Curiouser and Curiouser....
Recently, I posted a question here about the possible meaning for a letter I found with some historical information that I got via E-Bay on CDs….a Census of sorts
The letter in question, as it appeared, was (F.), and was after the person’s name, but before any occupation that they might have had
The response here in Live Journal to my query suggested that it might be either Freemason or Formerly
Alas, the letter in question is also for women, and women can’t be Freemasons (although, as I understand it, they have their own variation)
So….I asked another amateur Genealogist that I’m in contact with, and they suggested Freeholder
While that might make sense for the majority of them, it seems odd that, out of 18 Gentry listed, only 9 of them have this letter after their names (including, as it happens, one of my own Ancestors), with 5 of them being women, and I would have thought it would be odd for women to be owners of property back then (we’re talking 1793-98)
I also would have thought that, by mere definition, if you’re Gentry, you’re also the owner of property
So, I tried contacting the person that sent the CDs in the first place, who, of course, didn’t know
I then tried contacting the Records Office for that area, and, while waiting for them to reply, I also contacted the State Library in Melbourne
Records Office said that they didn’t know either, but, from the information that the State Library found, it seemed to confirm the Freeholder one
In all, out of the names included, in the Gentry section, 9 out of 18 have that, including 5 women as I mentioned
2 out of 4 Attorneys (none of them women)
32 out of 172 Traders, with only 3 of those being women
The letter in question, as it appeared, was (F.), and was after the person’s name, but before any occupation that they might have had
The response here in Live Journal to my query suggested that it might be either Freemason or Formerly
Alas, the letter in question is also for women, and women can’t be Freemasons (although, as I understand it, they have their own variation)
So….I asked another amateur Genealogist that I’m in contact with, and they suggested Freeholder
While that might make sense for the majority of them, it seems odd that, out of 18 Gentry listed, only 9 of them have this letter after their names (including, as it happens, one of my own Ancestors), with 5 of them being women, and I would have thought it would be odd for women to be owners of property back then (we’re talking 1793-98)
I also would have thought that, by mere definition, if you’re Gentry, you’re also the owner of property
So, I tried contacting the person that sent the CDs in the first place, who, of course, didn’t know
I then tried contacting the Records Office for that area, and, while waiting for them to reply, I also contacted the State Library in Melbourne
Records Office said that they didn’t know either, but, from the information that the State Library found, it seemed to confirm the Freeholder one
In all, out of the names included, in the Gentry section, 9 out of 18 have that, including 5 women as I mentioned
2 out of 4 Attorneys (none of them women)
32 out of 172 Traders, with only 3 of those being women