Could any residents of Battle, or anyone who has been to Battle recently please send me their views on the town as a matter of urgency.
Veness Family History
94 responses to “Veness Family History”
I am descended from the Camden branch of the Veness family and would love to share any further information you have on the tree. At this stage I have only been able to trace back to Thomas Veness and Mary Davis. Would appreciate anything further you have – happy to also share what I have.
My father’s name wasn’t Philip Edward. I don’t know who that is actually.
My great grandmother was Jane Alice Veness, who married Charles Wesley Smart. I haven’t met Robyn Bennett, but I would be interested to know where she fits in and get in contact with her.
Would you be able to email me so we can discuss this further – carolyn.littlefair[at symbol]gmail.com
Likewise, B’ham, but stuck. Any stories or knowledge concerning an Ann Sophia V*N*SS born abt 1828?
Any chance the couple had an additional child Ann Sophia V*N*SS born abt 1828? My 3xGGM.
I have been successful, through a fortuitous root, to connect my 3xGGM as a daughter of Samuel VENESS, the silk dyer in Worcester. Her sister, Elizabeth, is the root of the Birmingham VENESS family through her illegitimate son John Bacon VENESS. It was a complex search. Samuel is not of WOR county, so like many others if probably from SSX, born between 1782 & 1786. He is not the Dallington Samuel of the same age, who is also on the 1841 census. I suspect, from naming convention, his father might be James, but there are no records in support of taking Samuel’s line any further. If anyone is interested, it is now documented at http://creativegraces.net/genindex/veness.html
Discussion always welcome.
Alisan – We will be related through VENESS. You may wish to check my recent research on http://creativegraces,.net/genindex/veness.html. Your GM is my 2C3R through our common ancestor Samuel. Best wishes, Mark
Robin – I have emailed you to exchange info, if you are still at the same address. I can be contacted via my website http://creativegraces.net or my research blog https://www.facebook.com/Birmingham-Branches-from-N-Z-704020062952731
Impossible to tell for sure, unless the father acknowledges paternity at time of baptism, which is rare. Even if he does, the birth registry will ignore a non-married father if the mother registers the birth. Requires the co-operation of “more enlightened” clergy or registrar to record the father when illegitimate, and is very rare in my experience. The mother often knows who the father is, but you are then reliant on word of mouth passed down through families. IMHO, the time gap between the 1848 baptism and the 1860 marriage to RICHARDSON is probably too long to associate him as the father of your John. John may not have known himself, as there is no census info to support him ever living with his mother (that I can find). The middle name of Bacon could indicate the surname of his biological father, but Ben RICHARDSON is not fully document either, as is the real reason Elizabeth left him for John PARTRIDGE so quickly after they were married. Like her sisters, Ann & Sarah, Elizabeth is not found on all earlier census records. Finding Elizabeth prior to her 1871 residency with John PARTRIDGE may explain a few things. Were the girls in SSX with relations and misrecorded or simply missed because they used aliases? It is all quite unusual in one small family. There is an explanation for missing women, but not likely to be appreciated by family, necessarily.
Alisan – I have no suggestion of why the family of John VENESS were recorded as SMITH in 1881. Sloppy enumerator or a misheard surname is likely. By this time, he is a working man with a family, so no reason to provide false information. Family match is otherwise perfect. His identity may have been hidden in earlier census for a variety of reasons. I did mention on my research webpage that two of his children provided him as John William or William John upon their marriages. He doesn’t appear to have used Bacon from his marriage onwards.
Alisan – I have been considering this issue further and I may have an answer, although it risks blowing our minds.
The 1851 census appears to show John SMITH (of LIN) and his first wife (Elizabeth, of Worcester) in Wolverhampton, STS, with 3-yo child John SMITH (c1848, Worcester) & Mary SMITH (8 months, Wolverhampton). The marriage to an Elizabeth ELISON/ELLISON in Worcester has been eliminated as this couple. Neither does it appear to be the John SMITH = Elizabeth DISLEY (d/o Richard) marriage in 1848 Wolverhampton (not yet proven with a connection to Worcester). I had pesumed John junior had died before 1861, as Elizabeth his mother (sometime after the 1852/53 birth of Charles H SMITH, above). It is possible, since Elizabeth VINESS is given as being born in Wolverhampton, John first met her mother Ann there. Elizabeth (1851) is registered or baptised, but he does give “daughter” as her official status on two census, when he could have used “step daughter”. As Elizabeth is living with her mother and stepfather in 1881, her declared age and place of birth could be considered the most accurate, however there are no baptisms or births for an Elizabeth V*N*S in Wolverhampton around that time, or anywhere. Between the possible death of John’s first wife, Elizabeth, from 1853, John started the relationship with my 3xGGM, Ann. As the John = Elizabeth relationship remains to be determined, then one possibility that cannot be ruled out entirely, due to the very complex relationships in this family, is that Elizabeth VENESS was the common-law wife of John SMITH first, had a few children by him, then left to marry Benjamin RICHARDSON, or was displaced/replaced by Ann, who had Elizabeth by him. The age and place of birth of John’s wife in 1851 does provide a match to Elizabeth of Worcester. The John SMITH, c1848, would then not have died, but would be John Bacon VENESS. It may also explain the 1891 “slip” back to using SMITH by John on that census. Crazy or what?
Alisan – I forgot to add, in case you are trying to get to grips with my last post that it is also true, that on John Bacon VENESS’s marriage to Amelia he gave John, Stoker, as his father, which is exactly the occupation of John SMITH in 1851.
The VENESS explorations have been an interesting exercise in perceptions. There was one important flaw in my recent analysis that, once recognised, has provided a much better data fit. Loose ends always raise suspicion and demand a revisit! No wonder with this family.
The later census, including my 2xGGM Elizabeth BICKNELL nee VENESS, were taken in the household of John SMITH. Since Elizabeth married Daniel BICKNELL without a father’s name being given, it was natural to assume her illegitimacy. Once she appeared in a household, the next natural assumption was that the partner of John SMITH, Ann, was her mother. In fact, this is a red herring, if you accept John SMITH was not being “adoptive” in stating Elizabeth was his daughter (he could have said step-daughter, if Ann’s daughter), she really was his daughter, through his first common-law wife, Elizabeth VENESS of Worcester. Ann can be ignored as only John’s 2nd common-law wife, and in doing so allows all the other pieces to fit together. John’s first common-law wife, Elizabeth VENESS, had 4 children by him, then married Benjamin RICHARDSON, then settled with John PARTRIDGE, while John SMITH eventually settled with Ann (who was not Ann VENESS after all).
For you, John Bacon VENESS, upon his marriage gave John as his father, occupation stoker, which is a perfect match for John SMITH, stoker. It was the incumbent who assumed VENESS as his father’s surname.
The additional data that now fits includes John & Elizabeth in Wolverhampton in 1851 as SMITH, with her son John Bacon VENESS as John SMITH, matching his birth year and place, my 2xGGM’s birthplace c1852 and her younger brother Charles H SMITH c1853 (also resident with the BICKNELL family). It also explains why John slipped back to “SMITH” in the 1891 census.
I have updated my VENESS research page once again, so previous posts can be ignored. In the end, the grandmother of William ROTHERO and Selina BICKNELL turn out to be one and the same.
Sorry, Alisan – GEDCOM is not my area of expertise, however it wouldn’t hurt to back up under each of the options, providing a slightly different name so you know which is which.
We now have histories for 3 of the 5 children of Elizabeth VENESS (1825). The c1850 daughter Mary Ann SMITH may be the Mary Ann WILLIAMS who witnessed her sisters marriage (my 2xGGM to Daniel BICKNELL in 1868). Charles H SMITH (c1853) had a son Charles H SMITH who may have gone to Colorado, USA. The trail on both is currently cold, although I am still investigating.
We are probably moving off-topic for SSX VENESS, until we prove our common ancestor Samuel comes from there. We can discuss further offline if you can contact me through my webpage message form (to avoid putting email details out in a public forum).
Hello Robin – My apologies for the late reply and acknowledgement as I was engaged elsewhere. Your message is most appreciated.
I have, just today, concluded discussions with a direct descendant of Samuel VENESS & Sarah STONESTREET, which conclusively eliminates the late baptism, as you have already indicated. All their 10 children were baptised sequentially.
I will follow up the Kent connection. I was having doubts about SSX too due to the lack of records and that most VENESS families I could find in Brightling and surrounding areas were ag labs. I had hoped that being a silk dyer would possibly indicate a father’s trade. Plus, it is not clear why he named his eldest son James, and then his second son Samuel. I had visions of his father being James VENESS, silk dyer somewhere.
The name at Charles Henry’s marriage is fortuitous as his mother was Betsy (Elizabeth)and she was working as a tailor at the time, even though she was going by the name of Elizabeth PARTRIDGE, the mistress of John. The only time I have seen a mother inserted rather than the father. A curiosity if the incumbent decided he should add the mother where no father was declared.
I am hoping my atDNA in due course will indicate whether there is any genetic link to John Bacon VENESS’s reported father of John SMITH of Lincolnshire, who is the father of my Elizabeth VENESS, his sister. When John married (as VENESS, having lived his life from after baptism as SMITH), the incumbent assumed his father was VENESS, but had the name and profession of John SMITH correct.
Some of his children’s records are confusing that has now been sorted out. He had a couple prior to marriage and on one census he returned to SMITH and on another he was recorded with the surname of the family his eldest daughter married into. Some of the children did vary the names, and having a John William and William John who also reversed their names doesn’t help!
I have very much appreciated the interaction and feedback on this forum.
Should have mentioned that Betsy VENESS recorded on the marriage record of her son is a female as the occupation is clearly “tailoress”. If anyone is interested in the record, I have a copy.
Richard – Some interesting developments. My sibling’s DNA has provided a match between those who have tested atDNA with Ancestry and are connected to the Birmingham family in England and a descendant of John VENESS in Australia, who arrived in 1839; the son of Battle farmer Thomas VENESS and his wife Mary. Ancestry researchers have the wife’s name as Mary DAVIS, but I haven’t been able to confirm. Additionally, all have taken (perhaps they are the easiest to attribute)Thomas’ parents as the Said Samuel & Sarah. If true, it means our Samuel in England could at best be a son of a brother of Samuel senior. We remain frustrated by a clear baptismal record to pull this together, but the DNA is nevertheless intriguing. If any Australian VENESS descendants have tested atDNA (with any company) please let me know and share the data on GEDmatch. The match currently appears to be on chromosome 5.
To close this particular thread the paper trail and genetics now provide a match to the BACON family of Lincolnshire to the Birmingham VENESS family, so the origins of the John SMITH, John Bacon SMITH genes are proven. I have posted in reply to Richard that we have an intriguing lead for the genetics of Samuel VENESS which is the current focus of investigations.