unmarried partner

+3 votes
118 views

From his 1754 will, it appears that [[Shockley-75|David Shockley]] and [[Rathborn-3|Mary Rathborn]] were not married. And yet he left the daughters he had with Mary the bulk of his bequests, with a token 5 shillings for the legitimate Shockley children.

Daughters Love Rathborn and Emmely Rathborn "begotten by me on the body of Mary Rathborn" 

(A) Do you agree with this reading that David and Mary were not married?

(B) If so, how should I deal with Mary? Detach her as spouse and place her in a Note?

*Will of  ‘’David Shockley,’’ planter of Worcester County, in [https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33SQ-GTBJ-9C8H?i=74&wc=SNY4-K6K%3A146534501%2C148136101&cc=1803986/ Maryland Register of Wills Records, 1629-1999 (Worcester)] Wills 1759-1769, Vol 2, Image 76-77. Images (browse only) at FamilySearch.org, accessed 15 Sept 2020.

::Signed: 4 Oct 1754; Proved 22 Nov 1754

::Bequests to children James Shockley, Solomon Shockley, John Shockley, David Shockley, Agnes Engram wife of Jacob Engram, Love Rathbone “begotten by me…of Mary Rathbone,” Emmely Rathbone “begotten by me…of Mary Rathbone” who receives bequests when sixteen; grandson David Shockley son of Solomon Shockley

::Executor: John Shockley son of John Shockley Slaymaker [sleigh maker]

::Witnesses: Israel Holland, Obed Outten, Esther Haristey Outten

::Enslaved people: girl named Priscilla, girl named Venis,

WikiTree profile: David Shockley
in Genealogy Help by A Hayes G2G6 Mach 1 (12.7k points)
retagged by Steven Harris

2 Answers

+3 votes
If they didn't marry, then yes, she should not be connected as a spouse.  Both of them are connected to the children as their parents, but parents don't have to be connected as spouse.  The biography can state 'above' the will that he had x children with his wife and x children with Mary.

On his profile, under Parents Marriage, it looks like David was married twice, so those are 'his' marriages, not his parents marriages, which are later and not really needed on David's profile since they are listed on his parents profiles.

Since the will states the children have Mary's name of Rathone, not Shockley, they would seem to have never married.
by Linda Peterson G2G6 Pilot (534k points)
Huh. Thank you for that Linda, I did not realize the difference. Just "corrected" a record where the child was attached to mom but not dad, although they were listed as spouses, and was confused, now I am not.
When you add a child to a parent, if the parents were not married or if there are 2 spouses for that parent, instead of selecting the 'GO' button at the top, it is better to scroll to the bottom to see if the other parent is selected.  Note that it will state that the parents are married, so that will connect the parents as spouse, if the checked box is used during the adding of the parent.
0 votes
David definitely had an earlier wife (maybe more than one), but in the Records of Stepney Parish, Somerset, their births are listed only as being the children of "David Shockly and his wife" [unnamed]. Six children were listed, born between 1719 (William) and 1736 (Isaac). I'm getting ready to add to his profile.

* "Register of Births, Marriages and Deaths in Stepney Parish" FamilySearch, Image 133/629 [https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-99XW-XQCP?i=132&cc=2385204]
by Carole Bannes G2G6 Mach 1 (18.4k points)

Related questions

+12 votes
1 answer
233 views asked Sep 12, 2016 in Policy and Style by Keith Richardson G2G Crew (520 points)
+11 votes
2 answers
426 views asked Apr 10, 2014 in Policy and Style by Alison Wilkins G2G6 Mach 2 (29.9k points)
+3 votes
1 answer
67 views asked Oct 18 in WikiTree Tech by Stephen Davies G2G6 Mach 2 (29.4k points)
+6 votes
2 answers
+2 votes
3 answers
125 views asked Dec 20, 2019 in WikiTree Help by Foster Foster G2G2 (2.2k points)
+5 votes
1 answer

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...