Genealogy Chat

I have just learned an important lesson. In the BMD index I found what I took to be a cousin who had died aged 7mths. I told my cousin who has the same name as this poor baby that she had a namesake, an older sister. The birth & death certs arrived today & she is not of our family at all. Fathers surname, Mothers maiden name, place of birth all matched, then the certs arrived & all the first names were wrong. I was so sure, but I was wrong. Maybe those who have gone back many generations without certificates should think again. Vivienne

Oh don't i know how important they are after today. recieved g/grandfathers B/C his mother didn't match the one i had written down from a look-up although everything else matched county age year name. now i have to go back to spending all my hard earned cash on more units for 1837online to find the mystery doppleganger that is mimicing my rellie MOE!

I totally agree, you neglect to get certificates at your peril! 2 x GGF - finally got round to getting his marriage cert. GRRRR! He is a widower. This means that his first child is from the first wife and MY descendancy is from the second wife. (Wipe out 36 entries on my tree and shift them all one step to the side). Another 2 x GGF - eleven children, nicely spaced at 18 month intervals. Wife called Margaret. Eventually sent for two of the eleven BCs - first and last. Margaret has two different maiden names! Further research showed HE married twice, both wives called Margaret, first wife died on the day the fifth child was baptised, he married again within three months. (Wipe out umpteen more people,, shift them all one step to the left!!!) Old Crone

But what do you do with the certificates that make you say 'What???' I was having trouble establishing the maiden name of my 2 x great grandmother. Her marriage on IGI gave the same name as on parish records but someone local to the area suggested Brockhurst could be the correct name and had been misheard and so I obtained the certificates for the 2 children she had after 1837. Both name her as Rebecca, BUT although one was indeed Brockhurst, the other gives maiden name Green. I have followed the family in census, checked baptisms, marriages and burials and still think that the children had the same mother, - but how to prove it??

I would just add - I sent for a certificate and when I saw the mothers first name was wrong I was so peeved. Then a bit more researching and yep - the name was right, the census was wrong. So dont throw them away immediately, do a bit more research before you discard them.

Heather I would not throw them away anyway. I have a few 'wrong' certs which I have kept, just in case I can prove a link to them later. Lynne

How true! I have made assumptions that my family stayed at the same address and birth certs have shown that they moved around quite a bit. Birth certs can also give info about changes of job. They fill in the gaps between censuses/directory entries. In my personal experience though, for every question they answer, they fling up another question! nell

definately important but even these need checking carefully, My husbands family it depended who registered the birth if it was the father he invariably gave his wifes mothers maiden name!!! In my family I have one family where the mother said 1st child my grandfather was son of George Trim a master baker and she was Annie Francis Trim formerly Dowell but on the next 2 she said father George Dowell master baker and she was Annie Dowell formerly Francis ......... now we have always been called Dowell not Trim has made checking a nightmare. On the other hand a Death cert has helped prove which John Cornish was my ggg grandfather mind you it also showed he hung himself!! sandie

I've got a cert where the groom's first name is incorrect, but he signed his name correctly on the same cert! Neither he nor the registrar checked. nell

Hi All, Thanks for adding to the thread, I found your replies very interesting. I am lucky in that I only ordered my two certs out of interest, they have no relevance to tracing back. My mother was named after a sister who had died & I know this happened a lot. Whether this little one was the daughter of a cousin of my Dad, or maybe of my aunt I may find out at a later date but there was definitely not a name error. My aunt was Dora Elizabeth & my uncle Edward Richard. Little Pamela's parents were Ellen Lydia Matilda & John. I definitely would not throw any certificate away, someone else may be able to use it. I'm off babysitting now, have a good evening all Vivienne

if I've got this right, the fathers' surnames matched, the mothers' maiden surnames matched, and both couples lived in the same place and had a girl called Pamela, not that many years apart. So was this a case of two brothers marrying two sisters? Not all that unusual. Or at least, perhaps the two men were brothers, or the two women were sisters. That would make the two Pamelas cousins, and we all know how often cousins were given the same name, sadly. I've got a case in my tree of two brothers marrying two unrelated girls with the same surname. If there's really no connection at all, that is spooky

Hi Robin, Yes you got the first bit right but my dad didn't have a brother John & my uncles wife Dora was an only child. There is a possibilty that the family could be cousins but with my family name being Barker there could also be no connection at all. Thank's for your interest Vivienne

In 1869 I've got a two sisters, Ann Alice Gorrod marrying James Worboys in March and Jane Gorrod marrying Alfred Worboys in May, at different churches in St Pancras, for which I have certificates. James's father is called Thomas William and Alfred's is just Thomas, who is noted as deceased. Both are carpenters. I would have taken this as two brothers marrying two sisters, other than Thomas William is alive and well on the 1881 census, identified as such by living with his wife Elizabeth, born Yardley. I have identified James's birth in Hertford, son of Thomas William and he has a brother Alfred. Alfred is my gggrandfather. And I can't find a birth for him other than the one above. So the certificate for Alfred's marriage effectively rules out the brothers theory, although I can't find a death for Thomas between March and May 1869. So it's back to the hammer and chisel on this brick wall, unless anyone can come up with any explanations.

Brian Maybe they aren't brothers, but they could be cousins, both named after a common grandfather? In my family I have a great-great aunt Emily who married her brother Jack's (my gt grandfather) widowed next-door neighbour John William Evans. John William's son Frank by his first wife married Emily and Jack's niece! I knew that Emily had married an Evans, but he'd been misrecorded as William Evans. I also knew the niece had married a Frank Evans, but assumed it was a common name and that there was no connection. Funnily enough, my surname now is Evans, but there is no connection! nell

brian maybe your Alfred is James brother mistakes are made even on the certificates or maybe Alfred & his father had fallen out sanie

I take your point, Sandra, but if you start to disbelieve certificates what are you left with?

Brian - I'm sure you're right about your two people not being brothers (and I don't see how they could be cousins if both had a father with first name Thomas either? Perhaps second cousins? Or one the nephew of the other?) but sometimes you cannot believe a certificate because the people lied, and sometimes you will get a 'copied-out' certificate which has errors in it because it has been copied out wrong. So you can't believe everything that is on a certificate. But if there is no evidence that the certificate is wrong, there isn't really any reason to think it is. Coming back to the Warboys family, it was pretty common for a son to be named after the father, so it might be worth looking to see if Thomas William had a son called Thomas at all, who could be Alfred's father. Kate.

Thanks, Kate. Thomas William did have a son Thomas, born 1843, Alfred was born 1847/48 if the census ages are to be believed. Which is the same time as Thomas William had an Alfred. So the only evidence against the brothers theory is the 'deceased' on the certificate! I know all about certificate errors though, because Alfred's wife's surname was mistranscribed as 'Goddard' on a Somerset House copy, instead of Gorrod.

generally, 'unwitting' evidence is the best sort. Whenever people know they're being recorded, they try to improve on the unvarnished truth. Even indirect and inferential evidence, if it's not capable of being massaged, can be worth more than a direct statement that can be a straight fib. Certs aren't all that good, on the whole. The authority of the system stands behind the security of the records (protection from tampering) and the copying, supposedly. But it doesn't add much weight to what was actually said to the registrar and written down, the truth of that was never the system's main concern