i am hoping someone can help me with the biggest mystery in my family tree to date!
my great x 3 grandfather Richard Hawkins (b.1836, Portchester, Portsmouth,Hampshire,UK) married Emma Sparkes (c. 1836 Cosham, Portsea,Hampshire) in Portsea in 1858.
His father is Charles (b.1810 Portchester;his mother Charlotte Knight (b.1806 Portchester)
I think I have found him in the 1841 census in what could be a childrens home in Portsea (Charlotte died in 1839) with a 'James' Hawkins which is possibly a mistake as he had a sister named Jane (b.1838)
in the 1851 census he is listed as living back with his father Charles and his second wife Elizabeth Chase and his half brother William
following his 1858 marriage he then vanishes from the records I have accessed, I have followed Emma through the years with four children from 1858 and 1868; Elizabeth, Charles (my great x 2 grandfather), Jane and Emma.
In the 1861 census Emma is listed as head of house and married, in the 1871 listed as a widow.
My initial thought is that he was a mariner of some kind and was at sea at the time of the census~how would i follow this up? and where do i go from here?!
thanks all
Results 1 to 7 of 7
Thread: mystery relative
-
08-07-2008, 3:41 PM #1solsticedreamerGuest
mystery relative
-
08-07-2008, 4:15 PM #2MutleyGuest
In 1861 it looks like Emma is living with the children and her family so it is possible that he was away at sea. He returns to father more children so he has not 'gone away' completely.
There are other mariners on the same page.
What occupation does it say on their marriage certificate?
-
08-07-2008, 7:54 PM #3
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Location
- England
- Posts
- 9,620
-
08-07-2008, 9:34 PM #4MutleyGuest
You are quite right Pam, don't assume anything, so
I just presumed that solsticedreamer had proof that Charles was the son of Richard, grandson of Charles.
Help me out here solsticedreamer
-
08-07-2008, 10:09 PM #5
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Location
- England
- Posts
- 9,620
Sorry Mutley, a bit of mis-wording on my part. I wasn't querying Charles the son so much. More the two children born after the 1861 census. I should more correctly have underlined "He returns to father more children" not just the one word of 'he'.
Pam
(And I love your smilie. )
-
08-07-2008, 11:17 PM #6MutleyGuest
Now I am totally confused.
I have followed Emma through the years with four children from 1858 and 1868; Elizabeth, Charles (my great x 2 grandfather), Jane and Emma.
-
09-07-2008, 12:00 AM #7
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Location
- England
- Posts
- 9,620
Like you, I should have been in bed three hours ago as I'm obviously writing rubbish this evening.
When I took you to task for writing 'He returns to father more children so he has not 'gone away' completely', you were referring to Richard, the father of Charles.
But when I replied "No proof Richard was the father unless you've seen either a birth certificate or baptism record" I should have actually clarified it as "No proof Richard was the father of the children born after the 1861 census unless you've seen either a birth certificate or baptism record" .
Hopefully that has un-confused you.
Pam
Helping you trace your British Family History & British Genealogy.
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:26 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5
Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.
Bookmarks