RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: kooky on Tuesday 12 February 19 08:39 GMT (UK)
-
I can't find Hugh Kane's wife, Henry Kane's mother, Kathleen Boshell's mother, John Edward Boshell's mother!!
Hugh was my gr father's brother. Henry Kane was my grgrfather, Kathleen was my gr mother's sister, John Edward Boshell was my gr gr father and Kathleen's father.
I have posted all these problems somewhere in Rootschat :-[ but can't seem to make any progress!
They are all Irish!
Kooky
-
And what?
Have you followed all suggestions given on those posts?
If you've anything useful to add to the searches, go back and update with additional info.
Starting a post like this isn't going to bring a result any closer
Sorry, but that's the way it is.
-
That is the joy of searching in Ireland!
Yes, I would go back to what you have and re-read it?
I'm stuck in Ireland on a marriage in 1810 , it appeared in the papers but no parents mentioned .....
-
Pauline, thanks. I am not expecting much, just saying 8)
Also thanks Whiteout for input.
Kooky
-
That is the joy of searching in Ireland!
Yes, I would go back to what you have and re-read it?
I'm stuck in Ireland on a marriage in 1810 , it appeared in the papers but no parents mentioned .....
If it was mentioned in the newspaper in 1810, there might have been a marriage settlement. They are available family search, details on how to find them are on the Irish resources page somewhere
-
It's no less frustrating when you find in the baptism records, "son/daughter of Joe Bloggs and his wife". If they are going to mentioned, at least give them a name. ::)
-
And what?
Have you followed all suggestions given on those posts?
If you've anything useful to add to the searches, go back and update with additional info.
Starting a post like this isn't going to bring a result any closer
Sorry, but that's the way it is.
Kooky is just expressing frustration the women aren't always named in the records we find. Expressing that frustration to people who it would be thought would understand that frustration. Are we not allowed to get exasperated now and again?
-
It's no less frustrating when you find in the baptism records, "son/daughter of Joe Bloggs and his wife". If they are going to mentioned, at least give them a name. ::)
Some records don't even say "and wife".
-
Thank you pharma T!
You realised what I was saying!
Kooky
-
Even though we cannot change the past, it is frustrating when the mother is not named on the baptism. In 1759 my ancestor Patience Brown was baptised, daughter of John Brown. No mother named.
I was chatting to a lady, aged about 80 in the record office a while back and she said "Women were seen as second class citizens back then, so many baptism records did not name them". Not sure I agree with that, but she did share my frustration about no mothers being named.
-
Second class citizens in all respect EXCEPT actually giving birth to the child >:( ::)
-
Second class citizens in all respect EXCEPT actually giving birth to the child >:( ::)
Even then Igor. My 3 x grt gran and her second husband were imprisoned for stealing food. The judge ruled it was her fault as she had "kept having babies". This was given as the reason for her having a harsher sentence. He was released early for "good behaviour" on the condition he did not contact either her or his children as they'd be a corrupting influence. She had to serve her full sentence as she had displayed bad behaviour after she gave birth 3mon into her sentence.
-
Kooky, I think most of us "got" what you were saying in your original post. And you are fully in your rights to express your frustration.
That's a shocking story, Pharma T.
Women were indeed treated as second class. Up until the early 19th century, wives could be sold or bartered, and a woman's property became her husband's on marriage. That's why you often see stipulations in wills about husbands not having access to money or property.
-
Kooky, I think most of us "got" what you were saying in your original post. And you are fully in your rights to express your frustration.
That's a shocking story, Pharma T.
Women were indeed treated as second class. Up until the early 19th century, wives could be sold or bartered, and a woman's property became her husband's on marriage. That's why you often see stipulations in wills about husbands not having access to money or property.
And it was only 1989 that a woman was able to say no to her husband. In a legal sense that is. I find that shockingly recent.