Genealogy Chat

I'm trying to track the movements of one Anna Maria Randall, born in Holt, Norfolk in 1861. She appears in the marriage register in Norwich in 1887; there are three entries on the page, and I've established that the other two married each other, so I'm not quite sure where she fits in - and then she appears on the 1891 and1901 censuses, both times unmarried. Any suggestions - hubby didn't turn up for the ceremony, she'd already signed the register and his behaviour put her off marrying for life, maybe?!?!

Are you talking about Free Bmd? It may be that they haven't transcribed her husband yet.

When you say she appears in the marriage register, do you mean the GRO index to marriages registered? if its on Freebmd they often havent' transcribed all the names - its done alphabetically. Which would explain why you found one couple and your unattached lady. But that doesn't explain why she turns up on the census later unmarried. I'll investigate.

Is this the reference: Edith Fox 1887 Oct-Nov-Dec Norwich Norfolk Thomas William Nobbs 1887 Oct-Nov-Dec Norwich Norfolk Anna Maria Randall 1887 Oct-Nov-Dec Norwich Norfolk As its done alphabetically the husband's name probably starts with letter S-Z.

Thanks. I mean the GRO index - the entry in question is December 1887, volume 4b page 341: Edith Fox Thomas William Nobbs Anna Maria Randall The first two turn up together on later censuses, so it's definitely mine who's the odd one out. For reference, 1891: Holt, Norfolk William Randall, head, married, 58, Holt Sarah Randall, wife, married, 66, London Anna Maria Randall, daughter, single, 29, Holt John H Randall, son, single, 18, Holt 1901: Staple Inn, London Anna Randall, head, single, 39, Holt Nellie Leonard, cousin, single, 30, Bermondsey

Is this your Anna, 1891 census: Anna Maria Randall Age: 29 Estimated birth year: abt 1862 Relation: Daughter Gender: Female Where Born: Holt, Norfolk, England RG12/1512 Folio: 31 Page: 26 Reg district: Erpingham Sub reg district: Holt Are you sure she's the same Anna Maria as the one who married in 1887? I question, because she would probably have married in her home parish.

Thanks, I've just checked 1881 and found five Anna Randalls in Norfolk, of whom only mine is a plausible age to be marrying six years later, so I would think it's her, but can't be sure.

Don't forget that there could be an Anna Maria something else in 1881 who then married a Mr. Randall who then died and she remarried in 1887? Or an Anna Maria Randall could have moved to Norfolk from somewhere else, or her name might be wrong on the 1881 census. As for the 'missing' spouse, if you buy some credits on Family Relatives at www.familyrelatives.org then you should be able to get the full list for that volume and page number to see who Anna married. It could be that the 'missing' spouse has been transcribed on FreeBMD but the page number has been mistranscribed. I would have a nose around to see if I can figure it out, but my son wants to go on the computer now! Anyway, Family Relatives should come up with the goods. Kate.

Remember they only had to be 12 to marry with parental consent, and the Anna whose marriage you found, didn't neccessarily have to come from Norfolk. Kath. x

FreeBMD says that marriages for the Dec quarter of 1887 are complete. Not always transcribed in strict alphabetical order, by the way, because many people will be working on a quarter at the same time and some of them will take longer to complete their transcriptions than others. This could possibly be the missing entry, as the middle digit is not very clear on FreeBMD's image: Marriages Dec 1887 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HOWARD Arthur Alfred Norwich 4b 311 There is also another male and a female for page 311: REEVE Edward Palmer Norwich 4b 311 WOMACK Elizabeth Norwich 4b 311 The middle digit looks a bit more clear for Edward, though, which is why I think Arthur could be the missing one. Kate.

While I have one or two ancestors born in the Holt area who married in Norwich, then returned to their birthplace, the vast majority used Norwich as a stepping stone for London or emigration. I would in general expect them to marry locally: in Erpingham or Walsingham. It seems much more likely that the woman you have found is not related, but the only way you would find out is by obtaining the certificate.

This looks like the couple who married in 1887: 1891 Annie M Howard abt 1863 Aylsham, Norfolk, England Wife Heigham Norfolk Arthur A Howard abt 1857 Mistley Heath, Essex, England Head Heigham Norfolk Clarissa H Howard abt 1889 Norwich Daughter Heigham Norfolk Merry

Looks like I was onto a red herring there then. Thanks for your help everyone.