Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26
  1. #1
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    106

    Default Ephraim Langford

    Hi, can I please have help?

    My Great Gran on my mum's side, Sarah Ann Langford, to my knowledge was born Jan 1871 Bridgnorth Shropshire. Her parents are Thomas Langford and Eliza Walford.
    She should appear on the 1871 St Leonard's Bridgnorth census with them, however, she is absent but there is an Ephraim Langford aged 3 months. Is he my Great Gran's twin? Where was my Great Gran when this census was taken? Why is he here but then on the 1881 census, my Great Gran is listed as being ten years old but there is now no sign of Ephraim. What happened to him? Was he sick? Did he die? I can't find any other documents with him on, just the 1871 census.

    I don't understand how he can be on the census with them and yet not have a birth certificate or death certificate?...not that I have been able to find.

    Would love to solve this mystery.
    Eliza walford does have a sister named Elizabeth, so I wondered if Ephraim could have actually been her child? But that doesn't seem to fit.

    Perhaps Ephraim has been recorded somewhere but maybe spelling mistakes are on the record and i'm not finding them?

    Thank you for your help

  2. #2
    Super Moderator - Completely bonkers and will never change.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    8,229

    Default

    My guess is that it's pure enumerator error.

    This will sound ridiculous, but say Sarah Ann aloud and see if you can make it sound like Ephraim.
    Add to that a slightly deaf enumerator/incomer not used to the local accent collecting the household schedules - probably having to help most households fill them in - and you're halfway there.

    I know that not all births prior to 1874 were registered, but it would be slightly strange to only register one birth if there were twins. There is the possibility of one twin being still-born and therefore having neither birth nor death certificate, but if both are born alive and one dies then there should be a death certificate.

    Do you have Sarah Ann's birth certificate? If she was a twin then there should be a time of birth shown on the certficate.

    Pam
    Vulcan XH558 - “Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.”

  3. #3
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    106

    Default

    Unfortunately, I don't as of yet. But there are lots of documents for her. Ephraim (spelt Ephram on the census) is down as being three months old on the 1871 census and written in as a son, so I shouldn't think he was a still born.

    Thank you Pam.

  4. #4

    Default

    Sarah Ann's birth was registered March Qtr, 1871

    FMP Baptism (image/transcription)
    26 April 1871, Sarah Ann dau. of Thomas and Eliza Langford, abode River Side, father - labourer.
    "dyfal donc a dyr y garreg"

  5. #5
    Famous for offering help & advice
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    1,001

    Default

    we don't seem to be entertaining the idea that Ephraim might have been born with a different surname. One of my great-grandfathers, who was born out of wedlock, appears on his first two censuses with his uncle's surname, with whom he was living at the time. Then he reverts to his birth surname.

  6. #6
    Growing old Disgracefully
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NORTHAMPTONSHIRE, ENGLAND
    Posts
    3,142

    Default

    Births Mar 1871

    Langford Sarah Ann Bridgnorth 6a 649

    Details for sarah ann from freeBMD

    A search for birth of all Langford in Bridgnorth bringd up no Ephraim

  7. #7
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    106

    Default

    On the census there are Marks underneath the name Langford indicating that Ephraims surname is Langford too. Ditto Mark's.

  8. #8
    Super Moderator - Completely bonkers and will never change.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    8,229

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wimsey View Post
    we don't seem to be entertaining the idea that Ephraim might have been born with a different surname. One of my great-grandfathers, who was born out of wedlock, appears on his first two censuses with his uncle's surname, with whom he was living at the time. Then he reverts to his birth surname.
    Good point, but (a) admittedly I checked only on FreeBMD but no Ephraim/Ephram births registered December 1870 or March 1871 quarters in Bridgnorth registration disrict.
    (b) If it was an Ephraim registered with a different surname, then where is Sarah Ann allegedly born in January 1871? Very weird to have someone else's child in your house but not your own who is the same age.

    I'm convinced that it's enumerator error, and for some reason 'Sarah Ann' got mangled into 'Ephram' on the enumerator's form. (When Florence M can get mangled into Hovenn A as happened with a cousin's relative anything is possible. )

    Pam
    Vulcan XH558 - “Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.”

  9. #9
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    106

    Default

    I have got copies of Sarah Ann's baptism and birth index on ancestry but I cant find anything else apart from the 1871 census for Ephraim. Where did women have babies in 1871? At home or hospital?

  10. #10
    Loves to help with queries
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sandyhall View Post
    Births Mar 1871

    Langford Sarah Ann Bridgnorth 6a 649

    Details for sarah ann from freeBMD

    A search for birth of all Langford in Bridgnorth bringd up no Ephraim
    I have just found Sarah Ann on the 1939 census in Nascot place, Watford. She is widowed. Nascot Place is where my nan lived. It gives Sarah Ann's birth date as 28th December 1870.

    I wondered if perhaps I had the wrong Thomas Langford and Eliza Walford? Perhaps Sarah Ann was in a different house with parents of the same name...but I haven't found others so I do't think that can be it.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

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: