I didn't say Margaret Scholefield and family were not from Rochdale Parish, Lancashire; they may very well have been. Scholefields are very concentrated in the s.e. Lanc.-s.w. York border area in the mid-1600's and our line is most likely from this area, possibly Rochdale where they seem concentrated.
What I said was that our line doesn't descend from the Scholefields of Scholefield Hall in Rochdale. If you look at the lineage in Dr. Quinn's article in the "Baltimore Sun" in 1906, the line goes thru James, the 3rd. son of James and Ann (Latham), which indicates the older sons Cuthbert and Alexander left no surviving sons as the English practised primogeniture (eldest son inherits everything). James Jr.'s eldest son Cuthbert left no surviving sons as the Hall goes to his younger brother Alexander. I then passes to Alexander's son Gerard, to Gerard's son James (1620-1664).This James would be a slightly older contemporary of Margaret's husband (John ?).
Note none of the names found in the Scholefields of Scholefield Hall show up in our line.
There is a marriage for a John Scholefield and a Magaret WOODRATH ( apparrently a corruption of WOODRUFF) 8 Feb. 1658 (1659 New Style Calendar) in Rochdale Parish.
Is this ours ? I've checked that area for baptisms for Valentine, Henry, Benjamin and Joseph. There are many Henrys, Benjamins and Joseph's b. in the 1660-1687 period, but Anglican baptismal records of that period almost never list even the mother's given name so we can't distinguish
the different families. The name Valentine Schoelfield didn't show up in Rochdale in that period.
Notify Administrator about this message?
|Home | Help | About Us | Site Index | Jobs | PRIVACY | Affiliate|
|© 2007 The Generations Network|