Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Is there such a name as Peths?

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Madmeg

Madmeg Report 11 Apr 2009 19:51

Allison

I can't remember how I found it, but you have to be a bit imaginative with a name like Baggott - it could even be Baguette these days!

You have to try all possible combinations of spellings, and if all else fails, pick the most unusual forename and try without a surname. Most enumerators were okay with the forename but not with the surname.

My Millwards were Milwards, Millwoods, and even Millworths.

Maggie

MargaretM

MargaretM Report 11 Apr 2009 19:30

I found it by typing in Peths Baggott with 2 g's.
Oops! Sorry, you meant the other family!

Allison

Allison Report 11 Apr 2009 19:29

Thanks Libby - I hadn't noticed that madmeg had used just the one g. I have been using 2.

Methinks I need a break.....

Thanks again for everyone's help
Alli

Libby22

Libby22 Report 11 Apr 2009 19:21

Alison, how are you spelling the surname? To find them use the spelling Madmeg posted - with just the one 'g', as BAGOTT

Allison

Allison Report 11 Apr 2009 19:02

I've done that and the first record I get has a George and Elizabeth as parents. And no Benjamin with Benjamin and Eliza as parents. Help!

Netty

Netty Report 11 Apr 2009 18:55

Allison, if you use Benjamin's name for the search it comes up first on the page, hope this helps. x.

Benjamin Bagott
1844 +/- 2
Walsall.

Allison

Allison Report 11 Apr 2009 18:40

Madmeg - did you use the Ancestry search to find the 1851 census details? I've put in all sorts and can't bring this record up.

Thanks
Alli

MargaretM

MargaretM Report 11 Apr 2009 18:26

I looked at the image in 1851 and I'm sure it's Peter. It's scribbled over because I think originally they spelled it with 2 t's then scratched one out.

Allison

Allison Report 11 Apr 2009 18:22

Thanks so much - I was convinced the other family was the one I was looking for - I suppose on the basis of Eliza being a widow and there being a Daniel and John. I obviously wasn't looking carefully enough and would have been stuck right up a dead end if I hadn't posted here.

Many thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Alli
x

Madmeg

Madmeg Report 11 Apr 2009 18:15

This is the family in 1851:

1851 England Census
about Benjamin Bagott
Name: Benjamin Bagott
Age: 7
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1844
Relation: Son
Father's Name: Benjamin
Mother's Name: Eliza
Gender: Male
Where born: Walsall, Staffordshire, England

Civil Parish: Aston
Ecclesiastical parish: St Matthew
County/Island: Warwickshire
Country: England

Street address:

Occupation:

Condition as to marriage:

Disability: View Image

Registration district: Aston
Sub registration district: Duddeston
ED, institution, or vessel: 2
Neighbors: View others on page
Household schedule number: 132
Household Members: Name Age
Benjamin Bagott 40
Eliza Bagott 34
Jane Bagott 12
Margarett Bagott 10
John Bagott 9
Benjamin Bagott 7
Eliza Bagott 6
Daniel Bagott 2
Simeon Bagott 1 Mo


Madmeg

Madmeg Report 11 Apr 2009 18:10

Hi Allison

It could indeed be Peter.

There isn't much to connect this family with the 1861 family, the children's names are all different or the ages don't tally. We can accept a few differences, but I would say they are not the same lot.

Can't find anything better yet, but I bet there are lots of spellings of Baggott to look for.

Maggie

doddsy1

doddsy1 Report 11 Apr 2009 18:07

It could be Peter Baggott as there is a registration for him in 1845

Edited;
In 1861 he's Peter BAGGOT, born Much Marcle and he's a servant of Thomas and Sarah Dew

Allison

Allison Report 11 Apr 2009 17:39

I am tracing Daniel Baggott, born 1849 in Stafford, Walsall. In 1861 census he is 12 and living with his family including his widowed mother, Eliza. I then looked for them in the 1851 census. I think they are then living in Much Marcle, Hereford - again Eliza is a widow.

In 1851, there appears to be 3 younger brothers, one called Peths who is 5. However in 1861, there is no Peths, but there is a brother called Benjamin who would be about the same age. The 1851 census is certainly not clear, so I'm wondering if it could be a mistranscript?

Alli