Update: January 4th 2014 Re: Critchleys

Discovering family history is very much a "cold case" investigation, and information discovered at any point in the search can be contradicted by later finds. On this page I will note new information and discoveries that relate to or affect the accuracy of pages I've already written, rather than go back and rewrite the original page(s).
The Critchleys
In the Introduction I wrote a little about the origins of the name Critchley, and stated that Thomas Critchley and his wife, Anne, were both born in Heath Charnock:

"....Rachel Critchley (my Great Great Grandmother) was one of eleven children, all born in Heath Charnock, as were their parents Thomas and Ann. Heath Charnock is also where I was born, and it is a picturesque region just outside Chorley heading for the hills of Rivington and Anglezarke. I've discovered that Critchley is a derivation of Critchlow, a habitational name from Critchlow in Lancashire, named from Celtic cr{u: _}g ‘hill’ + Old English hlaw ‘mound’. According to houseofnames.com, "...the roots of the Anglo-Saxon name Critchlow come from when the family resided in or near some small settlement called either Critchlow or Chritchlow; experts theorise that this was probably near Chorley in the County of Lancashire...." This suggests that the Critchleys, one group of our ancestors, had lived in the Chorley/Heath Charnock area for centuries, as far back as the Saxons and possibly as far back as the pre-Roman Celts."

A closer look at the censuses after 1841 has revealed that Thomas Critchley was recorded as born in Clayton. To some extent this puts a question mark over the theory of the Critchleys having lived in the Chorley/Heath Charnock area for hundreds of years. Clayton could refer to one of three places: Clayton, which is in the Manchester area, Clayton-le-Moors which is North-East of Blackburn, or Clayton-le-Woods which is North of Chorley and to the East of Leyland. Thomas' birth year varies from one census to another. In the 1841 census he is shown as being 45 (=born 1796) whereas in the 1851 census he is shown as being 57 (= about 1794). The general procedure in the 1841 Census was to round ages down to the nearest multiple of 5 years, which would explain this anomoly, though not every enumerator did it that way. Through the Lancashire Online Parish Clerks Project I have found the  baptism of a Thomas Critchley in Leyland:
Baptism: 22 Sep 1793 St Andrews, Leyland, Lancashire, England
Thomas Critchley - son of Peter Critchley & Margaret
    Abode: Clayton
    Register: Baptisms 1774 - 1795, Page 80, Entry 14
    Source: LDS Film 93951


If Thomas was born after March 30th 1793, then on Census Day 1851 he would have been 57, turning 58 sometime after Census Day. This baptism record suggests that the Clayton referred to is indeed Clayton-le-Woods, North of Chorley and East of Leyland, which is a much more likely abode than the other two options. I believe this is the right Thomas Critchley, and the theory of our Critchleys having originated in a settlement called Critchlow somewhere near Chorley still holds up. However, whether or not Clayton-le-Woods would have been referred to as Clayton, I can't be sure, but the OS Map of 1845 labels the area around where Town Brow crosses the Lostock River as simply Clayton.  I've found that Thomas Critchley's first child, Mary, was also born in Clayton, but all the other children were born in Heath Charnock.

Another revelation from the 1851 Census is that Alice Critchley, born in about 1835, was not Thomas's daughter but was his Grand-daughter. So in fact Thomas and Anne Critchley did not have eleven children, they had ten. As yet I have not established who Alice's parents were.











No comments:

Post a Comment