Genealogy Chat

Hi Paul Yes that's the way I have traced most of the females in my family with the odd exception. I feel the same as you about the 1901, but it will be their lost as people won't bother getting copies of the different lines of their families until they are sure. But it is their loss, once we have gone past the need to know we won't even bother to buy it then. Freebmd is also good for finding mistakes in the indexing. My g grandparents married I had found the marriage in Wiltshire but wanted to get a copy, this was before I realised I could have copied the Church copy. When I looked in London I could only find g grandmother. Once this was on Freebmd I looked to see what Henry Simpkins was put under, Henry Timpkins, I would never have thought to look there. Hope all we put on this site gives others ideas of where to look and how. Irene

Not sure if I am stating the obvious here, but you can always ignore it if I am. On my tree I have a number of female and I didn't know their married name/husband. For those married before 1881 I have found a way of tracking down their married names, husband and children. If you use FreeBMD (marriage search) it will give you the a list the people on that page of the register. but that can be up to four names which is not much help. But if you use the 1881 Census on LDS and substitute the surnames of the males to the known first name of your female relative you can with a bit of luck find the husband. The more you know about the female ie. age place of birth etc the easier it is. You could do the same with the 1901 census if they weren't such "Bs" and let us use the decoder. Paul