Genealogy Chat
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
It is so hard not to assume.
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
TinaTheCheshirePussyCat | Report | 12 Aug 2006 15:34 |
Oh, how true Grampa. Mind you, do you know who the father of the children was? (Not that I wish to cast aspersions on your ancestors you understand!). I was contacted recently by a 'name collector' who demanded to see my tree on the basis of a connection between the families. After a little careful questioning, I ascertained that the 'connection' was that the sibling of an ancestor of hers had married someone who had a sibling who married someone who had a sibling who married someone who had a sibling who married the daughter of an ancestor of mine. On this basis she was following 'my' family tree. Unfortunately, she was obviously not bothering to obtain the relevant certificates. If she had, she would have known that the 'daughter' in question was not in fact the daughter of my ancestor - and that my ancestor had disappeared without trace some years earlier. I wrote and asked her if she had a death for my ancestor (several of us have been looking for it for some considerable time). I have received no response! Now, if this is what makes her tick, OK, fine, I just don't feel that I have to assist with it. I have not bothered to enlighten her as to the paternity of the lady in question. After all, she might have to strike several hundred names from her tree and I am sure she would find that far too traumatic. Tina (trying hard not to make assumptions) |
|||
|
Unknown | Report | 12 Aug 2006 14:35 |
Yes I did pense mal. Lol |
|||
|
Gwyn in Kent | Report | 12 Aug 2006 14:17 |
We have a birth cert. for a child born in 1839 and the wording suggests that the parents are married...She has her father's surname on GRO. 15 days later, however she was baptised with her mother's surname and in subsequent census, the mother is the unmarried housekeeper, with her own surname. Perhaps it was one thing to cheat the system but entirely different to stand up in church and lie. Gwyn |
|||
|
Christina | Report | 12 Aug 2006 14:09 |
Did you pense mal then Jim? Christina |
|||
|
Unknown | Report | 12 Aug 2006 14:02 |
I have just been trawling the 1881, and a rellie who I had previously thought was married with 2 children appears as an unmarried 42 year old farmer of 300 acres, living with an unmarried 40 year old servant and her 2 young children. Honi soit qui mal y pense. |