Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - coombs

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 843
1
The Lighter Side / Re: Myths debunked when doing family histroy.
« on: Today at 21:11 »
Another myth is that you should be able to always find a record of a death of someone. It is easier from civil registration onwards but even then not always. Workhouse burials where the registers do not survive, non conformist burials, lost at sea, went missing and never identified etc, and so on.

Lots of overseers ratebooks and disbursement books for Essex are on FamilySearch for a number of parishes. I was able to pinpoint an ancestor's death year by this, as it said "William Ingram Snr" for September 1794 ratebooks but for Dec 1794 it said "Widow Ingram" for what seems to be the same property as the neighbours names are the same. No burial can be found in Leigh On Sea for him in 1794 but he may have been buried elsewhere or in a workhouse cemetery or NC grounds. Also the family were mariners so worked in a dangerous job, and he may have been lost at sea.

Handy to use such books if a burial cannot be found.

2
The Lighter Side / Re: Myths debunked when doing family history.
« on: Today at 15:04 »
Quote from: MollyC on Yesterday at 22:48
I have commented elsewhere that I had found two instances of a person missing from his family at censuses, 1851 and 1901.  A long while later they were each found staying in hotels with surnames mis-spelled, presumably because the proprietors were not taking care filling in the form.

One was discovered in London on business.  The other was at the seaside, while wife and daughters (found previously) were staying with the mother-in-law.

That could be the case with my Quilter lot, they were in the local parish church on 30 March 1851 having 2 children baptised, but may have gone for an Easter break somewhere that day and missed the census. The father was a fisherman by trade. I will probably never know how they missed the census, if they missed it that is.

3
The Lighter Side / Re: Myths debunked when doing family histroy.
« on: Yesterday at 21:52 »
Another myth debunked is that "Everyone should be on the censuses, and if you cannot find them at first, they will be there somewhere". Missing pieces in census records, or the enumerator missed a house or two etc.

I have a story of my Quilter family Nathan Quilter born 1808 and Elizabeth born c1813 in Leigh On Sea Essex, who had their twin children Jabez and William Quilter baptised on 30th March 1851 at St Clement, Leigh, Essex, and that day was also the day of the night of the 1851 census. Yet they are nowhere to be found on the 1851 census at all.

4
The Lighter Side / Re: Myths debunked when doing family histroy.
« on: Monday 22 April 24 18:40 BST (UK)  »
Quote from: sylvia (canada) on Monday 22 April 24 17:58 BST (UK)
Quote from: coombs on Monday 22 April 24 16:27 BST (UK)
I have one who wed in Norwich in 1725 and she only had 2 known children, maybe she was about 35 when she married. I found a likely burial in 1768 aged 80, so born c1688. Then again we should never wholly rely on ages given in records, especially ones that have a "landmark" figure age at burial like 70 or 80, maybe the informant estimated their age.

Even now, you cannot trust ages, or many other "facts", on death certificates, as they are only what is known to the informant.

My grandfather died in 1963, he had always told us his birthday was on Christmas Day, and he was a certain age. That is what his son declared to the Registrar.

Nope, he was born on January 9 and his age was about 2 years out! But that was only found out later.

I believe that all you can expect to be true on any death certificate, up to the present day, is .....

Date of Death
Place of Death
Cause of Death
Doctor's Name
Coroner's Name (if there)
Name and Address of Informant (hopefully)

All else is only what is known to the informant, and must be checked out very carefully, if possible.

Very much so. I have one ancestor's cousin who died in 1985 and the DOB was given as 30 January 1915, but the birth cert says 27 December 1914.

I even have a step uncle born 8 November 1964 whose funeral service card says born 1 September 1964. However he said his birthday was in November and his birth was registered in the last quarter of 1964. He was of Jamaican parentage and the first of the children of the couple born in England, and his mother born 1 June 1929 and older sister 1 Feb (about 1959 or 1960), so bit of a coincidence they all had birthdays on the first of the month. I would go with the 8 Nov date, and more reliable than a funeral service leaflet, especially as he said his birthday was 8 November.

5
The Lighter Side / Re: Myths debunked when doing family histroy.
« on: Monday 22 April 24 16:27 BST (UK)  »
I have one who wed in Norwich in 1725 and she only had 2 known children, maybe she was about 35 when she married. I found a likely burial in 1768 aged 80, so born c1688. Then again we should never wholly rely on ages given in records, especially ones that have a "landmark" figure age at burial like 70 or 80, maybe the informant estimated their age.

6
The Lighter Side / Re: Myths debunked when doing family histroy.
« on: Monday 22 April 24 16:11 BST (UK)  »
Quote from: DianaCanada on Monday 22 April 24 14:43 BST (UK)
There is also the myth about women marrying at a young age, i.e. under 20.  I find most brides in my family range from 20-24.  I think this myth might have originated in the USA where brides might have skewed a bit younger. 
Puberty happened later in the past, so young mothers of 15-16 are rare, most of the births without marriage seem to be hovering around 20 and even older.

Also it is wrong to assume in the pre census and BMD era that a woman was around 20 when she married, if there is no other record of her age, a woman in say 1750 who had children after marrying could have been up to the age of 35. If she had just 2 or 3 children, it could be she married later in life.

7
The Lighter Side / Re: Myths debunked when doing family histroy.
« on: Monday 22 April 24 14:40 BST (UK)  »
Quote from: Andy J2022 on Monday 22 April 24 14:36 BST (UK)
Going off topic slightly (it's not about a myth), for anyone trying to locate a house or cottage based a census entry, don't forget to use all the collateral sources such as tithe maps (for rural locations) and city directories for the towns.  Dave Annal explains this technique in his excellent Setting the Record Straight series of videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clTdeptZqPg (for tithe maps) and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSTnayiyVaA (for an urban search).

Beat me to it, as I was just about to mention the fab Dave Annal and his YT videos where he also debunks many myths. I have watched a few of his videos such as his Setting the record straight video about the civil registration 1874 act, and his video on how it was very usually the householder who filled out the census records, and the image of the enumerator stood at the doorstep writing down the answers should be replaced with him collecting the filled out census form from the householder.


8
The Lighter Side / Re: Myths debunked when doing family histroy.
« on: Monday 22 April 24 12:54 BST (UK)  »
Another myth debunked is when people say "the census will give which cottage our ancestors lived in then". Maybe more likely in later census records but not so much in earlier records, and even for later records you still have to do a bit of digging to find where in the village or hamlet the cottage/house/farm was. In cities it was easier as houses were numbered more often and streets named.

9
The Lighter Side / Re: Myths debunked when doing family histroy.
« on: Sunday 21 April 24 15:01 BST (UK)  »
Quote from: Biggles50 on Sunday 21 April 24 14:46 BST (UK)
My Mrs family lore tells of her 2xGGF and his two daughters travelling over from Ireland.

Totally in error, family came from the same City as long as we can trace records.

Plus there is Zero Irish Ethnicity in her line.

My gran always said there was Irish in the blood on her mother's father's side. No known Irish blood in the paper trail. However her grandfather in Oxford was buried in 1927 in a shared grave with an unrelated woman who was born in Wexford Ireland and died in 1912 in Oxford. So a kind of Irish connection, as they will be buried together for hopefully eternity, even though unrelated.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 843