Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Dumb copying

  1. #1
    Brick wall demolition expert!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    3,642

    Default Dumb copying

    We all know (or at least should know) not to take published family trees at face value; and I will look at them to see if they have any value.

    Today, I came across a "match" to someone in my tree, so I thought I would look a little more, and there were 10 family trees with similar information.

    Seven of those ten had the person in question dying 3 days BEFORE he was born !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Needless to say I have discarded those "hints".

  2. #2
    Knowledgeable and helpful warncoort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Perth,Western Australia,Australia
    Posts
    640

    Default

    Likely to have started as a typo,then it was copied without any research.If i find a match it is my starting point rather than a result,and if source is shown it is easily verified.

  3. #3
    Starting to feel at home
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    merseyside
    Posts
    84

    Default

    I find that part of the enjoyment of building your family tree is the research into who your ancestors were and how they lived and not just the collecting of more and more names just because they look right and seem to fit and blindly copying from other trees. Although as warncoort says they are a good starting point.

  4. #4
    Brick wall demolition expert!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    3,642

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by warncoort View Post
    copied without any research.
    More likely copied without even reading.

  5. #5
    Knowledgeable and helpful
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    626

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Megan Roberts View Post
    We all know (or at least should know) not to take published family trees at face value; and I will look at them to see if they have any value.

    Today, I came across a "match" to someone in my tree, so I thought I would look a little more, and there were 10 family trees with similar information.

    Seven of those ten had the person in question dying 3 days BEFORE he was born !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Needless to say I have discarded those "hints".
    Actually that is indeed perfectly possible if the dates in the parish registers were recorded verbatim.
    I will not give the reason this evening but I expect someone will post it very shortly.
    Cheers
    Guy
    As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

  6. #6
    thewideeyedowl
    Guest

    Default Gregorian calendar

    The Gregorian calendar was adopted in 1752. In that year Wednesday 2nd September was followed by Thursday 14th September, so eleven days were 'lost' - to the confusion of many.

    Owl

  7. #7
    Brick wall demolition expert!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    3,642

    Default

    But the person in question was baptised 8 January 1837 and was buried 5 November 1837, so they can't use that excuse.

    One of them obviously started the "Chinese whisper" by putting "born 8 Jan 1837 died 5 Jan 1837", and the lemmings just copied it.

  8. #8
    Super Moderator - Completely bonkers and will never change.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    9,620

    Default

    One of my uncles was baptised ten months before he was born.
    The parish register says 'Ronald William, baptised 18 February 1917. Born 27 Dec 1917'.
    The vicar obviously meant 'born 1916', but he clearly wrote 1917.

    Pam

  9. #9
    Knowledgeable and helpful
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    626

    Default

    Yes clerical mistakes is one reason but by far the most common reason for the appearance that someone died before they were born is due to what thewideeyedowl touched on, the change of calendar.

    Prior to 1752 January, February and most of March were at the end of the year. That meant someone born in January 1627 was younger than someone born in July 1627.
    This also meant that to the unwary a person could appear to die before they were born. Obviously this did not apply in the year Megan now reveals as 1837.

    However when researching prior to the change of calendar the utmost care must be used with dates as some clerics changed "their" calendar far earlier then others. Always check the register to see whether the cleric was following the old style calendar (Julian) or the "new" (Gregorian) calendar, i.e. check to see whether they add entries for January, February & March at the end of the year or the beginning of the year.
    Cheers
    Guy
    As we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.

  10. #10
    Super Moderator Sue Mackay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rhoose Point, South Wales
    Posts
    6,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pam Downes View Post
    One of my uncles was baptised ten months before he was born.
    The parish register says 'Ronald William, baptised 18 February 1917. Born 27 Dec 1917'.
    The vicar obviously meant 'born 1916', but he clearly wrote 1917.

    Pam
    Even worse than being baptised prior to birth, my husband's 2xgreat grandfather was apparently buried before he died
    Sue Mackay
    Insanity is hereditary - you get it from your kids

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Select a file: