MARRIAGE ?
CHILDREN
1679 MEEKE Jeremy John Elinor Ruardean
1682 MEEK John John Elinor Ruardean
1684 MEEK Thomas John Elinor Ruardean
1687 MEEKE Jane John Elianor Ruardean

Its a challenge with transcriptions that in good faith the transcriber will come up with typically what is familiar to them / looks right so yes Elinor when the handwriting may appear as Elino/ Alino/Aliro/ etc. (the instructions that we gave the Transcribers was very much type what you see)

Pity there are no ages of Elinor in this record (there is an Elinor as a daughter of Jeremy too) the Elinor/Jeremy family names is a potential hint too

Year: 1722
Month: Dec
Day: 2
Surname: MEEKE
Forenames: Elinor
Residence:
Age_at_death:
Officiating_Minister: [not stated]
Event: Burial
Cause_of_death:
Memoranda:
Notes:
Register_Reference: P275 IN 1/1
Page_No: 231
Parish_Chapel: Ruardean

useful notes added by the transcriber here ;-
Year: 1645
Month: Oct
Day: 17
Parents_Surname: DUBERLEY
Child_Forenames: Elinor
Fathers_Forenames: Jeremy
Mothers_Forenames: Elinor
Mothers_Surname:
Residence:
Occupation:
Officiating_Minister: [not stated]
Event: Baptism
Memoranda:
Notes: Entry is faint and difficult to read. Child's name is probably Elinor rather than Joan or Ann. Dai si proably Oct 17 rather than Oct 1.
Register_Reference: P275 IN 1/1
Page_Number: 108
Parish_Chapel: Ruardean

(Jim A. RIP)

Much of my information of more modern times (if that's the correct term for the 18th century) came from correspondence with the late Jim Ashton who had extensively researched his Marfell and Meek ancestry.

Regards

-Colin

As Slowhands has quite rightly mentioned evidence is thin on the ground, so substantiating any of the lines of descent is often near enough impossible.

It's easy for errors to creep in : for example, there were two couples in the Ruardean area. Both called William and Sophia Knight - And both having children around 1800 - one of the wives maiden name was Meek (not the same Meeks as above) and the other Walding. I have no idea how to separate out some of the births and most Websites do not even try, attributing all the children to one couple.

All the best - Nick

John is given as married and dies in Ledbury - 20 odd miles from Ruardean - not impossible, but I be happier with Ross on Wye.

So as I understand from your reply there is no documentary evidence supporting the baptism date of 16 Apr 1655 for Francis Meek and there is no documentary evidence available that his parents were John Meek (1626 - 1734) and Frances Hale (1629 - 1670) ?

All those years ago the Bishops Transcripts had not been added to this site (example his marriage above)

The Latter Day Saint (LDS) trees give approx 1665

I was wondering if anyone has any further information on a source with image, which would confirm the details.

http://forum.forest-of-dean.net/index.php?mode=thread&id=1644#p1644

Slowhands has traced the Meek line for this family to Francis Meek & Margaret, with an LDS record of a baptism in 1655 for Francis with his marriage to Margaret Lamb in 1680. The LDS baptism for Francis Meek shows 16 April 1655 with a father John, who would have been born about 1630.

In my Family Tree I have a John Meek baptised 16 Feb 1682, married to Clare Bridgeman 9 Sep 1704. John Meek 1682 was the son of one of my 8 times great grandparents John Meek born about 1660 & Elinor.

It is of course quite possible that John Meek 1660 could be the brother of Francis Meek 1655 above.

As names tend to follow in the same line, John Meek 1682 had a son Francis 1716.

I would appreciate any information which would indicate a link between "My" John Meek 1660 and Francis Meek 1655.

Jim Ashton