Author Topic: Problem with Ancestry record  (Read 515 times)

Offline Nick_Ips

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Problem with Ancestry record
« Reply #9 on: Sunday 02 May 21 15:39 BST (UK) »
A search on Ancestry using England and Scotland Select Cemetery Registers 1800-2016 revealed a burial for her in Chingford Mount Cemetery on 26 Feb 1903 in Section G10, Grave 61777 and internment 61866. The transcript gives very little detail than that quoted above, so I wanted to find an image.

There are actually quite a few pages that have been missed.  They ARE there as you can see the page numbers showing through, they just haven't been included.

I've had problems with missing pages in this dataset. I found a workaround that works in most cases and has done for Gertrude.

The method is to go to the image for the nearest page, then manually edit the URL adding (or subtracting) 1 to/from the image reference in the URL to get to the next page.

Gertrude's record is on the left hand side page of folio 145.

The manually edited URL reference number for that image is 46493_3082375_0013-00199

(digits in red are the ones I had to change)

- however, I'm using the library edition at the moment so the URL format might be different on other versions.

When viewing that image the viewer claims it is image 2147483575 of 272.  ;)

Gertrude's address was given as Margaret [St/Sq] Hackney.

The entry immediately after hers with the same grave number appears to be for an (unrelated?) baby.

Edit: and there are further burials with the same grave number on the 27th.

Offline Greaves

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,040
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Problem with Ancestry record
« Reply #10 on: Sunday 02 May 21 17:49 BST (UK) »
Thanks very much, your trick with the URL worked brilliantly. I now have a screen shot of the register. The address by the way, is the same as on the death certificate and confirms that it is my relative's wife.

The only problem is that I still can't find the burial of my blood relative, John DANIEL(S), Gertrude's husband. John died at the same address (Margaret Street, Hackney), a few weeks before Gertrude on the 22 Dec 1902, aged 87. I would have thought that he would have been buried in the same cemetery, but despite using your trick on the missing pages just after his death I still can't find him.

I would welcome any suggestions.

Online Comberton

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 808
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Problem with Ancestry record
« Reply #11 on: Sunday 02 May 21 17:55 BST (UK) »
Just to say you can download the full image as well.
Glad you got the record, Thanks Nick for the solution.


Offline Nick_Ips

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Problem with Ancestry record
« Reply #12 on: Sunday 02 May 21 18:31 BST (UK) »
The only problem is that I still can't find the burial of my blood relative, John DANIEL(S), Gertrude's husband. John died at the same address (Margaret Street, Hackney), a few weeks before Gertrude on the 22 Dec 1902, aged 87. I would have thought that he would have been buried in the same cemetery, but despite using your trick on the missing pages just after his death I still can't find him.

I had a look for him as well - I discovered that entering "Chingford Mount Cemetery" in the keyword search field and selecting 'exact' will reliably list all records for just that location, and can be narrowed down by year, name etc.  I didn't see anything that came close to being a John DANIEL(S).

By searching for "Chingford Mount Cemetery 61777 G10" I found 36 records, so it appears Gertrude was buried in quite a large common grave.  Presumably the burial location was not necessarily a choice made by Gertrude and/or her family, and I'd guess it is possible that John's burial place was also decided by others rather than a family choice.

On the thread started by deejayEn the other day I commented that I have found some oddities with this dataset (not just these ghost/missing images) so another possibility is John is buried in the same cemetery, but for some reason the document recording his burial is missing from the set.
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=848185.0

And finally to just add, I'm fairly sure the uncertainty regarding the location(s) of the "Barnet" cemetery doesn't apply to Chingford Mount Cemetery as I got good correlation between records appearing as "Chingford Mount Cemetery" and graves that can be identified as definitely being in that cemetery.

Offline Greaves

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,040
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Problem with Ancestry record
« Reply #13 on: Sunday 02 May 21 18:46 BST (UK) »
Yes, I did the same for Chingford Mount with the same result.

I guess that for a poor family, as they were, there wasn't always a to of choice about final resting place. A common grave rather than a family plot was probably the norm.

I wonder whether the undertakers had a say, advising clients of the lowest cost options. Perhaps, some even had "arrangements" with local cemeteries. After all, with local churchyards closing down, it was a booming business opportunity with a steady stream of clients.

However, cynicism aside, I'm still wondering about how to track down his final resting place. It is a shame that there isn't a more comprehensive website for all the private and municipal cemeteries that arose in the second half of the 19th century.

Offline Nick_Ips

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Problem with Ancestry record
« Reply #14 on: Sunday 02 May 21 19:31 BST (UK) »
I wonder whether the undertakers had a say, advising clients of the lowest cost options. Perhaps, some even had "arrangements" with local cemeteries. After all, with local churchyards closing down, it was a booming business opportunity with a steady stream of clients.

However, cynicism aside, I'm still wondering about how to track down his final resting place.

A long shot, but a funeral director incorporating the same company name as the one for Gertrude's burial is still operating on the same street in Hackney.

If it is the same company and they arranged Gertrude's burial, there is a chance they also did John's. The odds are possibly low but is there a chance they have retained records going back that far and might be able to help in some way?

Offline Nick_Ips

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 483
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Problem with Ancestry record
« Reply #15 on: Sunday 02 May 21 20:19 BST (UK) »
Thanks Nick for the solution.

Thanks. I'd found myself in the same frustrating situation as Greaves several times before I cracked it.  :)

Offline Greaves

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,040
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Problem with Ancestry record
« Reply #16 on: Monday 03 May 21 13:28 BST (UK) »
I have followed the advice and have e-mailed the funeral directors who arranged Gertrude's funeral. I can't say I hold out much hope, but you never know.

PS Ancestry weren't very helpful, just suggesting that I contacted the people who compiled the database. Easier to rely on Nick's great solution.

Offline Greaves

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,040
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Problem with Ancestry record
« Reply #17 on: Tuesday 04 May 21 18:14 BST (UK) »
I got a phone call from the funeral directors today and sadly they no longer have records for 1902-3. They were very helpful and gave me a few suggestions, so not wasted effort.