Genealogy Chat

In recent weeks I have been fortunate enough to contact several distant cousins that I found using the Surname Summary facility. It was clear from birth dates that a number of these distant cousins were of advancing years.

In emails I was advised of their knowledge of their immediate family history, their siblings, the Aunt Flo's, Uncle Berties and so on. However when verifying the information against BMD information on Ancestry, wide disparities were detected between what individuals thought were the facts and actual documented fact.

Some of these disparities included Birth years being wrong by numbers of years, as were the true names of siblings, cousins, aunts and uncles. In one case it turned out a person who was thought to be a sibling was not and it is uncertain at the moment who he was.

Up until recently checking and verifying information after the 1901 census has always been more difficult. Fortunately Ancestry has recently added transcribed birth and marriage information up to 2005 to their indexes which has simplified much of the process.

Provided you know the surnames of two people who married it is now possible to locate most if not all of their children, (post 1911), just by typing in the appropriate surnames as criteria in the birth data selection box.

I suppose the point I am making with all this is that as children, we are brought up with knowledge that has been passed on by our elders.

Family circumstances, (skeletons in cupboards), could well mean that some of this information was "White Lies" that have never been dispelled over time. Such incorrect information is still regarded as truth by now aging children. Memories at any age can also play tricks with information becoming distorted in the mind.

When I was a child, unmarried people living together was considered a scandalous moral issue, something that should not be spoken of in the presence of children. Now such things are the norm. Such social conventions at the time could well have distorted the way elders passed on family information.

The moral of the story being, no matter what the source and reliability of information, always verify it. Facts could prove well different than memory.

Michael

As a PS. Discretion has dictated that I have not advised a distant cousin that who she thought was a brother was not. After all these years, why should I disillusion a person on what she believes to be the truth.

Yes Family stories can get distorted or are just plain porkies to cover up. My mum told several porkies which I grew up with as "Facts" and were my basis for looking for her elder half siblings born from 1898 to 1909.was looking for 5 extra children having known the eldest sister was sent to Canada as a home child before Nan & Grandad married, Well after lots of fruitless searches I found their were 4 in total not six AND mum told a porkie that she born in 1908 when she was born in 1909. Spent more hours than was necessary tracing her family back through her dads side.
remember being regaled with family memories by my mum which i now know were variations of the truth
Shirley

So right Mick,never tell anyone that their info is wrong ,dont you think as children we wouldn't have dared to question relationships?

It,s only now , with access to records that these Skeletons are emerging, my Mum is 90 and has firmly fixed memories, not all of them right,. Her sister has another set of memories, and they have terrible arguments about the past !

Worth a nudge.