Genealogy Chat

a very interesting thread I have a couple of babies missing will see if I can now find them thanks.

Nell, The thing about 'additions' at the bottom of the page is a good tip as well - I've certainly been guilty in the past of looking at an index page, not finding the entry I'm looking for, and going on to the next page without remembering to scroll down to the bottom to check for additions. Andrew.

Thanks Andrew, will keep that info. in mind Regards Mau

Andrew Two good tips there - one is never give up, sometimes when you look again you find. The other is about children registered as just male or female. Of course some children are registered with names other than the ones they are known by. It's also useful to remember that at the bottom of the index pages there are quite often additions which aren't in the right part of the index. nell

I don’t know if this is a tip or just me bragging about breaking a brick wall, but… When I first started researching my family history about three years ago, I found from the census that one of my great grandparents, Joanna Stone, was born in Lowestoft in about 1838. (Actually, the later censuses had her born five or six years later, as she had knocked a bit off her age to avoid letting the world know her spouse was thirteen years younger than her… but that’s another story.) Well, having found the registration district (Mutford), I looked up her birth on FreeBMD – nothing. Of course, FreeBMD is incomplete (and was even more so three years ago), so I looked in the BMD indexes at the Family Records Centre in London. No Joanna Stone to be found, though I looked from 1837 to 1841. (No point in looking any further – I’d already found her in the 1841 census). Well, I just assumed that her birth hadn’t been registered – it wasn’t compulsory in those days, after all – and moved on to other things. I knew her mother’s name from the census, and found out her father’s name from other research - but the other week, for whatever reason, I looked at the BMD indexes again. Still no Joanna, but this time I noticed a “STONE – Female” registered in Mutford in the December quarter of 1838. I applied for the certificate and… bingo. It arrived today and from the other info given, there’s no doubt that it’s Joanna, despite the lack of a first name. The tip is not to forget those little lost souls listed without a given name in the BMD indexes. Our ancestors didn’t always decide on a name for their children straight away. In this case the registration was 26 days after the birth, and they still hadn’t decided. One warning, though. The most common reason for a birth to be registered without a given name was that the baby had died already, and the parents had therefore not bothered to name it. So if you find a possible ancestor without a given name it’s worth checking the death index to make sure there isn’t a matching death in the same district for the same quarter with no given name but the same surname. Andrew.

See below