LONDON-L Archives

Archiver > LONDON > 2004-01 > 1074214802


From: John Norman <>
Subject: Re: [Lon] Occupation 'windster'
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 01:00:11 +0000
References: <jKoOkTASowBAFw3G@varneys.demon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <jKoOkTASowBAFw3G@varneys.demon.co.uk>


Surely, just for once, (:-), Eve is missing the point. In response to
the original question posed by Betty Martin the chances are that the
bride was indeed a silk winder, after all, the nine references on the
Old Bailey site, which were presumably based on well documented
evidence, establish the usage of the term as late as 1792. Surely it is
not inconceivable that the term could still appear on a marriage record
as late as 1839 especially bearing in mind the bride's fathers
occupation. We should also note that, according to Betty's original
posting, the individual's own entry in the 1871 census (presumably), has
her occupation as silk winder. Most responses to Betty's posting were
supportive of this view and were probably correct.


Eve McLaughlin wrote:

>In message <032d01c3db18$0635e800$>, Maureen
><> writes
>
>
>>I was looking at the The Proceeding of the Old Bailey
>>
>>
>
>and the time period covered is earlier than that which was posed by the
>questioner, by several decades.
>
>
>

--

John Norman
Email:


This thread: