I wonder if anyone has sorted out the parentage of the Joseph Meek who married Ann Harris at Ruardean in 1779. I've seen some discussion on the forum about Ann but not about Joseph. Apparently he was buried in 1819 aged 69 giving a birth date c. 1750.

There are 4 potentials if we only consider Ruardean and assume that his age at death was correct within 5 years.
Son of Francis and Rachel bap 1746
Son of William and Alces bap 1747
Son of John and Elizabeth bap 1749 and
Son of James and Elizabeth bap 1750.

Is Francis Meek, a witness at Joseph and Ann's marriage, a significant factor or was he (like Joseph Harper) a regular witness at marriages?

I've now seen potential father John's will dated 1771. This confirms his children but does nothing to help decide which Joseph is which.

Does anyone know anything that might help?

Thanks, Irene

The new addition to Ancestry re: transcribed Gloucester Wills 1541-1858

Lists 55 MEEK/MEEKE/MEEKES/MEEKS

These are the Ruardean's

John - 1754 - Inventory
Francis - 1727 - Will (burial 2 September 1726 - Ruardean)
John - 1754 - Will
[b]Walter - 1762 - Will ***** His Will, lists Son, Francis, Wife Elizabeth and daughter Hannah, now wife of John BRADLEY[/b] + eldest daughter Margaret, now wife of William Gagge - and other children etc. etc.
John - 1771 - Will
Francis - 1781 ***
George - 1786
George - 1812
Thomas - 1823
Thomas - 1827
Moses - 1828
John - 1841
George - 1853

No James MEEK Will listed -

***

Had a quick look at Francis 1781 Will, Yeoman of Woodside - he just mentions, a couple of names including his sister Hannah BRADLEY, (Niece -Hannah BRADLEY, 4 large Pewer Dishers & Plates, 1 Oak Table) & Nephew, Richard Bradley - £50) + Brother-in-law John BRADLEY -

(buried at Ruardean - 11 April 1781 - listed as a Bachelor)

Hannah MEEK married John BRADLEY - 14 October 1753 - at Gloucester Cathedral (Fod records)

also Nephew : Joseph, coalminer of Ruardean, son of my brother John left him 1 shilling.

(I thought the writing said NOOKE, but it appears to be MEEK, the writer does his "e's" like "o's"

Mentions a Stephen YEMM? his friend

---

The 1727 Francis MEEK - wife Margaret - Will is signed, Frances MEEKE (Senior)

Hope this helps.

This is the marriage of

Walter MEEK - of Ruardean (29 June 1720 at Walford)

to

Elizabeth HALE of Ruardean

As in previous reply, his Will - confirms, he is the father of

Francis (just left him a shilling)

Youngest daughter Hannah - now the wife of John BRADLEY

Eldest son, John

Eldest daughter, Margaret, now the wife of William GAGGE

Daughter Elizabeth - wife of John WILLEE?

Daughter Mary (Spinster)

Wife: Elizabeth - two houses - now with tenants, William HATTON and John HARPER

----

Walter MEEK's baptism is on FoD records - 3 January 1683/1684 (old/new date)

son of Francis & Margrett - so the Will of Francis MEEK - 1727 is Walter's father.

----

Marriage at Ruardean - 5 September 1680

Francis MEEK married Margrett LAMB (by Licence)

Irene

I too would be interested in the answer to this. Although my main interest is the Marfell family, I have 816 Meeks including 18 Joseph's.

I cannot guarantee I am right, but in my Family Tree I have the Joseph who married Ann Harris as the son of John Meek 1709 & Elizabeth Smart 1711.

As has been said, the Joseph Harper witness can be ignored as a Church official, there are a number of related Francis - I have 8 plus 2 femail Frances which doesn't need much of a writing error as a witness. In my tree, if I am right, he has an uncle Francis 1716/1791.

Nice work MPGriffiths. The Wills you have mentioned have been useful. I had William Gagg and Margaret in my Family Tree, not knowing her surname. Neither are related to me, but their offspring have many links to others who are related. The baptism record for William Gagg shows "Base son of a stranger" his mother Elizabeth Gagg.

Jim Ashton

The Will of John Meek - 12 Sept 1771
lists children, Elizabeth, Ann, Joseph, Phebe & Mary

Joseph get's £10 and is the Executor.

----

Thanks for this summary. It does help but is not definitive. I had seen the wills and it's interesting to establish this particular family line. I had been inclined to discount this descent for my Joseph because his sons were coal miners of limited means. The wills you mention would indicated that Joseph himself was a coal miner. Does this imply some kind of ownership or share in a coal mining venture? Or as I had originally assumed, just a coal mining labourer.

We do deal in probabilities for earlier events and on balance I'm inclined to accept the descent from Francis then John & Elizabeth down to my Joseph - at least for the time being. Perhaps further information will emerge to get rid of other candidates.

Thanks very much,
Irene

Hello Jim:

I'd seen Joseph as being the son of John and Elizabeth too but there didn't seem to be much evidence. Now at least, there are some details which help. That Joseph is a coal miner is definitely a plus. Joseph also names his eldest son John - not convincing in itself but perhaps just a clue. Unfortunately, there are no offspring named Elizabeth or Francis. On balance, I'm getting closer to believing it.

Best wishes, Irene

The Joseph who died in 1819, aged 69, is marked in the GFHS Burial Index as a shoemaker. I hope this doesn't confuse the issue.

Aagh! Of course, it does cause problems. Presumably, then, this Joseph was not the son of John and Elizabeth MEEK because that one was a coal miner. However, I'm not sure why I chose to believe that this burial belonged to the Joseph who married Ann HARRIS. It's a standard belief looking at family trees belonging to other folks but presumably there's no evidence for that since the marriage and children's baptisms seem to be silent on the occupation. There is another suitable burial in 1805 for a Joseph aged 55. No occupation given but just as likely, it seems to me.

It's been quite a while since I looked at this family and now I know why. I got inspired by the wills and thought that the problem might have a solution but I'm as stuck as I ever was.

Certainly 2 of my Joseph's sons were coal miners. However, very strangely, Joseph's great grandson William Henry MEEK born at East Dean in 1854 was a coal miner in 1871 but by 1881 was a - Shoemaker!

I wonder if there will ever be enough evidence to make a reasonable choice.

Thanks so much for pointing this out to me.

Regards, Irene

The Will of John MEEK of Ruardean - mentions his Son, Joseph, and daughter, Elizabeth, Ann, Phebe & Mary

By using the Advance Search for children of John & Elizabeth MEEK at Ruardean

Betty - 1739
Betty - 1746
Sarah - 1748
Joseph - 1749
Shusanah - 1750
Feby - 1752 (assume Phebe)
Mary - 1753

By using the Advance Search - Francis MEEK didn't witness too many marriages - just 5 at Ruardean

1767- George ROBERTS to Betty MEEK
1768 - Richard VAUGHAN - to Betty GAGG (see GAGG previous reply i.e. Margaret MEEK married William GAGGE
1769 - William GAGG - Anne YEME
1775 - John GAGG to Priscilla MEEK
1779 - Joseph MEEK to Ann HARRIS

William & Margaret GAGG - at least two children at Ruardean : John 1751 and Mary - 1753

There is a Gagg tree on the net - giving these children of William & Margaret at Ruardean - William 1744, Thomas 1749 and Joseph 1751 **

The Fod Records give the child name of John - 1751 , however, the Church of Latter Day Saints has : Joseph - parents William & Margaret

http://www.alangagg.f2s.com/

Thanks for this. It would seem to confirm that Francis MEEK was a witness at family weddings rather than a regular witness to any marriage. Also, if this is the Francis of the 1781 will, then he was Joseph's Uncle and John's brother.

I notice that Ann (nee HARRIS) was buried in 1803 (wife of Joseph). So does it seem likely that Joseph lasted a further 16 years? Or more likely succumbed to black lung or similar only a couple of years later in 1805.

Abandoning the 1819 burial of the shoemaker, does make the rest of the scenario fit better. But it's all circumstantial at best.

I think I'm going to go with the new information but leave copious notes about other possibilities. If it's incorrect, somebody might sort things out one day.

Thanks to all,
Irene

The Will of John MEEK of Ruardean - mentions his Son, Joseph, and daughter, Elizabeth, Ann, Phebe & Mary

By using the Advance Search for children of John & Elizabeth MEEK at Ruardean

Betty - 1739
Betty - 1746
Sarah - 1748
Joseph - 1749
Shusanah - 1750
Feby - 1752 (assume Phebe)
Mary - 1753

By using the Advance Search - Francis MEEK didn't witness too many marriages - just 5 at Ruardean

1767- George ROBERTS to Betty MEEK
1768 - Richard VAUGHAN - to Betty GAGG (see GAGG previous reply i.e. Margaret MEEK married William GAGGE
1769 - William GAGG - Anne YEME
1775 - John GAGG to Priscilla MEEK
1779 - Joseph MEEK to Ann HARRIS

William & Margaret GAGG - at least two children at Ruardean : John 1751 and Mary - 1753

There is a Gagg tree on the net - giving these children of William & Margaret at Ruardean - William 1744, Thomas 1749 and Joseph 1751 **

The Fod Records give the child name of John - 1751 , however, the Church of Latter Day Saints has : Joseph - parents William & Margaret

http://www.alangagg.f2s.com/

This 1751 child is presumably yet another candidate for Joseph Meek born c. 1750. However looking for the marriage of John Meek with Elizabeth gives a 1745 marriage to Elizabeth SMART. Back to the wills gives the will of Henry SMART in which he mentions Joseph Meek, a collier, the husband of his daughter Elizabeth. So now with naming patterns we have eldest son of Joseph named John after his father, 2nd son named Joseph after himself, 3rd son named Henry after wife's father. So the children of John and Elizabeth baptized before 1745 must be for either a different couple altogether or for a previous wife also name Elizabeth or Betty.

It's quite a tangled web and I'm not sure that things are getting any clearer for my Joseph's ancestry but we are certainly making progress with the coal mining Joseph son of John and Elizabeth nee SMART.

I'll keep digging.

Thanks a bunch,
Irene

I think "A" Joseph dying 1819 aged 69 (i.e born 1750)is not necessarily the Joseph we are talking about. Apart from the Joseph born 1749 who married Ann Harris, I also have "A" Joseph born 1750, son of James Meek and Elizabeth Rudge, also a Joseph Meek born 1746 son of Francis Meek and Rachel Vaughan.

Jim Ashton

Irene

MPGriffiths will data, helps me to think that I have it right :
The Will of John Meek - 12 Sept 1771
lists children, Elizabeth, Ann, Joseph, Phebe & Mary

Joseph get's £10 and is the Executor.

In my Family tree I have the offspring of John Meek & Elizabeth Smart as :
Betty baptised 7 Sep 1746
Ann baptised 7 Feb 1747
Sarah baptised 2 Oct 1748
Joseph baptised 10 Dec 1749
Susannah baptised 23 May 1750
Phebe baptised 15 Mar 1752
Mary baptised 20 Sep 1753

Sarah & Susannah could have been dead when Will drawn up.

Will data often reveals some surprises regards the wealth of the deceased, some are more thrifty and in some cases, we will never know how they acquire the money.

Jim Ashton

Hi MPGriffiths

Thank you for picking up on my interest in the Marfell family.

I am grateful for your interest, but as I am in possession of all the wills you have mentioned, I am concerned that others might use as fact the information you have included. Unfortunately - as is the price of transcribing part of a document, which itself was taken from another web site, some inaccuracies have occurred.

Not wishing this Meek posting to be swamped by Marfell information, I will start another thread Marfell Wills.

The new posting Marfell Wills :

http://forum.forest-of-dean.net/index.php?id=43467

Jim Ashton

Hello Jim:

I agree with what you and MPGriffiths have said. I had all of those Josephs too. I was hopeful that the wills would sort things out.

The documentary evidence back to the Joseph MEEK who married Ann HARRISON is reasonably convincing. My problem is establishing which of the several Josephs this one is. There's not sufficient evidence from the PR's alone and not even when you add in the wills but we are building a set of circumstantial evidence which may hang together enough unless further evidence comes to light to refute it.

The John who married Elizabeth SMART, had a son Joseph baptised 10 Dec 1749. This is entirely consistent with age at burial of 55 in 1805 or for that matter age of 69 in 1819. The other Joseph who fits this age criterion closely is the son of James and Elizabeth. That is, if we only consider Ruardean.

Naming patterns for children of Joseph and Ann (nee Harrison) do lend credence to his father being John and his maternal grandfather being Henry though they don't seem to name a daughter Elizabeth after either one of the potential mothers.

The wills for John Meek and for Henry Smart would indicate that Joseph was a coal miner or collier. If he was managing the coal mine then he might survive to be 69 years old but if he had been a hewer, say, then the death at 55 is much more likely. 10 generations of coal miners in the family tree give the experience that longevity is pretty unusual for this occupation.

I'm not convinced yet, but am definitely leaning towards Joseph son of John and Elizabeth (nee SMART). By the way I can eliminate Susannah (not mentioned in the will) as there's a burial for her in October 1750. We would also have to transform Sarah baptised in 1748 to Ann mentioned in the will. This is not out of the question as I've seen this kind of thing before. It would have been better though not to have to do it.

There's definitely more work to do here. I'm hoping we'll be able to build a good case eventually.

Best wishes, Irene

Hello,
The will of Henry Hale states that his daughter Elizabeth married John Meek, ground collier, not Joseph.
Lesley