RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: Bosconermal on Sunday 13 August 17 04:17 BST (UK)
-
I have found what might be the death registration of my 3rd great grandmother. The general location, her maiden name and her husband's name suggest it's her, but her name is common so I have been trying to build a case. The witness to her death was her son-in-law, which might cinch it, but I can't make anything out of his signature.
The deceased died in Liberton, Midlothian in 1874. The son-in-law lived in Stainton, which I assume is the one in Midlothian (close by) and not in Ayrshire (not so close).
Can anyone help?
-
Placenames looks to be Straiton, rather than Stainton. :-\
Andrew Sch---ton?
S not like others though ... I will have another look. :) i don't know of the son in law would have signed in his own hand?
Reconsidering .... The first name seems to end in an 's'.
-
I see the last name as Johnston(e).
-
Sorry-- you are right. I meant to say Straiton (Midlothian).
-
Presumably age at death and husband's occupation also tallies for this death to be the correct one?
-
I see the last name as Johnston(e).
So do I.
Sue
-
Yes - age is also approximately right. Husband is dead, but described as "labourer". That's also a generic description of what he did.
I think I found her but I want be as sure as possible.
-
Yes - age is also approximately right. Husband is dead, but described as "labourer". That's also a generic description of what he did.
I think I found her but I want be as sure as possible.
Are her parent's names at death the same as her parent's names at marriage? Surely this would be the clincher?
I would think that the curve of the first letter is facing the wrong way for the letter to be J, and the riser of the 'h' should lead from the loop at the top of the 'o' rather than the from the base line ... Maybe? :)
-
I think the name is Gilchriston/e.
Not common, but it appears on records on Scotlandspeople ;)
-
I would think that the curve of the first letter is facing the wrong way for the letter to be J, and the riser of the 'h' should lead from the loop at the top of the 'o' rather than the from the base line ... Maybe? :)
Well, I am not super-confident about JOHNSTONE ;D, but I would say that if we accept the last syllable of the name is stone (which it may not be ::)) and we just look at that, then the rise to the next letter after the 'o' (which is 'n') emerges from the base line of the 'o'
Sue
-
Yes, maybe Sue .... I thought either the t looped down below the base line or the o may be larger and have a big loop. No idea really .... ;)
I still think an easier way to work out if this is the correct death is to compare her parent's names. :)
-
The J of January looks to have been formed differently to the supposed J in what might be the name Johnstone.
On first glance I thought the starting letter was a G.
Keep looking for more evidence!
A
-
The J of January looks to have been formed differently to the supposed J in what might be the name Johnstone.
I assume that one J was written in a signature and t'other by a registrar/clerk.
-
I think it says Andrew Johnston(e).
Isobel
-
Agree - Andrew Johnstone. The last e is quite small and tucked into the next column.
-
The deceased name is Margaret Smith, nee Brown. Her parents are not named in the parish record of her marriage to James Smith in 1813.
The 1841 gives her age as 42 and 1851 censuses as 57 so puts her birthdate between 1794 and 1799. If 1799 then she married at 14 or 15-- not impossible but not likely-- so 1794-ish and marriage at 19 or 20 seems more sensible. The census in 1841 in Temple, Midlothian only says that she was born in a different parish. The 1851 census from Borthwick, Midlothian has her born in Smeaton, Midlothian. Looking for her in Smeaton didn’t get me anywhere. I haven’t yet found the 1861 and 1871 censuses yet.
James Smith died between 1851 and 1858, but I haven’t found a parish record or statutory record of it yet. He’s an “agricultural labourer” in 1841 and a “farm servant” in 1851.
So here’s the evidence of this Margaret in 1874 being my Margaret.
The death register says:
1) She was 79 so born about 1794 or 1795. Because her parents are given I can find a parish record of her birth in April 1794 so 79 almost 80.
2) her husband is deceased
3) her husband’s name was James
4) James’s profession is given as “labourer”
5) at the end of her life she lived in Gilmerton, Liberton, Midlothian. The 1841 and 1851 censuses put her in Temple parish and Borthwick, the latter just over 8 miles away according to Google maps.
6) Her son-in-law lived in Straiton, maybe named Andrew Johnston/Johnstone.
7) She had 9 children so far as I know, 5 of whom were daughters so five potential sons-in-law. I only know of the marriage of her youngest daughter, Agnes, who married Andrew Johnston in 1858. In 1871 they lived in Liberton; in 1881 they also live in Liberton but the “Road, Street & c.” column says they lived in Straiton. The Ancestry transcriber says their name is “Johnstone”. I looked at the census and it certainly could be “Johnstone”. It’s very clearly “Johnston” on their marriage register.
9) I can certainly see “Andrew Johnston” or “Johstone” in the signature on her death register. It might be confirmation bias I admit.
10) Andrew’s name looks to me to be in a different hand than the rest. It does have the same slant as the rest of the document (apart from the “cause of death” colum, which is more upright), but it looks heavier and more “flourishy” than elsewhere. If it’s a different hand that might explain why the “J” in Johnston/Johnstone differs from the “J” in January and James elsewhere on the page.
I think the preponderance of evidence suggests she is my Margaret. The only thing that makes me scratch my head is that the Margaret in the death register turns out to have been born in Channelkirk, Berwickshire which is a fair way from Smeaton, Midlothian. Can’t see how they could be confused.
Now onto James. He is the bigger prize because he is the earliest known ancestor in a straight patrilineal line, so finding him and his parents can push the YDNA line back further.
Thank you for all your help deciphering that signature. I couldn't see the name in it.
-
10) Andrew’s name looks to me to be in a different hand than the rest. It does have the same slant as the rest of the document (apart from the “cause of death” colum, which is more upright), but it looks heavier and more “flourishy” than elsewhere. If it’s a different hand that might explain why the “J” in Johnston/Johnstone differs from the “J” in January and James elsewhere on the page.
Andrew would have signed his name. The rest of the certificate would be written by the Registrar/clerk.
-
"The only thing that makes me scratch my head is that the Margaret in the death register turns out to have been born in Channelkirk, Berwickshire which is a fair way from Smeaton, Midlothian. Can’t see how they could be confused."
Plenty of things point to the right person but can you explain what you mean with the above please?
Are you saying that her DC gives this info?
Annie
-
I think she means that the parents names given on the death certificate match with a birth in Channelkirk, Berwickshire in 1794. From Familysearch parents for this birth would appear to be David Brown and Margaret Frater who had other children in Channelkirk, Lauder and Inveresk & Musselburgh.
I think Margaret is shown as born Borthwick, Midlothian in 1861 and 1871.
1861 at 695/4 55/17 Blinkbonny Cottage, Newbattle with one year old granddaughter Elizabeth ( born Newbattle)
1871 at 693/6 174/13 Drum Farm, Liberton .Some discrepancies with this one as Ancestry has her as Mary Smith born 1797 and FindMyPast has her as Margaret Smith born 1795. Can't find her at all on SP.
Isobel
-
this post has been removed
-
Re Margaret Smith
Thank you all. Isobel got what I meant-- various censuses give Margaret's birth in Midlothian (Smeaton, Borthwick...) but the person on the death registration connects to someone born in Berwickshire. It's definitely my Margaret, though.
Thanks to Isobel I now have the 1861 and 1871 censuses. The Elizabeth with her in 1861 is her son William's daughter, born in 1859. Ancestry transcribes the 1871 census with the name "Mary". I had a look in the SP facsimile and I think it says "Marg" and they mistook the "g" for a "y". As for the age, the number is very blotchy and struck through to boot. It could be a 74 giving her a presumed birth year of 1797. The first digit is a 7, but you could make just about anything out of the second digit. I know know her birth year was 1794, so she was 77.