Margaret wife of John Richards of Gulval, d. 1723

[trencrom]

I have not found a record of the marriage, but they had the following children:
John, christened 11/5/1667, buried 17/5/1667 at Gulval,
Clarinda, chr. 16/11/1668, marr. Thomas Ellis,
Dorothy, chr. 21/4/1672, bd 13/1/1697/8 at Gulval,
John, chr. 29/8/1675, bd 23/6/1718 at Gulval,
Francis, chr. 8/12/1678, marr. Catherine Jose 4/11/1701 at Gulval, 6 children, bd 4/8/1739 at Gulval,
Elizabeth, chr. 13/11/1682,
Mary, chr. 15/2/1685.

Does anyone know Margaret's maiden name?
The given names "Clarinda" "Dorothy" "Francis" and "Elizabeth" do not appear in the previous generation of the Richards family, so they might be indications of names in Margaret's family -- whoever they were.

[Cornish Terrier]

Don't know much about this family but am doing a bit of a search to see if I can find anything for you.

It seems obvious that the marriage was not at Gulval or you may have found it.

But, even if you did find it at Gulval, I would think that the entry might not include Margaret's maiden name unless she was of a family of prominence.

It may be that the marriage occurred in a Parish, such as Sennen or St Levan, for which PRs prior to about 1700 are no longer extant.

I have just done a check of IGI for any marriage for a John RICHARDS using a search term of 1665 +/- 2 years and could find only one record that might be possible.

The marriage was at Phillack so I have now just checked my copy of Phillimore & Taylor marriages for that Parish.

This just MIGHT be who you are looking for:-

PHILLACK

John Richards & MARGERY NICHOLL, of GULVAL married 26th February 1665

Furthermore - there are (according to the Phillack Baptisms Transcript) NO Richards children baptised at Phillack between 1660 and 1679.

Hope this is of help to you.

[trencrom]

That looks very interesting, and could well be it.
Thanks you very much Cornish terrier.

[Cornish Terrier]

You are most welcome, my friend.

This is possibly why our friend NRT nicknamed me 'Cornish Terrier' many years ago.

But - for others looking at this information there may be another lesson to be learned.

Anyone who has spent time looking at 'old records' (and some not quite so old) will, many times, have been confused by the handwriting.

I certainly have - and it has, on many an occasion, taken me a long time (in some cases years) to determine the correct interpretation of some of that writing.

In this case the query was about 'Margaret' but, if my finding in Phillack is correct, it may be that the name was written as 'Margerey'.

Many a time I have seen this and also seen it (done so myself) transcribed as 'Margaret'.

When looking at transcriptions - always consider that the transcriber may have had some difficulty with the original document.

Also - try to get a look at it yourself.