Genealogy Chat

Hi Is this common? The address on my gg grandads wedding certificate and my grandads birth certificate are the same. Kind people on here have looked it for me on 1891 census and it shows , Joseph Brown Head Agnes Brown Wife Frank Brown Brother Thomas Brown Son William Baber Lodger All the ages are correct according to my research but they're all Babers (Joseph, Frank & William are brothers - all born in Batcombe, Somerset). So why is William saying he's a lodger, why are Frank & Joseph saying they were born in Bristol and why are all the others saying their surname is Brown???!!! Debby

I can think of a few possibilities: 1) They are not the same people despite huge coincidence of christian names and ages - unlikely 2) Joseph actually had a different father so was officially a Brown, even though he is William's brother - is he the older brother? maybe born before the Baber parent's married? 3) Joseph and Agnes had something to hide so were pretending to be Mr and Mrs Brown - do you have a marriage ref for them? was Agnes too young to marry maybe? As for differing place of birth lots of mine seem to get very confused about this, think it depends who gave info - parents would know where their children were born but often adults don't realise they weren't born in the same place they spent their childhood.

Hi Judith Josephs father was married in 1858 and Joseph was born in 1859 so Baber is his name. The marriage cert is Agnes Bingham & Joseph Baber although Agnes said she was 21 she was actually 18. Joseph was 29 but said he was 32. The very youngest of Josephs brother (Esau or Esan) has the same parents as Joseph (the eldest) so wouldn't make sense that any of the children in between had any other parents. Really baffling me! Debby

If I'm abroad, I say I'm from England. If in a different county, I'd say London. In Surrey, I'd say Croydon, and in Croydon, I'd say Sanderstead. They might not be able to spell Batcombe if asked and just said Bristol from laziness. Brown might be a mistranscription or an alias. You wouldn't expect the lodger to necessarily to have the same surname. Lodgers and visitors are sometimes family members, but nothing indicates this on the census. I agree that there is a great deal of -at best ambiguity - on this census entry, but it does not necessarily mean that that the information given was deliberately misleading. B

It's just so frustrating - you always have that nagging doubt that you may not have the right person. My mums side is so much easier - shoud have stayed with that side! Debby

Annoying, isn't it. I have the same problem with one of my rellies. He had three different places of birth on the censuses. I still haven't found out where he was actually born!! I imagine that on the 1871 census the form was filled in by his father, the 1881 by his mother (who was a widow by that time) and the 1891 and 1901 by himself.

On a side-track... Has anyone else come across the name "Esan". It's not one I've come across before. "Esau" is definitely biblical, so I recognise that. Christine

You're right Christine! It is Esau (says Esan on one of the censuses). Still quite an unusual name though - was reasonably easy to find! Debby

Hi Debby, Peter again. Given that the records, particularly the census of 1891 can to some extent be corroborated back to the earlier information, perhaps we are into a bit of fansasy...! So i) Joseph and Agnes were caught out and had your g grandad Thomas out of wedlock. ii) At the time of the census in 1891, (they were still unmarried) as this occurred a month or so later. iii) Being unmarried they panicked at the sight of the census enuerator, and came up with the first name they could think of.m..Brown...! iv) So Joeseph and Agnes became the Browns v) To add a little credence to the lie, Frank was recorded as brother vi) Wiliam refused to be drawn in to this deception, and was recorded correctly I do think you have got a little gem here - do keep a record of all of this for the future. Peter PS Forgot to ask - have you any of the family on the 1901 Census?

Peter - I love your explanation! On 1901 census, Agnes has remarried. Joseph died in 1898 but they'd had 4 more children by this time as well as Thomas William. Frank is happily married living in Hampstead with 5 children. William I haven't found yet but it's actually Francis William! Think he's dead. Also looks like the father William has remarried as Dinah has died also. The girls are harder to find but I'm on the case! Jim The William on the 1891 census is Francis William which matches with older censuses. There's another twist to the story if you read another thread of mine titled '1891 look up please' on the other board regarding Elijah! Confused - you will be! Debby