RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: R_Morgan on Sunday 04 February 18 22:02 GMT (UK)
-
see below
Does anyone know the words (Ref Big) please?
-
Can you please put a snip on here? Everyone doesn't have a Dropbox account. It needs a log-in to look at your link.
thanks
Dawn M
-
(http://)
-
It looks as if someone has scored out Morris in blue and replaced it with Colman in blue. Then a later hand has changed it back in red to Morris.
-
Lily married my grandad, he assumed the identity of Ronald Colman, his real surname was Coffman. They had 2 children, I have found one son called Robert. I can’t seem to make out the letters in the brackets by the numbers. The date 21.12.46 is when they “married” the other date in red I’m not sure what the significance is of that (looks like 28 10 47 - 28th October 1947 maybe?) if anyone is able to make out the word or words between (Ref Big: and the numbers 89516 I would be most grateful. I can only imagine it is something to do with his bigamy conviction, I’m not sure when he was convicted of it but do know that he was
-
Also does anyone know what document this is? Is it census information maybe?
-
Also does anyone know what document this is? Is it census information maybe?
The document is the 1939 Register.
-
Looks like: Mgr / [or %] es
but what that means ??? ???
Manager? es - some kind of salesman?
Dawn M
-
I see:
(Ref Big: Inge/es/89516)
and Inge/es/89516 would be the case file for the Bigamy investigation dated 28. 10. 47.
tony
-
Background info on Beginners board: http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=787199.0
-
The colon after "Big" is slanted - the lower dot is further to the right than the upper dot.
Maybe that is the case after (Inge), too.
It could be: (Inge):/es/89516
I was wondering whether "Inge" could actually be "Image" - it could be, for example, a microfiche reference.
Just an idea...
-
If the. "Big" does relate to bigamy, it may say "Big Mge" for bigamous marriage.
Assuming the Register was still being used in 1947 (as rationing was still in place then) it would have been relevant to record a marriage being declared invalid.
I don't think any sort of document imaging would have been used in the 1940s, so not that.