Family History research.

[MyRule1]

At the moment it's worth checking your local library's web-site. Here in Essex FMP is usually only available in libraries but since March you have been able to use it from home for free,

[Rivercider]

51 minutes ago, Reorte said:

Despite a fairly unusual surname my dad's attempts at tracing the line back in his direction fizzled out in the early 1800s, they were all undistinguished agricultural labourers (and one miner). I can get back to medieval times on my gran's side though. If you're in luck and find some aristocracy in there you should be able to get a long way, and considering the timespans involved most of us will probably have some aristocrats in our past somewhere, if you can just get that far.

No aristocracy that I am aware of so far. Most of my ancestors seem to be a mix of labourers, lead miners, and lace makers. The coming of the railway to Devon seems to have given a number of them a step up though,

 

cheers

[Reorte]

24 minutes ago, Rivercider said:

No aristocracy that I am aware of so far. Most of my ancestors seem to be a mix of labourers, lead miners, and lace makers. The coming of the railway to Devon seems to have given a number of them a step up though,

Railway and lead miners in your family history? As someone interested in both I'm a bit jealous! The miner in my history was a coal miner, which I'm rather less interested in, and the only railway connection I know of is my great grandfather, who apparently was supposed to clean out wagons but more often found a convenient one in an out-of-the-way siding in which to put his feet up with a good book.

[Bernard Lamb]

3 hours ago, Barry O said:

Once you get back into the 1600s FMP is not up to it.. but you can find  items in Family Search.

 

Biggest problem with all of them is trying to print information out easily..

 

Baz

If you can find any relatives who became Mormons and went to Utah Family Search is brilliant. They love to help any one connected with them. I have a branch of the family who went there in the very early period and they are on the roll of historic pioneers. Unfortunately when certain facts came to light about one member of the family the Mormons got rather upset.

Bernard

[TheSignalEngineer]

2 hours ago, Reorte said:

..........considering the timespans involved most of us will probably have some aristocrats in our past somewhere, if you can just get that far.

Statistically if you go back to the time of Henry VIII, given the size of the population in those days we should all be related to each other twice over.

[tigerburnie]

1 hour ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

Statistically if you go back to the time of Henry VIII, given the size of the population in those days we should all be related to each other twice over.

Given the lack of transport and movement of people, I read that is an urban myth.

[TheSignalEngineer]

35 minutes ago, tigerburnie said:

Given the lack of transport and movement of people, I read that is an urban myth.

Agreed, and that makes the number of inter-relationships much higher I suppose, at least prior to the coming of the canals and railways. In earlier times it was mainly fighting that moved people over any distance.

The name of one branch of my family is thought to date from the Norman Conquest. Later it was unknown in North America for the first 100 years or so of settlement. During the march south of a certain Scottish Prince in 1745 he was reputedly accommodated on their land in the North Midlands. Within five years there were several hundred people from that area with the same surname living in the American Colonies.

[Ozexpatriate]

5 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

During the march south of a certain Scottish Prince in 1745 he was reputedly accommodated on their land in the North Midlands. Within five years there were several hundred people from that area with the same surname living in the American Colonies.

It may be a bit too "American" focused, but you might enjoy "The Cousins' Wars" by Kevin Phillips. His thesis is that the English Civil War, the American Revolutionary War and the American Civil War are a continuation of the same conflict.

 

While I will confess it is not easy reading, (and while not focusing on Scots) in it he tracks the demographics of migrations to the colonies. I distinctly remember a focus on the Scots-Irish (from Ulster 1714-1775) to Appalachia. (He touches on the Jacobite emigration of the "Cape Fear Highlanders" to North Carolina and the "Scottish Grant" in upstate New York to Scottish veterans of the Seven Years War, which also includes MacDonalds and MacDonnells.)

 

Highland Regiments (including the 78th Fraser Highlanders) were instrumental in the American theatre (French and Indian War) of the Seven Years War (1756 - 1763).

 

The history of transportation to the American colonies has been largely whitewashed. At least *some* '45 Jacobites were transported to the North American colonies. The Duke of Cumberland proposed that clan Donald and Cameron should be transported in their entirety, though this did not happen.

 

It is interesting to see where Scots immigrants to the North American colonies divide between loyalist/tory and "patriot" during the American revolution.

 

Highland Scots were a big part of the western expansion of what would become Canada.

[rockershovel]

I had an aunt who concerned herself with this, and a niece has followed on the task. 

 

The first problem becomes, who do you regard as “family”? As No 1 Son quickly realised, what it actually provides is a selective path through a range of diverging options. The extant family tree is based on my mother’s side of his descent, partly because my father’s family tree can’t be traced with any certainty beyond living memory; no one seems to have any actual information, or even useful memories beyond my grandparents, on that side, and even their background is obscure. All that is known is that my paternal grandfather was living at one time somewhere around the Baltic, married an English woman working as a governess in Germany, and they settled in London around 1920 (although he appears to have had family in London at least as far back as the 1880s).

 

My mother’s family tree, or at least her branch of it, has been traced from Cambridge (where they were active in the Church) with a branch in North London, to Yorkshire in the 1600s. Most family trees become too indeterminate to follow past that time, since the Civil War resulted in extensive destruction of Church and Parish records. My aunt occupied herself in touring round, reading old gravestones etc but I’m afraid that her research further back seems more fortuitous than convincing, given the common repetition of names, the frequent absence of family names as we understand them and the variations in spelling.  

 

You might also regard my wife’s family tree as my son’s, at which point you arrive at a completely different version of things, involving people I have no knowledge of, and little interest in. 

Edited November 25, 2020 by rockershovel

[TheSignalEngineer]

3 hours ago, Ozexpatriate said:

While I will confess it is not easy reading, (and while not focusing on Scots) in it he tracks the demographics of migrations to the colonies. I distinctly remember a focus on the Scots-Irish (from Ulster 1714-1775) to Appalachia. (He touches on the Jacobite emigration of the "Cape Fear Highlanders" to North Carolina and the "Scottish Grant" in upstate New York to Scottish veterans of the Seven Years War, which also includes MacDonalds and MacDonnells

My son and his partner have traced a lot of her tree back to the 1600s. One part of her family crops up frequently in the north of England during the Civil War, whilst others seem to bounce between the west of Scotland and Ulster. Later there are many connections in North America.

[tigerburnie]

Miss spelling of names is common, as is wrong dates, there's a gravestone close to our village which states that the occupant died before he was born, clearly the engraver got the numbers the wrong way round and I guess the cost of replacement was too great. Families also traditionally used the same names, in my mothers family the male names Francis and Louis in various permutations go back over a century and a half, it get's confusing, but census data confirms them to be correct.

[rockershovel]

There’s at least one example in my wife’s family, of a child bearing the same name as a sibling which died in infancy, two or three years before. This seems to have been particularly common in the early to mid 19th Century, probably because of the expansion of literacy and record keeping - it probably wasn’t new, but becomes evident. 

[tigerburnie]

I had no interest in History as a youngster, but I really am enjoying not only finding out about my families, but the history of the ages they lived in.

[TheQ]

One branch of the family, Rawlings, Rawlins, Rawlens, Rawls, and Rawles. With their first names Herbert George, next generation George Herbert, girls Lucy over several generations.. 

 

Going back further  one couple had 24 surviving children, not a bad survival rate for a mining family, with the youngest being adopted by the oldest when the couple died, which formed a loop in the family tree...

 

An uncle named a child after his twin brother who died at  or near birth... Unfortunately that child died as well....

[Rugd1022]

11 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

Agreed, and that makes the number of inter-relationships much higher I suppose, at least prior to the coming of the canals and railways. In earlier times it was mainly fighting that moved people over any distance.

The name of one branch of my family is thought to date from the Norman Conquest. Later it was unknown in North America for the first 100 years or so of settlement. During the march south of a certain Scottish Prince in 1745 he was reputedly accommodated on their land in the North Midlands. Within five years there were several hundred people from that area with the same surname living in the American Colonies.

 

 

Similar situation with my paternal ancestors, some of whom were amongst those on the first ships to set sail for the 'new found land'. There are now thousands and thousands of folk spread across the US with our surname, variations on Ratledge, Rutledge and Routledge, whereas here in the UK it's now just a handful. My brother and I have been in touch with a few of their descendants recently in California and in the mid west.

 

There's a lot of Nordic and Scottish ancestry on my dad's side too, but my mum's side is a mixture of German / Austrian / Russian Jews and London dwelling folk. There's even a dedicated family tartan and crest somewhere amongst the Scots side.

Edited November 25, 2020 by Rugd1022

[tigerburnie]

It would seem I am mostly Anglo Saxon and Viking, which sort answers a lot of questions about me being a tearaway as a yoof I guess.

[Nick C]

2 hours ago, tigerburnie said:

Miss spelling of names is common, as is wrong dates

 

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

There’s at least one example in my wife’s family, of a child bearing the same name as a sibling which died in infancy, two or three years before. This seems to have been particularly common in the early to mid 19th Century, probably because of the expansion of literacy and record keeping - it probably wasn’t new, but becomes evident. 

 

1 hour ago, TheQ said:

One branch of the family, Rawlings, Rawlins, Rawlens, Rawls, and Rawles. With their first names Herbert George, next generation George Herbert, girls Lucy over several generations.. 

 

We found several examples of these in our tree - as most working class people would have been illiterate, censuses etc would have been done verbally, so it would have been down to whoever wrote it down as to which spelling was used - there's also the issue of many of the censuses being somewhat difficult to read, so introducing transcription errors. 

[brigo]

2 hours ago, tigerburnie said:

Miss spelling of names is common, as is wrong dates, there's a gravestone close to our village which states that the occupant died before he was born, clearly the engraver got the numbers the wrong way round and I guess the cost of replacement was too great. Families also traditionally used the same names, in my mothers family the male names Francis and Louis in various permutations go back over a century and a half, it get's confusing, but census data confirms them to be correct.

 

Actually before 1751 it was quite possible to die before being born according to the "dates". Until 1751 the start of the year was on the 25 March, so you could be born in April 1749 and die in January 1749. The changeover was 1751 which ran from 25 March  to 31 December. In 1752 11days were lost in the changeover from the Julian to the Gregorian calenders, Wednesday 2 September was followed by Thursday 14 September. The tax people at the time didn't change their year start date and the calender change is the reason our tax year starts on the 6 April.

 

Brian

[Rivercider]

2 hours ago, tigerburnie said:

I had no interest in History as a youngster, but I really am enjoying not only finding out about my families, but the history of the ages they lived in.

I was always interested in history, but one grammar school history teacher seemed to make it so dry and stuffy I lost interest for a while.

Now  I am hoping to learn more about my ancestors, not so much interested in going as far back as I can, rather that I can find out more about the places they lived and jobs they did in the 1800s and 1900s. In recent years I have done some walking in Devon in and around the area they mostly lived (Dartmoor - Tiverton - Honiton - Exeter area), and hope to do more next year.

 

cheers 

[rockershovel]

As a couple of general comments on the above

 

- East Anglia, and the East Coast up to the Humber in particular was a hub for the Baltic trade. There are a lot of people in East Anglia with Baltic connections as a result, although they generally aren’t aware of it. 

- the East End of London was, for many years, a magnet for Central European and Russian Jewish migrants. It was also involved in the Baltic trade. A lot of cockneys have connections of that sort, it’s often the reason why family trees are so difficult to trace - the records just weren’t kept, or have been destroyed. 

[Ohmisterporter]

My younger brother traced our paternal history as far as great great grandfather who was born in a workhouse in Penrith in the mid 1800s, I forget the exact date. Unfortunately, those were the days when unmarried women who fell pregnant were sometimes locked into workhouses or mental hospitals, sometimes for life. The babies' fathers were given a pat on the back and two pints out of public funds. (I jest; but attitudes towards unmarried men and women creating children were very different). With a father unnamed on the birth certificate brother's search met a dead end.

Of the birth certificates that he could trace all were in England as his free search site only held English records. This was slightly puzzling to us because we remember our grandmother saying her husband's grandmother was Irish and she, grandmother, could hardly understand a word she said. We also had the impression that great grandfather was Scottish but brother's search does not show this. Therein lies the reason for my caution. It is quite possible that our ancestors were indeed Irish and Scots, and people with their names may be recorded in Irish and Scottish census or parish records. If English records draw a blank it may be worthwhile expanding the search into other countries. That is why we rely so much on listening to our old relatives; they may seem boring when we are young but we will kick ourselves after they have gone and it is too late. Good luck with the search.

[Barry O]

17 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

If you can find any relatives who became Mormons and went to Utah Family Search is brilliant. They love to help any one connected with them. I have a branch of the family who went there in the very early period and they are on the roll of historic pioneers. Unfortunately when certain facts came to light about one member of the family the Mormons got rather upset.

Bernard

We don't have any mormons in the fanily. As the Mormon church use the information to track their anceators they do have a load of freely available information not easily accessed elsewhere.

 

Baz

[Rivercider]

40 minutes ago, Ohmisterporter said:

 That is why we rely so much on listening to our old relatives; they may seem boring when we are young but we will kick ourselves after they have gone and it is too late. Good luck with the search.

Having made the mistake of not paying attention to my grandparents in the past I have been fortunate that I have still been in contact with a great uncle who is now 98.  Last year I purchased a copy of the book 'Teign Valley Tales'* which is a compilation of interviews with older residents of the Teign Valley. I was able to sit and discuss some of the book with my Uncle, he remembered many of the places particularly farms, and quite a few of the interviewees.

 

* The book contains mention of many aspects of valley life from about the 1930s to 2010. Farming, school life, and quarrying are often mentioned. The Teign Valley Railway is also mentioned a number of times, including reference to ambulance trains during the war. (The line closed before I was born, so I do not remember it in use.)

 

cheers 

  

[Clearwater]

I've similarly researched a tree on ancestry.  I did their DNA test which was surprisingly informative as you could sometimes see where trees would join.  That gave me more confidence in some of the reserch.  My particular interest is that my great grandfather was clearly illegitimate, and noone named on birth certificate.  Therefore I'm curious to try and work through a DNA elimination process to see if I can work out his parentage.  There was a great read on the BBC along these lines recently: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/stories-53447901.  I also enjoyed "A house through time" - great programme.

 

I found certain lines easy to trace however where there are common names and periods of population movement, tracking "John Smith" for example becomes extremely challenging and often leads you to a dead end so to speak.  Of course, many people changed their names when they were moving for whatever reason.  What partially surprised me is that some branches seems almost rooted to the sport whereas some move all over the shop!

 

Have fun!

 

David

[TheSignalEngineer]

3 hours ago, Ohmisterporter said:

. The babies' fathers were given a pat on the back and two pints out of public funds. (I jest; but attitudes towards unmarried men and women creating children were very different). With a father unnamed on the birth certificate brother's search met a dead end.

I had a similar situation with an ancestor born before the introduction of the national system of registration.

We came to a dead end at the 1841 census. The 1851 census had him as born in Oxfordshire although he lived in Shropshire. Finally when a set of Oxfordshire Parish Records was transcribed his name came up in the correct birth year, listed as illegitimate and his mother's name but the father's name added later by the church authorities. Now to find the missing link between the mother and villiage where he lived, the name having appeared there at least as far back as 1620.

Edited November 25, 2020 by TheSignalEngineer