Implication of female entry in Griffith Valuation 1847-1864?

wavehopper1

There are very few women listed on the page, but I do see a particular family name where both a male and female are entered. They appear to be grouped together, except for one line where the woman seems to have her own entry.

I've attached a pic.
I don't know if this is husband/wife. Could it be son/widowed mother?

pinkypinky

Well, usually if a woman is listed, it's because she's a widow.
Can you give a link to the whole page?

It should be possible to establish if she is.

wavehopper1

This is the link - I have an Ancestry subscription, I'm not sure if that link will work for others?
I tried FamilySearch without logging in, but I don't think Griffith is available that way.

tabbey

wavehopper1 wrote: »

There are very few women listed on the page, but I do see a particular family name where both a male and female are entered. They appear to be grouped together, except for one line where the woman seems to have her own entry.

I've attached a pic.
I don't know if this is husband/wife. Could it be son/widowed mother?

There are lots of women in the valuation books.

Where two people are named, they jointly occupy the lot. Occasionally you find a lot occupied by ten or twenty joint occupiers.

In this case, the land only lots are jointly occupied, but the lot 5&6 with buildings is solely occupied by Hannah.

Hannah may be a widow, or a single woman, or less likely, a married woman whose husband is in England for example.

If she is a widow,you will see the changes recorded in the revision books (aka "cancelled" books) in the Valuation Office. Going through them carefully, you can follow how occupation changes over time, typically Pat Kelly dies, his widow Mary is shown as occupier for some years, then eldest son John takes over for an extended period. Of course sometimes the widow holds on until old age, possibly because she does not approve of her son's choice of spouse.

If she is a widow, she may have shared the land with her brother-in-law, as her husband may have joinly inherited the tenancy with his brother.

tabbey

wavehopper1 wrote: »

This is the link - I have an Ancestry subscription, I'm not sure if that link will work for others?
I tried FamilySearch without logging in, but I don't think Griffith is available that way.

We usually view GV through "ask about ireland", as this is free.

wavehopper1

Tabbey, that is great information and advice for continuing my research. Thank you so much.

VirginiaB

Tabbey, I was amazed to read your post saying a GV entry could be a woman whose husband was in England. My 3X great-grandmother is in GV and I have always assumed she was a widow. Esther McCaw, Ballintoy parish, Co Antrim. Any further info on this kind of situation?

tabbey

VirginiaB wrote: »

Tabbey, I was amazed to read your post saying a GV entry could be a woman whose husband was in England. My 3X great-grandmother is in GV and I have always assumed she was a widow. Esther McCaw, Ballintoy parish, Co Antrim. Any further info on this kind of situation?

The purpose of establishing who the occupier was, was to determine who was responsible for paying the rates. There would be no point in naming someone who was not there, as nobody would pay.

Having said that, a married woman would be much rarer than a widow.