You are here: Desborough > Surnames > Sumner > Sarah Sumner (1747 - )

Desborough People
Sarah Sumner

 

Notes about the page layout and content are at the end. Change the display type here:

Display


   11903 1.0 Sarah Sumnerfemale
11774 Father: George Sumner    b. before 1724    bur. 26 Nov 1787 at St Giles, Desborough
11775 Mother: Ann [not known]    b. before 1724
Baptism: 13 Dec 1747 at Desborough (source reads 'Sarah Sumner daughter of Gorge and Ann his Wife') Bp Transcripts Desb

Pedigree
   12627
Married: John Hurlbert  at Desborough by Licence, 02 Apr 1770 (marriage source reads: John Hurlbut of Market Harborough in the County of Leicester and Sarah Sumer of this parish by licence) Bp Transcripts Desb
b. before 1752, at Market Harborough, LeicestershireEst. from marriage

   126282.1 John Hurlbertmale
Mother's maiden name in IGI shown to be Sarah Sumner
Birth: 29 Oct 1773IGI
Baptism: 18 Nov 1773 at Independent, Market Harborough, LeicestershireIGI

 


Notes

The numbers at the right of the page are unique reference numbers.

The source follows each piece of information. If the source is underlined a full citation will be shown when you hover over it. Click on any link to switch to that person's details page.

Estimated dates of birth (treat with caution - they could be decades out!)
:- where there is a marriage or children recorded, the date is estimated at 16-18 years before the earliest date;
:- where there is only a burial known, if the person or their spouse is described as "old", the birth is estimated at 50 years earlier; if they are described as "very old", the birth is estimated at 60 years earlier; if neither, the birth is estimated at 18 years earlier.

Estimated dates of death are given as a visual aid to point up whether or not they survived their spouse.

Before 1752 the calendar year started on 25th March; dates where the year appears as, eg: "1650/51" show the year as it would have been given at the time (in this example 1650), and the year by the modern calendar (1651). Jan-Mar dates before 1752 which don't show this "double-dating" are from secondary sources which haven't made clear which dating system has been used.


Source Codes

top of page