We must be careful of making assumptions. It's not only the 'red herrings' in the evidence that we have to watch out for, but also the traps we walk into of our own accord - often because we assume that what works 95% of the time will work 100% of the time. For example, when we search for a marriage we tend to assume that the wife was using her maiden name - and yet she could have been a widow although not stated on the certificate at the time of the marriage (in which case she'd almost certainly have been using her late husband's surname).
Another example: when we see people on the census described as sons and daughters we tend to assume that they're the children of the head of household and his or her spouse - yet that won't always be the case, step-children or even grandchildren can, by some, be classed as children. Sometimes the order in which they appear offers a clue. Of course it must also be borne in mind that wicked step-mothers were not only in fairy tales, and many a widower married for the second or even third time and the new wife did not want the children from a previous marriage around!
One of the hardest pitfalls to avoid is created when a widowed husband marries a woman who bears the same first name as his late wife. Unless you see a marriage that is for the same man there will be a difference in the age or birthplace shown on the census that provides a clue - but always be alert to the possibility or you may not put two and two together.
A common mistake is to think that everything has to be solved in chronological order. You might think, for example, that you have to find out who your ancestor's parents were before you can find out who her grandparents were - but that isn't always the case, especially when so many grandparents had a grandchild living with them as ‘servants’.
Another time when lateral thinking comes in handy is when you can find the answer - or part of the answer - by asking a different question. For example, you might not be able to find your direct ancestor's birth certificate - but maybe you can find her brother's birth certificate instead, and discover that her’s is in quite a different area.
And following on from that last tip, what if you can't find either certificate - doesn't that suggest there's something strange going on? When something like that happens your next step should be to run through all the possible scenarios - no matter how unlikely or embarrassing to present day eyes- that might result in this lack of evidence.
MISSING BIRTH CERTIFICATE
1 Because of the lack of legislation or guidelines and the fact that the Registrar had to find the births only approximately 65% were registered.
2 Parents were not bound to give birth information unless requested by the Registrar. Some were not truthful about the date of birth, as they had to pay if the registration was more than 6 weeks after the birth. Some parents thought baptism was a legal alternative.
3. An Act in 1874 made registration compulsory. The responsibility for registration of a birth was passed to the parents, or the occupier of the house where a birth took place. The birth had to be registered within 42 days or a £2.00 fine was payable, It still remained a common belief however that baptism registered the birth, also if the parents ran out of time they would either lie about the date of birth or simply not register and hope not to get caught.
So my advice would be before 1875 Baptism Records are more reliable.
MISSING MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE
1. From 1837, marriages were allowed to take place in a local register office, instead of a church. A new type of marriage register was introduced for all marriage ceremonies. The Church of England, Jews and Quakers could conduct and register their own marriage ceremonies. Two registers were completed, one for the church the other for the state. Other denominations (Methodists, Baptists, Unitarians etc) had to apply for their chapels to be licensed to conduct marriages and could only conduct a ceremony there if, in addition to the minister, a Registrar was also present to record the events in a Register Office marriage register. This did not change until 1898.
2. Banns might be read and the marriage never taken place for a variety of reasons.
3. The couple may never have married or not married until any children of the union were adults. The female taking the title of Mrs for appearances sake.
Again Church Records may be more reliable, especially the Banns Book.
MISSING DEATH CERTIFICATE
Not a lot to say about this because the responsibility for recording a death was placed on a relation of the deceased. The registration had to be supported by a certificate signed by a doctor, and the death had to be registered within 5 days.
When looking at the Church Burial Records bear in mind that prior to about 1900 embalming was only for Royalty and the Aristocracy so ordinary people had to be buried in 3-5 days to prevent the horrors of decomposition been seen and smelt.
ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING FAMILT HISTORY CONTACT ME
No comments:
Post a Comment