You are here: Desborough > Surnames > Dunkley > Thomas Dunkley (1805 - )

Desborough People
Thomas Dunkley

 

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

Display


   4677 1.0 Thomas Dunkleymale

Birth: about 1805, at Braybrooke, NorthamptonshireCensus

Pedigree
   4676
Married: Jane Coleman  at Desborough 15 Mar 1835IGI
b. about 1812, at Braybrooke, Northamptonshire  d. 1893, age: 81y

   46782.1 James Dunkleymale
Birth: about 1835, at Braybrooke, NorthamptonshireCensus

   46792.2 Eli Dunkleymale
Birth: about 1837, at Braybrooke, NorthamptonshireCensus
Death: 05 Feb 1908, at 34 Victoria St, Desborough, age: 71y.
Probate: 06 Mar 1908  executors, etc
4682
Married: Jane [not known] 
b. about 1839, at Desborough  d. 26 Dec 1901, at Desborough, age: 62y

   46802.3 Emma Dunkleyfemale
Birth: about 1839, at Braybrooke, NorthamptonshireCensus

   46812.4 Thomas Dunkleymale
Birth: about 1843, at Braybrooke, NorthamptonshireCensus

 


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