John BLACKBURN

Male Bef 1617 - 1656  (> 36 years)


Personal Information    |    Media    |    Notes    |    Sources    |    All

  • Name John BLACKBURN 
    Born Bef 1617 
    Gender Male 
    Will 1653 
    • On file
    Died Between 1653 and 1656  [1
    Person ID I49  VICKERMAN unproven
    Last Modified 5 Feb 2017 

    Family Sybil VICKERMAN,   b. Bef 1617,   d. Aft 1653, FURTHER RESEARCH Find all individuals with events at this location  (Age > 38 years) 
    Married 6 May 1633  Almondbury, All Hallows parish church, WRY Find all individuals with events at this location  [2
    Children 
     1. Sarah BLACKBURN,   b. Bef 1617,   d. Aft 1634  (Age > 19 years)
     2. ? BLACKBURN,   b. Between 1633 and 1656
     3. John BLACKBURN,   b. Between 1634 and 1650,   d. Aft 1656  (Age ~ 23 years)
     4. -?- BLACKBURN
     5. Michael BLACKBURN,   b. Bef 1653,   d. Aft 1653  (Age > 2 years)
     6. ? BLACKBURN,   b. Bef 1658,   d. Aft 1658  (Age > 2 years)
     7. ? BLACKBURN,   b. Bef 1658,   d. Aft 1658  (Age > 2 years)
     8. ? BLACKBURN,   b. Bef 1658,   d. Aft 1658  (Age > 2 years)
    Last Modified 23 Oct 2016 
    Family ID F18  Group Sheet  |  Family Chart

  • Documents
    BLACKBURN, John (Sybil VICKERMAN), Hall Bower, 1656, will transcription
    BLACKBURN, John (Sybil VICKERMAN), Hall Bower, 1656, will transcription

  • Notes 
    • In the early 14th century mention is made in public records of the Blackburn family.

      The Blackburns were a prominent family in Huddersfield up to the 17th century and owned property and land in the town centre as well as Dalton.
      http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16288403&method=full&siteid =50060&headline=history-spotlight-----dalton-name_page.htm

      The records in which they appear, however, do not show the family in good light because they were often offenders against the township's by-laws.

      In 1454, William Blackburn was accused of causing problems for wayfarers because he had not cut his hedges. Ten years later Thomas Blackburn was in trouble for putting his cattle on Dalton Common.

      Another relative, Richard Blackburn, committed a much more serious offence in 1490. He was apparently involved in an `affray' with two Dalton tenants.

      It is not known whether this family actually lived in Dalton, but what is certain is that they never went to any of the hearings regarding their alleged crimes.

      The result of this was, however, favourable to Dalton's coffers, as the Blackburns were often fined for non-attendance, as well as their crimes!

  • Sources 
    1. [S11] will & Sally POCOCK.

    2. [S29] BVRI & Ancestry PRs.