When PRs are misleading

[iluleah]

When researching I always trying to find each and every real record in the lifetime of each ancestor, so I can cross reference them and be as sure as possible I have my ancestors and not some collected data/name that 'fits'

So early on I found this difficult ( pre internet) as my great grandfather was born/baptised with one name, born in one county, added his mothers surname, got married, then  moved to another county and took a new completely different name, after his first wife died he married again and stated two different names as his father on each of his marriage certs, died and was registered using his 'new name' and 'his' gravestone in the village is not even where he is buried.......... phew!

I know both 'fathers' are not his father, one being his grandfather the other his uncle (his mums brother) I also know he knew very well he lied..... thankfully there are enough real records to prove all this.

BUT.........it gets much more difficult to prove people earlier on finding enough connecting records or records full stop.

I always thought he can't be the only one to lie.... found others on marriage certs who removed or added many years to their age to better fit nearer to the age of the person they were marrying.

Just recently I have found two separate ancestors both who on the marriage PR name 'their father' as someone different to who he is. I have researched and re-researched to check for other records which might prove one or the other. Both it seems are naming older brothers instead of their father.

What do I do? These names are not their fathers (according to other records) but they stated as their father on the PRs

[andrewalston]

There are many marriages where the name of the father is incorrect, for any number of reasons, of which illegitimacy is the most common.

But, if you've solved the puzzle, just link to the person you know to be the real father (when known), and insert a note explaining what you know the real situation to be, and how you know it.

That way you can quickly quote chapter and verse if challenged by someone less knowledgable.

[iluleah]

Both it seems are naming older brothers instead of their father.

I can only guess, which is not what I like to do, I like to prove.... but what we all use as proof is the real records, which is really my point they are as you say " many marriages where the name of the father is incorrect" and of course that information is secondary being 'given information' and certainly not checked 150-200 yrs ago....and as precise as FH research is I know we all face the same issues

I have done as you suggest although I do wish I could find another record like a Will to 'confirm' the research I have done...over and over and over again on the same few people.

Maybe one day my wish will come true and I will find that yet unknown, unresearched record

[pharmaT]

I've done what Andrew suggests. My grt grt grandfather names his mother's first husband as is father when on his marriage certificate (not PR), when his FIL registers his death he gives the same name.  I have entered a note on both the marriage and death record in my tree recording this, I have then under his birth noted all the sources I have used to deduce his real father.

[Guy Etchells]

I can only guess, which is not what I like to do, I like to prove.... but what we all use as proof is the real records, which is really my point they are as you say " many marriages where the name of the father is incorrect" and of course that information is secondary being 'given information' and certainly not checked 150-200 yrs ago....and as precise as FH research is I know we all face the same issues

I have done as you suggest although I do wish I could find another record like a Will to 'confirm' the research I have done...over and over and over again on the same few people.

Maybe one day my wish will come true and I will find that yet unknown, unresearched record

Unfortunately in family history there is no such thing as proof, the best we can achieve is the balance of probabilities.

Though you say you can only guess, you base your guesses on relevant information rather than simply a hunch that cannot be substantiated.
You are finding good clues (e.g. memorial stone rather than a grave marker) which points to someone living in a different area, many people miss these minor but vital details.

I am sure you have already discovered the benefits of researching the wider family as you progress further back in history and even the value in following such things as occupations and even employers in some cases.

Cheers
Guy

[iluleah]

Unfortunately in family history there is no such thing as proof, the best we can achieve is the balance of probabilities.

The more I research and find the more I realise I have to learn.

When I first began  I was given some really good advice about researching, I put that advice into practice and developed my own style, such as additionally writing a  timeline for each person, so I knew where they were, what they were doing and what was happening nationally and internationally.
That enabled me to learn more about history, events which could have effected them and of course other records that potentially I should seek out.
Although I was lulled into a false sense of security as the line I was researching remained in the same tiny village for centuries.

Quickly I realised that my ancestors are just people who made mistakes, good and bad decisions  and the things that happen today ( which we seem to think are 'new') have always happened, affairs, pregnancy before marriage, petty crime, travelling, 'fall outs' with family and the pattern of life family scripts can really be helpful in research.

Researching FH is mainly a solitary hobby,so it is easy to get blinkered,  to assume you are the only one facing a particular issue...so thank you all for your comments so far, they do help