Newsletter
- 16 April 2012
End of the
line for Birmingham graveyard?
Naturalisation
records at the National Archives
Finding
children who died as infants
Analysing
baptism register entries
Browsing
parish registers at findmypast
Will you
live longer if you make a will?
Ancestry
adds Surrey marriages
Findmypast
adds more parish records
Overseas
members make big Ancestry savings
The LostCousins newsletter is usually
published fortnightly. To access the previous newsletter (dated 6 April 2012)
please click here.
Whenever possible links are
included to the websites or articles mentioned in the newsletter (they are
highlighted in blue or purple and underlined,
so you can't miss them).For you convenience, when you click on a link a new
browser window or tab will open (so that you don’t lose your place in the
newsletter) - if nothing seems to happen then you need to enable pop-ups in
your browser.
To go to the main LostCousins
website click the logo at the top of this newsletter. If you're not already a
member, do join - it's free, and you'll get an email to alert you whenever
there's a new edition of this newsletter available!
End of the line for
Birmingham graveyard?
If the proposed new high-speed rail link
between London and Birmingham goes ahead the Curzon Street terminal in the Digbeth area of Birmingham will be built on the site of a
19th century graveyard, according to this BBC news article.
Meanwhile in London, Allan Jenkins has
been granted exceptional permission for the exhumation and reburial of his
mother, who was buried in West Norwood Cemetery last year, so that the grave
can be enlarged to make room for him to be buried with her when he dies.
According to the Evening Standard
report (4th April) the Chancellor of the Diocese of Southwark also gave permission
for the bodies of Mr Jenkins' grandparents and great aunt to be moved as well,
should this prove necessary.
There's an amazing collection of
memories in the BBC
Archive, including an interview with Eva Hart - who I wrote about in my February newsletter
(and who performed on the same bill as my father in 1939).
Coincidentally, when I visited the National
Archives impressive online
exhibition to mark the centenary of the sinking there was a quotation from
Eva Hart at the head of the page:
"She
was such a beautiful ship, that's how people should remember her"
Naturalisation
records at the National Archives
There are now indexes
to many of the naturalisation records held at the National Archives, covering
the period 1789-1980. Unfortunately I didn't find my German ancestors in the
indexes, but you may be luckier!
Writing in the August 2009 issue of Family Tree Magazine Geoff
Culshaw drew attention to the very high rate of
infant mortality in 19th century England. This would have been no surprise for
anyone who has studied the parish registers of the era - but I was surprised to
see that the peak in infant mortality, 150 deaths per 1000 births, was reached
in the 1890s. I suspect that this was a product of the slum conditions in which
so many city-dwellers lived, and which are described in the research of Charles Booth and Maud
Pember Reeves, and the writings of Charles
Dickens, Henry
Mayhew, and Jack
London.
Most children who died during infancy were
given names, but during the 19th century just over 1% of births in England
& Wales were registered simply as male or female - if you search the birth
indexes at findmypast you'll see them listed at the end of the Search results.
As 6 weeks were allowed for the registration of a birth it seems a reasonable
assumption that they were babies who died in their first few hours or days of
life.
Rather more than half are recorded as
male, which reflects the higher infant mortality amongst boys, and you might expect
that for every birth entry there would be a corresponding death entry (and vice
versa), but that didn't seem to always be the case in the samples I checked,
especially in the first few years of civil registration.
This apparent discrepancy may have been
the result of confusion about still-births: until 1927 still-births were not
registered - the entries in the birth and death indexes should all relate to
live births. Even now there is no publicly available index of still-births, and
normally only the father or mother of the child can apply for a copy of the
certificate, though if they are both deceased brothers and sisters are also
entitled to apply.
Finding children who
died as infants
The 1911 Census was the first to ask
married women how many children they had given birth to during their marriage - and how many of them were still alive. For
many researchers this was confirmation of something they'd long suspected -
that there were children who, because they had died as infants, never appeared
on a census.
Of course, knowing that there are
children whose births you weren't aware of, and actually finding those births
in the GRO indexes are two different things. Where the surname is a common one
the task of finding a missing birth can be very challenging, particularly if
the marriage has lasted 40 or 50 years - it wasn't until after the 1911 Census that the GRO started recording the mother's
maiden name in the birth indexes.
Tip:
although the mother's maiden name isn't recorded in the GRO birth indexes until
the 3rd quarter of 1911, some local indexes do include this vital piece of
information. Visit UKBMD to find out whether a
local index exists for the area(s) of interest to you.
Fortunately a little knowledge of
biology can help. Mothers who breastfed their children - the norm in the 19th
century - would have been very unlikely to have become fertile (and thus able
to conceive) during the 6 months after birth, and in some cases for as long as
they continued breastfeeding.
Start by calculating the time in months between
consecutive births - the ones that you know about. If you don't know the
precise birthdate in a particular case, assume for now that it was the first
day of the second month of the quarter in which the birth was registered.
You'll probably find that there was a
gap of 18 to 30 months between consecutive births. If there's a gap that's
significantly longer (and which can't be explained by the husband being away at
sea etc) then it's quite likely that there was a sad
event somewhere in the middle - a miscarriage, a stillbirth, or the live birth
of a child who died in infancy. Of course, there could be other explanations -
for example, the mother might have been ill following a difficult birth - but
if you know from the 1911 Census that's there's a missing birth, it must fit in
somewhere!
Suppose that you've identified a gap of
45 months - or 15 quarters. You can be fairly certain that the birth you're
looking for didn't take place in the first 5 quarters or the last 3 - so there
are only 7 quarters to search. Whilst I'd normally use the BMD indexes at
findmypast, this is one of those occasions where FreeBMD comes into its own -
because you can search between any two quarters that you specify.
If the two births on either side were
recorded in the same registration district, then there's a reasonable chance
that the missing birth was also recorded in the same district - and you can
also be fairly certainly that the child you're looking for won't have been
given the same first name as a surviving sibling - so by now you've probably
narrowed down the list of possibles to just a
handful.
But don't send off for any certificates
just yet - because you can narrow down the list even further! Since the child
you're looking for didn't appear on any censuses, you know that he or she must
have died before the next census - which means that you can use the information
in the death indexes to narrow down the number of possible results. If there is
an entry on the shortlist that doesn't have a corresponding entry in the death
indexes you can strike it off the list.
Analysing baptism
register entries
You can use a similar strategy to the
one I've described in the previous article to analyse baptism register entries.
You might wonder why this is necessary considering that the register normally
shows the mother's forename (and may also show her maiden name) - but, believe
me, there are numerous reasons that I've come across during my research!
Quite often the information recorded in
the register varies from one baptism to the next, even when it's the same
couple: perhaps the surname is spelled differently, the address or father's
occupation has changed, or the wife's forename is different. You might be
fairly certain that it's the same couple (it's amazing how often vicars got the
mother's name wrong) - but it's always better to test your hypotheses when you
can.
Another example from my own tree
concerns a couple who had children baptised in two nearby parishes. They had a
surname that was very common in the area, which meant it was perfectly feasible
that there were two couples with the same names - so I needed to apply logic to
the situation.
In each case the first thing I did was
write down all of the relevant baptisms in date order, to see whether it was
physically possible for one woman to have been the mother of all the
children - it was. Next I looked for
duplications in the forenames: there were some forenames that appeared more
than once, but in each case I was able to find a burial register entry for the
child who was born first.
Tip:
in the 18th century and much of the 19th century most people had only one
forename - but when parents gave a new baby the same name as a previous child
who had died in infancy they were more likely to add a middle name.
There are many problems that we come
across in our research that can be solved or minimised simply by the use of
common sense. Do you have any similar tips that you'd like me to pass on?
When I'm researching families in the
19th century I generally don't find births to mothers older than 47 or 48, and
the mortality rate for these late children seems to be much higher. Even today
the risks are higher when the mother is over 40.
But in this week's New Scientist magazine there's an article that suggests that with
the help of modern medical science women could routinely become mothers in
their 50s or even their early 60s. It's wonderful what technology can achieve,
but I wonder how it might affect the children?
Whilst I've read lots of books and
articles about DNA testing, and corresponded with many researchers who have
been using DNA to supplement more conventional genealogical methods, there's
nothing quite like doing something yourself.
I've therefore decided to take advantage
of modern technology in an attempt to break down some of the 'brick walls' in
my family tree. I'm going for a two-pronged approach: a Y-DNA test in order to
kick off a Calver surname study,
and a Family Finder test that I hope will reveal some unexpected connections.
I've decided to use Family Tree DNA,
as they have been recommended to me by numerous researchers; I shall let you know
how my voyage of discovery proceeds!
Browsing parish
registers at findmypast
Until now it hasn't been possible to
browse parish registers at findmypast - but that has changed with addition of
'Previous page' and 'Next page' buttons. Findmypast currently has digitised
parish registers from Cheshire, parts of Wales, Plymouth,
and parts of the City of Westminster;
during 2012 they will be adding the remaining parts of Wales, West Devon, and
Westminster, also part of Kent.
Note:
there are many more parish records online at findmypast than the above list
implies - records from most counties are currently available only as
transcriptions.
According to Who Do You Think You Are? magazine (March
2012) findmypast are also working on a new system for transcription errors
which will allow suggested alternatives to be attached to records. Both of
these features will bring findmypast closer into line with Ancestry; findmypast
already allows browsing of the England & Wales censuses.
Will you live longer if you
make a will?
Research carried out in New South Wales
and published in 2006 found that the average age at death of people who made a
will was 81.2 years, whereas people who died intestate were, on average, only
60 years old. (Thanks to LostCousins member John for drawing my attention to
the report.)
It would be nice to think that making a
will would add 20 years to one's life expectancy, but of course there's an
obvious flaw in this line of argument (which I'm sure you've already spotted).
Nevertheless this example serves as a
handy reminder of how statistics can be misused - and not always intentionally:
journalists frequently quote statistics in a misleading way, and often it's
only by going back to the source that we can discern what the research really
tells us (if anything!).
The same applies to family history
research - unless you can find the source records
There was a very interesting post on the
National
Archives blog recently, in which Audrey Collins reminded readers that some
of the documents held at the National Archives are fakes or forgeries, and also
pointed out how easy it was to obtain a death certificate prior to 1874.
Not everybody wants to find other
researchers who share their ancestors, so here are my top tips for avoiding
your cousins:
(1) Don't enter any relatives on your My Ancestors page - this works really
well, and is my No.1 tip.
(2) Focus on just one or two lines -
that way your cousins from other lines are very unlikely to find you.
(3) Remember that most of your living
relatives don't share the ancestors who were alive in 1881 - they are connected
through an earlier generation. This means you can avoid most of them by ignoring
your ancestors' extended families.
(4) If all else fails,
and one of your relatives tries to get in touch, don't reply.
These tips are proven to work!
Ancestry adds Surrey
marriages
Marriage
Bonds and Allegations recently added to Ancestry cover 750,000 marriages in
the Surrey area between 1597 and 1921.
Findmypast adds more
parish records
Nearly 700,000 parish records have been
added at findmypast, including more than 400,000 Northamptonshire burials. For
more details of the new records, which also cover Yorkshire, Dorset and
north-west Kent, or to search them, click here.
Last time I gave some examples of
double-counting in the censuses, which led to some interesting correspondence
with members. For example, Barbara wrote to tell me that in 2011 she and her
husband were recorded on two censuses in different countries: as UK residents
in March, then as visitors to Australia in August.
Ann's tale of the 2011 Census was a sad
one - her mother was taken to hospital and died two days before the census, but
being very efficient had already submitted her census form. I wonder what the
family historians of the future will make of that? Keith
told me of a similar error in the 1911 Census - his grandparents listed 4
children, even though their answers to the 'fertility' questions indicated that
one of them had died. Further research showed that George Reeve had been born
in October 1909, but died in June 1910 aged 8 months - the age that was shown
on the next year's census form. Keith's grandparents weren't the only ones to
make a mistake like that - my great-great uncle listed his youngest child on
the 1911 census form, even though she died (aged 1 year) before the day of the
census. However, in this case he realised his mistake and struck out the entry.
Janet discovered an entire household of
14 people that appears twice in the 1861 Census of Liverpool, at two completely
different addresses. How did this happen? Looking at the map the two streets
run parallel before eventually crossing over - so it's likely that the building
where they lived and worked had entrances in both streets. Interestingly,
although the same 14 people are listed in each entry, there are several
differences in spelling and age, so I suspect that one form was filled in by
the householder and the other by his wife (perhaps neither knew what the other
had done until it was too late?).
I can't finish this article without
mentioning the 1911 Census schedule that Den spotted: it was written out by the
enumerator, who noted that it had been "Recopied because of strong smell
of fried fish"!
Since writing about the cost of England
& Wales certificates I've had a number of emails from Australian members
asking what we've got to complain about, since Australian certificates cost far
more than ours (for example, they cost $37 in Queensland, equivalent to £24).
My answer was a simple one - if Scotland
can provide the information online for less than £2, then other countries
should be able to do the same.
Family historians in Australia are going
to have to fight their own battle - I can't do it for them, though I can tell
them that the best way to start is to use Freedom of Information legislation to
obtain both a detailed breakdown of the cost of producing certificates, and an
explanation of the way in which certificate prices are currently set.
But it's not just certificates that
Australian members have been overpaying for....
Overseas members
make big Ancestry savings
In my tips column in the last issue I reminded
overseas members that they could save a fortune by buying subscriptions from Ancestry.co.uk,
rather than from their local Ancestry website.
Brian in Canada saved $115 by switching
his Ancestry subscription to the UK site. But the savings are even greater for
members in Australia: Valerie wrote to tell me that she'd bought a Worldwide subscription, the best Ancestry offer, for just
£135.13 ($208.93); previously she'd been paying almost as much for the
lowest-level subscription from Ancestry's Australian site. Similarly, Cathy saved
well over $200 by switching her Worldwide subscription to the UK site - and she
didn't even have to change her sign-in or re-enter her credit card details.
Cathy went on to tell me that her only
problem now is deciding how to spend all the money she has saved - though she
generously spent £10 on a LostCousins subscription as a way of thanking me for
the tip.
No matter which Ancestry site you
currently subscribe through, you'll find that the cheapest place to buy a Worldwide subscription is Ancestry.co.uk!
In some cases you'll find that you can get a Worldwide
subscription for less than you're currently paying for an inferior
subscription.
Tip:
Ancestry will try to send you to your local website; click here
to go direct to the UK site.
I expect many LostCousins members who
followed my advice to buy 1st and 2nd class stamps ahead of the price increase
were feeling smug when they heard on the news about the present shortage - some
retailers will be out of stock until next month, by which time the prices will
have gone up.
However, it's still possible to buy stamps online from
Royal Mail, and whilst there's a postage and packing charge of £1.45 that's
more than covered by the saving you make on the first book of stamps you buy
(they're going up by an amazing 14p on 30th April). And when you buy online
from Royal Mail you're not limited to the range of stamps that you'd find in
your local post office - for example there are some new 1st Class stamps being
issued on 24th April that will be on sale at the old price for just 6 days
(you'll find the details here).
You can even buy last year's Christmas
stamps, both 1st and 2nd class, at the old prices - why not use them to send
out this year's Christmas cards?
My personal favourite is this beautiful miniature
sheet of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee stamps. At just £2.76 it costs no more
than you'd pay for 6 ordinary 1st Class stamps (which in 2 weeks' time will set
you back £3.60).
After my article about scams in the last
issue LostCousins member Nicky wrote to tell me about Action Fraud UK,
run by the National Fraud Authority, which encourages members of the public to
report online scams even if they themselves haven't been victims. They are currently
running a campaign called The Devil's in
your Details, which alerts the public to the dangers of giving out
information to people who may not be who they say they are. It's well worth visiting the site just to
read about the myriad different techniques and scams that criminals use to get
their hands on other peoples' money!
Very few people have realised that
budget airline Ryanair now offers the option of reserved
seating in the front 2 rows or the exit rows over the wings. True, there's
a charge of £10 per seat, but when you're as tall as I am it's
well worth paying extra for the privilege of sitting in an exit row, especially
since priority boarding is included in the price. It's good reason to check-in
the full 15 days ahead while the seats are still available.
Finally, I've been watching the price of
Family
Tree Maker Platinum at Amazon, and at last it has come down again! You
can currently buy the 2012
edition for just under £30, which considering that it comes with a 6 months Premium
subscription to Ancestry (worth £53.70) is a bargain, but if - like me - you
don't intend to use the software the 2011
edition is an even bigger bargain at £23.98 (£27.27 including postage), saving you
nearly 50%.
Family
Tree Maker World Edition comes with a
6 month Worldwide subscription, though the saving on
the 2012
version isn't that great. However, at £49.99 (£53.28 including postage) the 2011
version offers UK subscribers a saving of just over 30% - which is well worth
taking.
This where any last
minute amendments will be recorded or highlighted.
Please keep sending in your news and tips
- many of the articles in this newsletter result from suggestions from readers
like you!
Peter Calver
Founder, LostCousins
© Copyright 2012 Peter Calver
You
may link to this newsletter, and I have included bookmarks so you can - if you
wish - link to a specific article by copying the relevant entry in the list of
contents at the beginning of the newsletter. However, please email me first if
you would like to re-publish any part of the newsletter on your own website or
in any other format.