Genealogy Chat

Bear with me, Im a little confused!
I have an Elizabeth Minnie Rowland born 1889 in Horsham, Known as Minnie. Many thanks to those who tracked her down.

Found a Minnie Rowland on 1901 census.. 16 queen street Horsham aged 12.. so this fits, but due to name went back a census... however didnt realise I had gone back to 1881.... found the same family same address with a daughter Elizabeth, born c1878.... so my initial thought was maybe they had a daughter called Elizabeth who died and thus called my Gx2 grandmother Elizabeth.... found the 1891 census and both Elizabeths are on there and are both Daughter (elizabeth A D and Elizabeth M)... was it common to have 2 daughters of the same name?
any thoughts greatfully recieved

carrie

I have a few relatives that share first or middle names with the same parents, I think its just the way they did things back then to carry on a name, and I'd guess in your case they probably were known in the family by there middle names to stop confusion.

I think quiet a few people find multipul children called the same name in a family, because as the child with that name passed away its been given to the next child of the same sex born to that family.

On the image it's Eliza M, not Elizabeth. For some reason the enumerator seems to have put full stops after some of the forenames for that family, so maybe the transcriber though Eliza. was short for Elizabeth.

Always check the image!

good point about the names, bit muddled now as everything fits with it being "Minnie".. dates, place of birth and the fact that in 1901 she is down as "minnie". Even the address is situated around the right area for the family
not sure now whether it is the right one or whether it is a huge coinsidence... do I take a chance or does it look like a birth cert should be ordered??

Can't find an Elizabeth Minnie b1898 in Horsham, but there is an Eliza Minnie. Where did you get Elizabeth Minnie from?

Births Mar 1889 (>99%)
Rowland Eliza Minnie Horsham 2b 320

just had a look on the 1911 census and looks like she is a definate Eliza and not an Elizabeth... birth reg has confirmed this... probably why I couldnt find the birth registration as Elizabeth.
thank you for pointing out that it isnt always a shortened form of Elizabeth....
strange thing on 1911... she is with her family as Eliza Minnie Murrell, Married.. but the Murrell and Married are written over Rowland and single which have been crudely rubbed out. At this point her son (my great grandfather) was a nurse child in Reading!?! but "husband" isnt there, they married around March 1907.

found William her husband with his parents as married!!

I am hoping he is a visitor.... its going to bug me till I can top up my credits tomorrow!!
I would love a time machine to go back and find out why they married in Reading, had a family in Reading take my great grandad as a nurse child and came back to their home town! My nan recalls her father being bitter about his mothers family till his dying day!

One more thing, she married as Eliza too:

Marriages Mar 1907
MURRELL William Ernest Reading 2c 612
ROWLAND Eliza Minnie Reading 2c 612

Rose

The fact they're not living together in 1911 sort of implies they separated but I see they had 2 more children.

Rose

It is all a bit odd!! Will post what the original image says when I get some credits tomorrow.. Im hoping it says visitor for William.... dont know how I could investigate Harold being a nurse child...
I could understand it if he was illegitamate and it was done for the sake of scandel and the "what would the neighbours say" .... my aunt (Harolds daughter)and my nan thought this was the case.

Hello Carrie, maybe the discord with Minnie's family was because they didn't recognize the marriage & forced them to separate. She was a minor when she married, & they may have been able to do that, & kinda explains Harold being a nurse child. Probably the marriage was a sort of elopement.

Then Eliza & William got together when she turned twenty-one. Far-fetched, I know, but the nurse child bugs me.

ahhhh that would explain it, I thought she was young when she married. Hence Molly (Harolds sister) wasnt born until 1916 I suppose. back off to work in a bit but will continue the hunt when I get home.
Thanks for the tip :)

Surely if she was a minor when she married she would have needed her father's permission?

Probably why they got married in Reading. She was 20 so could've passed as 21. Not everyone is scrupulous with the paperwork.

It's only a theory.

Ozi.