baptised in Helston in 1719, but searches have not thrown any light upon his fate, other than a marriage between a Thomas Arundell and a Susanna Pender in 1741:

"Paul PR 172/1/2 page 112 - 1741, Thomas Arundel of the Parish of St Just and Susanna Pendre (handwritten record --- could be Pender or Pendre) of this Parish were married."

Extensive searches have shown no other possible origin for a Thomas in Penwith (nor any other nearby parish) other than the 1719 baptism in Helson.

I am trying to establish that the Thomas born in Helston is the same Thomas who married Susanna Pender and moved to Penwith. Searches have revealed only one Susanna Pender of the time and general location, born in 1715 to Robert Pender and Alice Wallish:

"St Buryan PR Baptisms 1714/15 - Susanna daughter of Mr Pender and Alice his wife 6 Jan 1714/15."

St Buryan is next to St Just in Penwith.

So, we have the Thomas born in Helston in 1719 with no evidence of his marriage or death in Helston, nor any other suitable "Thomas" in this or nearby parishes. At around the right time the only other Thomas we can find is one who married Susanna. I can trace Thomas forward to his offspring all in St Just, Penwith.

How can I prove these Thomas's are one and the same (assuming they are!)? The only records available seem to be parish records which do not contain enough detail.

Would welcome any help in solving this please.

Thank you!!!

[Cornish Terrier]

Welcome Maria.

Often times the Parish Registers are all you will have have and the details contained vary greatly from Parish to Parish and even day to day dependent on the Vicar (or Clerk) entering the details. Marriages, especially very early, will often not even record the forenma of the bride simply (as an example) John Smith was married. Prior to 1813 many registers contain only the name of the father in baptismal records and, also prior to 1813, the greater number of burial records in Parish Registers will record only the name of the deceased.

Probably the next best source would be Wills but they are dependent on, firstly, whether the deceased made a Will in the first place and secondly on whether the Will survived.

I have been looking at your particular Arundel problem and it would appear that Thomas son of Henry and Jane Arundel baptised 1719 at Helston and Susanna daughter of Robert and Alice Pender baptised 1714 at St Buryan must be the parties involved in the 1741 St Just marriage. I can find no other possibility.

What concerned me at first was the fact that Thomas did not name a son Henry after his father which, although not a 'rule', was often done. But he did name his first child Jane which would imply she was named for her mother. The last child was a daughter named Alice who would probably have been named for Susanna's mother and son William possibly named for two short-lived brothers of that name in the Arundel family.

I have also searched for Wills for this family and found none and I have found burials for a number of Thomas Arundel's siblings and for his mother Jane who was buried at Helston in 1753 'wife of Mr Henry Arundel. That entry implied that Henry was still alive but I have been able to find no further trace of him. I have also been able to find no further trace of Thomas or Susanna Arundel after the baptism of daughter Alice in 1763.

I hope that is of at least some help. And if you have any knowledge of what happened to Thomas and Susanna as well as Henry Arundel I would appreciate it if you could enlighten me.

CT

[maria]

Hi CT

Thank you so much for replying.

You have the same information I have, which is absolutely great that someone is thinking along the same lines as myself, and have the same information as I do. I am just at a dead end. I can’t find anything further. You actually picked up a really good point to why he didn’t name his first male as Henry… I really don’t know.

I have the same children as you going forward, but Thomas/Susanna just seems to have disappeared coming into St Just and what happened afterwards. I can’t even find where he was living at the time of moving on any MDR I am beginning to think it’s going to be an unsolved mystery.

I will keep digging and if I find anything more, I will for sure let you know. Thanks again.

Maria

[Cornish Terrier]

It is possible this family ended up around the Linkinhorne and St Cleer area. There is a family tree on Ancestry that suggests this but the couple of things I looked at didn't quite match up with our known information. That is to say that some burials mentioned where an age was given was out by several years when compared to the baptisms.

However, I just had another look using the OPC site and in one instance at least there is enough to indicate that Ancestry information might be worth further exploration.

For example - there is a marriage at St Cleer in 1795 for a John LUCE of Linkinorne to an Alice ARUNDEL of St Cleer. There do not appear to be any children for this couple, at least not in Cornwall, but there is a burial for Alice Luce at Linkinhorne in 1837. Alice is recorded as being age 69 at the time of her burial which, if accurate, would place her birth at around 1768. Baptismal records show that your Alice was baptised in 1763 which is 5 years difference.

Why it is possible that this could be the daughter of Thomas and Susanna is that the OPC database shows that the daughter of Thomas and Susanna is the only Alice Arundel (of any spelling) baptised in Cornwall between 1641 and 1790!!

Then there is a Susannah Arundel buried at St Cleer in 1795. Her age is recorded as 74 at burial which suggests she was born about 1720 or 1721 yet Susanna Pender was baptised in 1714/5 so again we have an age differece but this time of about 6 years. There is also a Thomas Arundell buried at St Cleer in 1798 but his age does not appear to have been recorded.

There do not appear to be any Arundell Wills up that way unfortunately but perhaps there is enough in the above to suggest it might be worthwhile you exploring a little further.

CT

[maria]

Wow CT 😀

This is great. Thank you so much.

It does add a bit more into the line for me to follow up, but I still can’t connect the family as being Thomas and Susanna from Helston, and why they moved to St Just. I’m guessing it’s because of mining and work.

I have never joined ancestry as I’ve heard a lot of things that the records are not correct, so I have stayed away from it.

I have been looking at what you said earlier, as to why Thomas and Susanna didn’t name their first male child, Henry. It looks like they’re first born was a Thomas, which I guess is named after himself. I couldn’t find the burial of Henry either after his wife, Jane died in 1753.

I’ve got some more digging to do, but you have been great and have me excited about starting up some research again. 🙏🙏

[Cornish Terrier]

There is nothing to say children 'had to be' named after grandparents but more often than not it can be seen in Cornish families at least into the 19th Century. But it is certainly not unusual if it did not happen.
In the case of Thomas Arundel it may simply have been a case of 'too many daughters' and he needed just that one more son to name Henry and never made it.

The move of Thomas Arundel to the St Just area may nave been in some respects due to Susanna's family. I don't know what his occupation was but if it is this family at St Cleer/Linkinhorne then it may well have been connected to his occupation or trade.

It is certainly worth investigating further to see if you can find more evidence of the family in the east of Cornwall.

CT

[maria]

Hi CT 😀

So I have been busy! We know that Thomas was living in St Just when he married Susannah Pender in Paul on 11 Jul 1741. Their first child Jane was baptised privately four months later in Paul on 18 Nov 1741. This does not mean that the couple were living in Paul rather than St Just as it was common for a first-time mother to return to her own mother’s home for the delivery, and Susannah was born in Paul.

Baby Jane was then baptised again in St Just on 24 Jul 1742, a year after her parent’s marriage. The baptisms in St Just of a further 7 children of Thomas and Susannah identified as : Thomas (bapt 21 Jun 1743), Elizabeth (bapt 1 Nov 1746), Mary (bapt 19 Aug 1749), William (bapt 7 Jul 1751), Ann (bapt 6 Jan 1755), Honor (bapt 16 May 1858) and Alice (bapt 6 Jan 1763).

Most of Thomas’ children married in St Buryan:

25 Mar 1771 Elizabeth married in Paul and settled in Madron as the wife Thomas CHURGWIN, ropemaker.
•28 July 1775 – son Thomas, described of as from St Buryan, marries Margery ELLIS in St Buryan (He is referred to a Jr implying that Thomas Sr is also in the parish or locality).
19 Feb 1776 – daughter Mary marries James ELLIS tinner in St Buryan. (She is described as a sojourner so wasn’t settled in St Buryan).
24 Dec 1786 – daughter Honor, described of as from St Buryan, marries Thomas HOSKYN husbandman in St Buryan.
18 Oct 1788 – daughter Anne, described of as from St Buryan, marries James ELLIS in St Buryan.

In St Cleer on 24 May 1795 Alice ARUNDEL of St Cleer married John LUCE shoemaker of Linkinhorne.

The Arundell family first appear in the parish records in 1780. The overseers accounts for that year record that £6 1s 1d was paid out providing food, clothing and household items for Thomas Arundel, his wife and daughter, who had been staying at Henry Borrow’s house. This possibly could be Thomas, Susannah and their youngest unmarried daughter Alice, who would have been around 16/17 years old.

If Thomas and his family were supported by the parish of St Cleer then it may mean that Thomas had satisfied the JP that he had settled status in that parish. To have claimed legal settlement Thomas must have been either been born in St Cleer, been apprenticed or in service there, held public office or paid the parish rate, or rented property in the parish worth over £10 per annum. The family are first mentioned in the St Cleer parish records in 1780 as having stayed at Henry Borrow’s house.

So if they first appear staying at the house of Henry Borrow, a local yeoman from a significant local family with connections in Liskeard, Is it possible that Thomas and his family were seen as being a distressed family closer to the Burrow family’s own status.

There is no record of a Thomas being born in St Cleer, so maybe Thomas is the Thomas from St Just, and the most likely qualifying condition that Thomas might have met is if he had in the past been apprenticed to a master in St Cleer.

Possibly an avenue worth exploring is whether Thomas had been apprenticed to a member of the Borrow family in his youth, which might explain why yeoman Henry Borrow had been willing to house Thomas and his family in 1780.?

Is it possible that Henry Arundell could have found a position for his son Thomas in St Cleer, possibly in connection with the Borrows family, as Henry Borrow appears to have housed the family in when they arrived in St Cleer.?

More research to do.
M 😀

[Cornish Terrier]

You have been busy!

Just to keep you on your toes - it might be worth keeping in mind that you need to keep your options open and not narrow your field of vision too much. Although a Thomas and a Susanna Arundel who appear likely to have been your St Just couple were buried at St Cleer and what appears to be their daughter Alice was married in that area it is always best to keep checking for anything that might 'throw a spanner in the works'!

For example, I was just taking a bit of a look around my database and on the OPC site to see if I had any of the marriages you mention in recorded. It was while looking at the OPC site that I found something that might give you some more to think about regarding the information in the Parish records you referred to.

There was a Thomas Arundel with wife Mary whose first child appears to have been baptised at Whitstone in 1754. (Whitstone is a Parish on or near the head of the Tamar River in the North of Cornwall and it borders Week St Mary to the West). All subsequent children for this family from 1755 through 1769 were baptised at St Breward which is separated from St Cleer only by the Parish of Altarnun.

It might be worth considering that the St Cleer Parish records might refer to this couple and, perhaps, their youngest daughter Philippa who was baptised at St Breward in 1769.

You need to make sure to investigate everything that might be related and to eliminate anything that can be proved not to belong. Once everything that can be proved irrelevant is discarded then what remains must almost certainly be correct. (And I must stress the phrase 'almost certainly' because I have been through this process many times and occasionally the end result just does not seem to be right)

CT

[maria]

I understand - thanks! But its Thomas and Susannah who continued to receive support from the parish of St Cleer for the rest of their lives, and indeed were buried at parish expense, no mention of a Mary in St Cleer at all.

[Cornish Terrier]

I was thinking more of the family and daughter receiving aid from the Parish and suggesting the possibility that, given St Breward is so close to St Cleer, it may have been Thomas and Mary and their daughter Philippa rather than Thomas and Susanna whose daughter Alice in 1780 would have been about 17.

Always best to double-check so that one or other can be definitely dismissed.

CT

[maria]

Hi CT

Totally makes sense!! Always best to double, and triple check, and try to exclude any of the possibilities as you mention!! It’s always good to have someone put that gentle reminder into your mind, that there are other possibilities that need to be researched just in case we go down the wrong path. Thank you so much! 😀M

[Cornish Terrier]

Always happy to help - I have fallen into these little traps many times!

CT