You are here: Desborough > Surnames > Rogers > Elizabeth Rogers (1674 - )

Desborough People
Elizabeth Rogers

 

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

Display


   8037 1.0 Elizabeth Rogersfemale
Niece of Thomas Gutteridge (will of 1729), has son Samuel Rogers Mansfield by first husband, so assumed to be the daughter of Jane Rogers nee Gutteridge
10282 Father: Samuel Rogers   b. before 1656 at Desborough   bur. 29 Jan 1722/ 23 at St Giles, Desborough
8030 Mother: Jane Gutteridge   b. before 1655 at Desborough
Baptism: 20 Mar 1673/74 at Desborough (source reads 'Eliz the daughter of Samuell Rodgers')Parish Reg

Pedigree
   8038
Married: John Mansfield  before 1729
b. , at Desborough  d. before 1729

   109942.1 Martha Benoni Mansfieldfemale
Burial: 27 Dec 1714 at St Giles, Desborough (source reads 'Martha Benoni Daugh of John & Elizabeth Mansfield')Bp Transcripts Desb

   80392.2 Samuel Rogers Mansfieldmale
Birth: before 1729Will

 


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