Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

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

Okay, stop me if you've heard this one...

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Gwen

Gwen Report 11 Jun 2004 19:33

Hi Ingrid, you asked about interesting records. I came across some 17th and 18th century London marriage records. George Allen apparently murdered his wife Anne Ivorie, "a modest and good wife" in 1674, about two years after marrying her, and was hanged in chains for it... ´bye for now, Gwen

Ingrid

Ingrid Report 11 Jun 2004 19:10

Thanks to everyone who replied... I feel better for knowing that the ages aren't 100 per cent accurate, 'cos I was thinking, "7 quid up my wazoo!" y'know?! LOL! And wow, Jan, quite a few William Wilson's knocking about in the late 1860's! I feel certain that my Great-Grandfather is one of the Birkenhead entries though, since my Grandfather, (and his siblings,) were born and married there. I have to say that although I've never looked through any censuses before last week, I had *great* fun! The time just flew by! I think I'm hooked... :) Going a little off the subject, does anyone else think it's a mistake to keep the lion's share of censuses, marriage/divorce/death certificates, etc, all in one place, IE; the PRO in London? If there happens to be terrorist activity down there (God forbid!) we'll be in the same boat (if not worse,) as we were when the hall of records was damaged in WW2. It should be more equally distributed around the country I think. Those records are our nations heritage and are irreplaceable. I'd like to see some Lottery money being spent on enhancing, duplicating and preserving the records so future generations can enjoy them too. Okay... rant over! Just out of curiosity, what is the most interesting entry, (on *any* record not just a census,) that you've ever come across, and why? ~Ingrid.

Jan

Jan Report 11 Jun 2004 09:24

births for William Wilson, Cheshire 1860-1870 from freebmd: Births Mar 1860 WILSON William Hayfield 7b 636 WILSON William Pearson Gt Boughton 8a 341 Births Jun 1860 Wilson William Stockport 8a 29 Births Sep 1860 WILSON William Macclesfield 8a * WILSON William Henry Jackron Wirral 8a 3__ Births Dec 1860 WILSON William Northwich 8a 196 Births Mar 1861 Wilson William Stockport 8a 82 Wilson William Warrington 8c 142 Births Jun 1861 WILSON William Arthur Gt Boughton 8a 392 WILSON William Wakefield Northwich 8a 246 Births Sep 1861 WILSON William Edward Hayfield 7b 587 Births Dec 1861 WILSON William Ashton 8d 408 WILSON William Henry Stockport 8a _8 Births Mar 1862 WILSON William Harry Wrexham 11b 348 WILSON William James Birkenhead 8a 434 Births Sep 1862 WILSON William Ashton 8d 406 WILSON William Edwards Runcorn 8a 190 Births Dec 1862 WILSON William Charles Birkenhead 8a 387 WILSON William Richard Hayfield 7b 594 WILSON William Thomas Wrexham 11b 294 Births Mar 1863 Wilson William Warrington 8c 146 Wilson William Birkenhead 8a 433 Births Dec 1865 Wilson William James Congleton 8a 241 Births Mar 1868 Wilson William Northwich 8a 217 Wilson William Birkenhead 8a 423 Wilson William Birkenhead 8a 436 Wilson William Alexander Altrincham 8a 149 Births Mar 1870 Wilson William Nantwich 8a 341 Births Sep 1870 Wilson William Ralph Warrington 8c 121

Twinkle

Twinkle Report 11 Jun 2004 00:38

I think it's a pretty close match. Check the censuses for someone of the same name whose birthdate was 1867/66. Did you check FreeBMD or 1837online for the birth certificate? Perhaps there are two. Check deaths if you really are uncertain, perhaps he was named after a brother who died as a baby and they re-used the certificate. On the other hand, you are only one year out. Is the other information on the certificate correct? It's probable that it is the right person. People did genuinely forget their ages.

Stan

Stan Report 11 Jun 2004 00:05

Kim is right about the computerised transcription of the 1881 Census. The problem seems to be that they have used the (presumably American) convention that the age stated is the age at the birthday in the year of the Census, whereas in the UK we use age at the date of the Census. Consequently their estimate for the year of birth is only accurate for three months of the year (Jan-Mar). For other birth months they are a year out - so always look at the age and work it out yourself - never take their year! Stan

Ian

Ian Report 10 Jun 2004 20:52

Ingrid I have been down the same road myself. Lessons to learn: Allow some years either side of the deduced census age. Not only can ages be entered incorrectly, or the birth month falling befiore/after the census date, but the declarations can be erroneously or diliberately wrong. Never assume you have the right family. It is amazing how many people with the same names/professions/children's names and also living in a similar area are an entirely different family. Always double-check results with as many different sources as you can find. Best of course are actual certificates, and even they can be wrong! Keep an open mind. Ian

Kim

Kim Report 10 Jun 2004 20:24

They often seem to be a whole year out on the 1881 census, i've found that too. Kim

Geoff

Geoff Report 10 Jun 2004 20:16

Assuming you meant 1867, he would be 13 at the time of the 1881 census and aged a further 19 years in the following 20 - that's pretty close in my experience. I had one couple who aged only 7 and 5 years between 1891 and 1901! It's not altogether unknown for people to actually get younger from one census to the next. A carter was the 19th century equivalent of a lorry/van driver.

Ingrid

Ingrid Report 10 Jun 2004 20:03

I found my relatives on the 1901 census and it gave my Great-Grandfathers age as WILLIAM WILSON - 32 yrs. So, depending on which side of his birthday he was on, he was born in 1868-89, right? Checking on the wonderful British 1881 census, (computerised! YAY!) I found a boy who seemed to match William's details... he was age 13, lived in Birkenhead, Cheshire, England and worked as a "shop boy." (William grew up to become a Master Butcher, so I figured he was in line to become an apprentice on the 1881 census.) Also, he had a brother called James which was the name of my Grandfather, and William's son, if it was him. So I took down details of his household, the head of which was his widowed mother Eliza. BUT! When I got the birth certificate for William, it states his birth date as 27th Nov... 1867! How the hell?! Have I bungled somehow? Or was the census info wrong? Does anyone have any suggestions on how I can check if *this* William is the right one? Thanks in advance! ~Ingrid. P.S. By the way, anyone know what a "Carter" is please? It was listed as the profession of Eliza's oldest son John. Ta muchly!