RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: jedidiah on Wednesday 16 May 18 17:11 BST (UK)
-
Thank you very much for anyone who can help.
These 4 lines are from the occupation column, though i think the first and last are the same ..
-
Furrier
Tunbridge ware turner
Bone Sawer (?)
Furrier
-
I would say the first and fourth ones are "Farrier"
The third one looks like the first work is "Bond" with the second word perhaps "Saver"
Looking at how the a in Farrier is written I would guess at the second line being "Tanbridge Ware Tar***"
-
Yep agree with Shaun J
Tunbridge Ware turner on google ... shows the lovely craft of making decorative boxes etc.
xin
-
Definitely Tunbridge Ware - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunbridge_ware
-
Could the 3rd one be "Band Saw(y)er"?
-
Could the 3rd one be "Band Saw(y)er"?
My thoughts exactly,
a person who works a band saw.
-
Thank you very much everyone for your help on that!
-
I would say 'Bone' for the beginning of the third occupation - compare the final letter with the 'e' at the end of Ware in the second line.
Also, the final letter at the end of the word after bone is different to all the letters 'r' in the other occupations so that word may not end with 'r'.
Michael.
-
Would it be possible to point out who these people were on the census?
It helps to get the "whole picture".
Maureen
-
I would say 'Bone' for the beginning of the third occupation - compare the final letter with the 'e' at the end of Ware in the second line.
Also, the final letter at the end of the word after bone is different to all the letters 'r' in the other occupations so that word may not end with 'r'.
Michael.
That is what I thought, Michael.
-
There are marked variations in letter forms even in the tiny sample we can see - a bit more would make things easier. However, what we can see would allow Furrier, Tunbridge Ware Turner, Band Sawer, and a repeated Furrier, which I think is the likeliest list given that sample.
EDIT: Bandsaws were not technologically feasible before the mid-1840s - the date of the sample may be telling.
EDIT2: Tunbridge Ware Turner (seemingly so obvious) has me worried, too. What gets turned in the manufacture of wooden inlaid decoration?
-
EDIT2: Tunbridge Ware Turner (seemingly so obvious) has me worried, too. What gets turned in the manufacture of wooden inlaid decoration?
Here is a detailled explanation:
https://www.stuartking.co.uk/index.php/tunbridge-ware/
Best regards,
Karen
-
Thanks Karen. I must send a message to my brain to remember the obvious ;D
I'm just getting old.
-
Furrier
Tunbridge ware turner
Bone Sawer (?)
Furrier
I agree with Shaun. :)
I also agree that it would be useful if you gave us the names and census reference, if known, of the people in question, so we can have a look for ourselves.
You often find people with similar occupations living in the same area, and sometimes the writing is clearer on other entries. :) Occupations can be typical of an area too, so helpful to have a look at the bigger picture.
-
Thanks again everyone ..
Here is the full census image as was suggested, It was from 1861
Moderator comment: small portions only are allowed for deciphering purposes
-
Hello,
Unfortunately we are not allowed to post full census pages like this.
Just in case it is removed, here are the details so the image can be looked up.
1861 345/147/15
Ann Jones and 3 Children lodging in the home of James and Elizabeth Herbert, Newington.
Heywood
-
This might well be Ann's son Benjamin in 1871. If so the occupation is relevant
RG 10 / 218/ 65 / 49
51, Kings Cross Road, St Pancras
Benjamin Jones, head, mar, 28, wood turner, Surrey St Mary
Ellen do, wife, do, 35, Hants ?Cranley
-
Thanks for the 1871 census - yes that fits in with the other ones I have so makes sense. I can't find that record on Ancestry for some reason :s
Can I throw in another question if possible - on the 61 census I gave, Ann Jones is listed as a lodger, but there abode seems to be a different number from the Herberts above them (99 to 100) .. does that mean they were lodging with them, or could it be lodging with someone not on the census, or have i misunderstood it?
-
I think this might be George’s marriage but no help with that occupation :-\
25th December 1869 St Mary Newington
George Thomas Jones, Stoker, 58 Brandon Street Father Benjamin Jones Farrier
Fanny Elizabeth Jennings, the same (address) father Henry John Jennings Carver and Gikder
Witnesses Benjamin Jones and Caroline Chantry
It looks like Farrier but I think it should be Furrier
-
Yes that marriage looks good.
25th December 1864 same church
Ann Jones married Robert Chantry - Father Benjamin Jones, Furrier
Same day
Benjamin Jones married Ellen Turton - Benjamin is his father - a furrier and George Jones is a witness
-
Thanks for the 1871 census - yes that fits in with the other ones I have so makes sense. I can't find that record on Ancestry for some reason :s
If you use the census reference I gave in reply #7, on the 1871 census search on Ancestry, you will be taken to the correct page :)
-
In 1871 629/88/49
George T Jones is an Engine Driver.
The sub-registration district is Leather Market. The local pub on the census sheet is The Jolly Tanners.
Going back to the original al query, I still wonder if he was a ‘Bone Sawer’ - perhaps re furs; skins etc - maybe there were carcasses ???
-
Thanks Jen, I'm almost embarrassed to ask this as I consider myself a bit of a whiz at these things, but how do you search by the reference ? I can't see anywhere to put that .. I tried search the 71 census for his name in St Pancras but it just doesn't come up for me :s
-
Thanks Jen, I'm almost embarrassed to ask this as I consider myself a bit of a whiz at these things, but how do you search by the reference ? I can't see anywhere to put that .. I tried search the 71 census for his name in St Pancras but it just doesn't come up for me :s
The reference is RG 10 / 218/ 65 / 49
So go to the 1871 census search page on Ancestry.
Scroll down the page a bit and in 'piece number' enter 218
In 'folio number' enter 65
In 'page number' enter 49
You need not enter anything else.
On the first page of results you will find Benjamin Jones (but not transcribed as that ;D, which is why your search isn't turning him up :-X )
-
Thanks again Jen, got that now :)
As so many experts have been kind enough to help me here, may I venture another question if anyone has time to help .. what was the maiden name of Ann Jones here, born around 1820-25, the first record I have of her is in the 51 census, Piece: 1567, Folio: 317,Page Number: 7 .. at which point she already seems to be a widow. Her husband was a Benjamin Jones (mentioned on the wedding barns of his son Benjamin for example). With Jones being such a common name it is hard to search on it, though still I can't find any suitable marriage records - looked on Ancestry and FindMyPast.
-
.. does that mean they were lodging with them, or could it be lodging with someone not on the census, or have i misunderstood it?
The Herbert family (schedule 99) and the Jones family (schedule 100) are both living at 9 Brandon Street. They have been enumerated as two separate households within the same dwelling house. Whether this means that the Herbert family owned the whole house and Ann Jones was their tenant, or whether someone else completely owned the house and the two families were both tenants is impossible to tell from the census.
As so many experts have been kind enough to help me here, may I venture another question if anyone has time to help .. what was the maiden name of Ann Jones here, born around 1820-25, the first record I have of her is in the 51 census, Piece: 1567, Folio: 317,Page Number: 7 .. at which point she already seems to be a widow.
Have you checked the GRO website? https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/indexes_search.asp
If you search for the births of her sons Benjamin or George Thomas on there it should give you her maiden name. The 1861 census indicates that they were born in Newington, and the family were certainly in Newington R.D. in 1851.
However, looking at the 1851 census I think it says 'U' i.e. unmarried :-\
-
Annoyingly there doesn't seem to be a consistent mother's maiden name across two of them alas .. so I am probably out of luck on this one.
-
Going back to the original query, I still wonder if he was a ‘Bone Sawer’ - perhaps re furs; skins etc - maybe there were carcasses ???
Bone was commonly used as a decorative material, being a cheaper alternative to ivory. Think back to Karen McDonald's excellent link explaining the intricacies of Tunbridge ware; similar work was done in ivory or bone. Cutting the pieces would be a skilled job, I would think.
Carol
-
From " A Dictionary of Occupational Terms"
-
Thanks Stan, that's a more practical use of bone but on the same lines.
Carol
-
There would have been a big demand for bone cutlery and shaving brush handles.
Stan
-
That sounds good :) I never thought of that re cutlery and of course bone buttons etc.
I was thinking of a factory in our town when I was a child which produced a horrid smell - hide, skin and ...( possibly fat) was the name. I think it was a glue factory ???
-
Cutlery! That's the one I couldn't think of - all those bone-handled knives etc., kept for 'best' and never used ::)
And buttons - cheaper than mother-of-pearl and an endless supply :D
Carol