Find Ancestors

Thanks LadyKira. I have looked at that connection because it's Deptford. It's an interesting one for sure, and I've thought hard about it. I found Mary's marriage to Walter Ring and she was a Baker.

If I could find some evidence that Mary was married to Robert Baker before she married Walter Ring, I'd be excited, but I haven't found that. For it all to fit, Mary would've had to divorce Robert Baker, then marry Ring.

Then there's the problem of Maud's sister Sarah. She would then be Sarah Ring. There are a couple, but I can't make one look partcularly likely.

"For it all to fit, Mary would've had to divorce Robert Baker, then marry Ring."

Remind me. Is this because you have proof of life for Robert Baker at some point that would mean Mary could not have married as a widow?

Divorce is unlikely in the extreme, of course.


Marriages Mar 1892
Baker Mary St. Saviour 1d 307
Ring Walter William St. Saviour 1d 307


In the 1891 census, someone has corrected the surname of a brother of Walter in Deptford in this household:

Eliza King 48
Alfred King 26
James King 22
Walter King 20


You could always try contacting that person to see whether they know anything about Walter's family.

Another to consider

Births Mar 1887 (>99%)

Baker Sophia Maud Greenwich 1d 1011

*If I could find some evidence that Mary was married to Robert Baker before she married Walter Ring, I'd be excited, but I haven't found that. For it all to fit, Mary would've had to divorce Robert Baker, then marry Ring.
*


Marriages Dec 1882 (>99%)
Baker Robert Greenwich 1d 1529
BARRY Frances Mary Greenwich 1d 1529
Neary Mary Teresa Greenwich 1d 1529
Shinnock James Greenwich 1d 1529

"Tantalisingly, parish birth records show a Sarah Baker (Maud's sister?) with parents Robert and Charlotte in 1897"

Which parish records?

Could you copy what you have about her?

The parish records are the London ones, on Ancestry. There's a christening for Sarah Baker in 1897.

I'm convinced that Robert Baker existed because he's down on the marriage cert. But for no other reason.

f Robert Baker is Maud's father, and the Mary Baker who married Walter Ring is Maud's mother, it seems logical that Mary Baker would've had to divorce Robert Baker to get married to Walter Ring.

Unless, Robert Baker died (he likely didn't because he's on the marriage cert in 1907 and it doesn't say 'deceased'). But maybe he in fact was deceased... if so there will be a record and it will be before the marriage to Walter Ring.

Or (unlikely) Mary and Robert Baker weren't married and just happened to have the same surname.

I have spent many hours today looking for Robert Baker for you. There is not one that matches all your criteria somewhere. I usually find that when that happens I have taken a wrong turning somewhere. It may be a good idea to step back to the known documented facts and look again.

Androo, some of this is just loony!

People didn't get divorced pre 1900.

But people did give their fathers' names when they married without saying "deceased", generally because they weren't expressly asked.

They also very definitely gave false names for fathers - whether because they had been given false info, or thought a stepfather was their father, or didn't know and made one up.


You're hypothesizing that Mary Baker, mother of Maud P, who married Walter Ring, had had a child with a Robert Baker to whom she was not married but whose surname she shared??

Listen, I'm a big fan of wild theories, but that one's off my chart! ;)


And - for goodness' sake! - I **ruled out** that Maud P Baker -- by giving her marriage -- in about the 4th post in this thread!!

Marriages Mar 1907
>> BAKER Maud Primrose Poplar 1c 878
ENRIGHT Monica Poplar 1c 878
Horlick Charles Henry Poplar 1c 878
O'Keeffe John Poplar 1c 878

There is *no other* Maud P Baker in the births index, and that Maud is with her Horlick husband in 1911, matching the Maud P Baker from the previous censuses.

I'm deeply impressed and grateful for the time and effort you're all putting into this search.

I wish, for all our sakes, that we had the answer. Well, maybe we do, but unless we know it's the answer, it's no use to us.

I've sent for Maud's death cert to see if it says 'Deptford' for place of birth. If it says something different, I'll report back.

Damn woman. Nobody even liked her, apparently.

"The parish records are the London ones, on Ancestry. There's a christening for Sarah Baker in 1897."

Androo, could you really not give the details - date, parish, anything else there? (Sometimes it gives father's occupation ...)

I don't have UK deluxe access so I can't look it up -- and we shouldn't have to, when it's info you have.

My point is that there are too many maybes, She has a sister Sarah but WE will only know she has a sister if we have correctly identified Maud's birth and parents. So Susan is an assumption. And London is a big place.
What we really need to know is the exact wording on the marriage cert.

And it was not Maud P Baker as step daughter to Walter. and Mary.

Maud (approximately pronounced "mawd" in English), is an Old German feminine given name meaning "powerful battler". It's a variant of the given name Matilda, and it's uncommon as a surname. The name's popularity in 19th century England is associated with Alfred Lord Tennyson's poem Maud

Depending on where in Deptford She was born she may be registered in Greenwich Southwark or maybe Lewisham.