Pam Downes
11-03-2008, 3:41 PM
On a whim I decided to trace my granddad's sister-in-law.
I have her marriage, found her on the 1881, 1891, and 1901 census. Got a choice of two birth certificates I can send for, but as she's with her grandparents in 1881 and 1891, I think her mother at least is doomed to remain shrouded in mystery.
Tracing her grandparents back, it looks as if Jane's father was illegitimate. I have a George who has to be him on the 1851, 1861, and almost certainly on the 1871 census. Got several marriages to choose from, but as I can't seem to find George on the 1881 or 1891 census, again that's a no-go area.
One thing I always forget is you can often access an alternative source of information. e.g. I have an sub to the dreaded A......y, but I can also access the 1901 census index via the 1901 census site. I also have a sub to Findmypast, which also has the 1891 census online. Searching for George Barker born 1849 +/- 2 years Lincolnshire will only give me other George Barkers born in those years in other parts of the country on A.....y, but on FMP I can tick 'variant' boxes. I have thus been given Barber, Bark and Parker. Barber I was already aware of - and Baker though that doesn't figure in their listing - but I would never have thought of Parker. But one of those quite probable mistakes that can be made by an enumerator when transferring the names to the schedule, or by an indexer.
On previous occasions I have found BMDs indexed on 'local' indexes on the UKBMD site http://www.ukbmd.co.uk/ which do not appear on the GRO Index.
So always think if there is an alternative source you can use - even just for an index - and always tick the variant/Soundex box. :)
Pam
I have her marriage, found her on the 1881, 1891, and 1901 census. Got a choice of two birth certificates I can send for, but as she's with her grandparents in 1881 and 1891, I think her mother at least is doomed to remain shrouded in mystery.
Tracing her grandparents back, it looks as if Jane's father was illegitimate. I have a George who has to be him on the 1851, 1861, and almost certainly on the 1871 census. Got several marriages to choose from, but as I can't seem to find George on the 1881 or 1891 census, again that's a no-go area.
One thing I always forget is you can often access an alternative source of information. e.g. I have an sub to the dreaded A......y, but I can also access the 1901 census index via the 1901 census site. I also have a sub to Findmypast, which also has the 1891 census online. Searching for George Barker born 1849 +/- 2 years Lincolnshire will only give me other George Barkers born in those years in other parts of the country on A.....y, but on FMP I can tick 'variant' boxes. I have thus been given Barber, Bark and Parker. Barber I was already aware of - and Baker though that doesn't figure in their listing - but I would never have thought of Parker. But one of those quite probable mistakes that can be made by an enumerator when transferring the names to the schedule, or by an indexer.
On previous occasions I have found BMDs indexed on 'local' indexes on the UKBMD site http://www.ukbmd.co.uk/ which do not appear on the GRO Index.
So always think if there is an alternative source you can use - even just for an index - and always tick the variant/Soundex box. :)
Pam