RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Ruskie on Tuesday 03 August 10 02:30 BST (UK)
-
Welcome to our continuing epic. I think we're still all having fun with this, still progressing well and with the infamous and eagerly anticipated August 9th entry in a few days, I'm sure we'll have even more to discuss. ;D
Links to previous threads:
Part 1:
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,457330.0.html
Part 2:
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,459757.0.html
On page one of Part 2 is a recap of our discoveries and a timeline.
Part 3:
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,464660.0.html
Part 4:
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,469736.0.html
And Nathaniel's Diary:
http://www.westminster.gov.uk/services/libraries/archives/victorian-clerk/
-
Steven, you may have an opinion about the building on the south side of Richmond Buildings cnr Dean St - do you think it might have been one end of Richmond Buildings? It does resemble the buildings in the drawing and photo.
-
Hi Just popped in to book mark this.
I haven't had an answer from Ancestry yet, but I noticed that you can read the querie.
I am so glad Nat's grave has been found. If I wasn't so far away I would help on the restoration team.
Keep up the good work. I will get back to tracking decendents eventually.
Its Tax time here in Australia ;D Ted
-
Found you ;D
okay this is my last post from part 4 :
I have just come back from outside and was thinking of 'out of the box
John Shepard/Sheperd/Shepherd Bryceson's 2nd wife was Gertrude (John s/o Nat b 1860)...I saw that Gertrude Bryceson remarried a guy called Mason ( a few years after JSB died).....I know it's a long shot but maybe some of the Mason kids may have photos etc ...
deb
-
For Steve; How fab ...all these knew findings especially Mongi's photo of the Bryceson gravestone!!!
deb ..off to bed ...night all :)
-
Its Tax time here in Australia ;D Ted
can you deduct time/money for the worldwide search of NB?? LOL
good luck!
deb
-
Today Nathaniel says:
"The New Metropolitan Theatre is to be forthwith erected on a plot of ground on the east side of Leicester Square, formerly the site of Jaunay’s Hotel".
The name Jaunay originates from France. François Marie Jaunay fled the Revolution and established Jaunay's Hotel in Leicester Square London on the site of the Odeon Theatre just around the corner from St Martins In the Field.
The Odeon was built in 1937 on the site of the Alhambra Theatre, a large music hall dating from the 1850s.
The Alhambra was a popular theatre and music hall located on the east side of Leicester Square. It was built originally as The Royal Panopticon of Science and Arts opening on 18 March 1854. It was closed after two years and reopened as the Alhambra. The building was demolished in 1936.
A bit more, but no mention of The New Metropolitan or any buildings on the site as early as 1846: :-\
The Leicester Square theatre's name was changed frequently, but usually reflected the building's (very loose) stylistic associations with the celebrated Alhambra in Granada, Spain. By 1864, the circus had become the Alhambra Music Hall. Rebuildings occurred in 1866 and 1881, by Perry and Reed. From 1871, when it obtained a licence, an equestrian ballet was performed. The Alhambra was destroyed by fire in 1882, and was rebuilt in a more restrained style by Reed, reopening in 1884 as the Alhambra Theatre. Further rebuildings were in 1888 by Edward Clark, 1892 by Clark and Pollard, 1897 by W. M. Bruton, and in 1912 by the prolific theatre architect, Frank Matcham. Other names used during the life of the theatre were the Royal Alhambra Palace; Alhambra Theatre of Varieties; Theatre Royal, Alhambra; Great United States Circus and New Alhambra Theatre.
http://www.oldlondonmaps.com/stanfordpages/westminster03b.html
About 2 streets below the red "I" is Leicester Square, and on the right side of that The Alhambra is marked. :)
-
Now looking for the new baths at George Street Euston:
George Street, Euston, Marylebone ( A-Z Ref 3M 139) - Now called North Gower Street.
Using the excellent 1846 map, top right corner is Euston Square, and the second street left of that is George Street. (near the reservoir) :)
-
This 1790's map shows Richmond Buildings as a lane with houses on both sides (left edge of the map, about half way down).
http://www.oldlondonmaps.com/horwoodpages/horwood11201.html
In London directories it has always been listed as a separate street
-
You always come up trumps Shaun. ;D
I do have that excellent map but as it's a bit older than 1846 I didn't check it for Richmond Buildings. Of course, as we know, the buildings were there for many years before Nathaniel moved in.
The long road/lane going SE from Richmond Buildings is Richmond Mews.
It doesn't look like the old building on the cnr of Dean St is classed as part of Richmond Buildings (at this point in time at least) however that quote I posted earlier seems to imply that part of Richmond Buildings faced Dean St. Odd numbering on both Richmond Buildings and also Dean St - and the old building that I think may still remain today isn't numbered. :-\
Deb, look at the name of the street a little to the right and down a bit from Richmond Buildings ... :P Queen St - could this be where Ann Fox was born? ;)
-
This 1868 map shows both Richmond Buildings and Richmond Mews http://london1868.com/weller41b.htm (but in rather less detail than the 1790's map).
-
Just bookmarking part 5 and to say I have Steven's email so will let him know about the grave.
More later
N
-
Odd numbering on both Richmond Buildings and also Dean St - and the old building that I think may still remain today isn't numbered. :-\
Not that it has any real significance, but I've worked out the numbering system.
The mapmakers start with 1, 2, 3, etc up to 10. Then they put 1, 2, 3, again up to 9, then the next number they print is 20 (ie you're supposed to put in the missing 2 yourself). Then they print 1, 2, 3 to 9 and then print 30 and so on. The exception to this rule comes at street corners etc, where they print the full house number (sometimes). It's not that easy to explain, but if you look at Richmond Buildings and Dean Street, you'll be able to see what I mean, I hope!
-
So, looks like number 9 where Nat lived is at the bottom left side of the road? Which looks like a new building. The row of 6 houses referred to in the last few posting pages would be on the other side of the street, so not where Nat lived as such but perhaps similar.
The 60's photo Rusjie found if clicked on is bigger - as below. But this was after a rebuild mentioned in ealy 1900's ?
-
I think the largest building at the south west corner is no 8. No 9 is the medium sized mid-terrace house between that larger house and the house marked "10"
No 8 may not have been a newer building but it could have been a different size because it was an end terrace. Mid-terrace buildings can only be two rooms deep ie windows at the front and back because otherwise any middle rooms would have no natural light. End terrace buildings can be bigger because they can have windows on three walls.
Shame NB didn't put sketches in his diary, isn't it?
-
morning all
I thought I would repost Dinkydidy's link to the 1846 map.
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/snow/1846map/3_2bw.htm
BTW ... Shaun, I love the 1790 map.
Ruskie ... Queen Street is really close ....would love to know if Ann was born there.
Off to see if I can spot Stephen Street...
deb
-
Odd numbering on both Richmond Buildings and also Dean St - and the old building that I think may still remain today isn't numbered. :-\
Not that it has any real significance, but I've worked out the numbering system.
The mapmakers start with 1, 2, 3, etc up to 10. Then they put 1, 2, 3, again up to 9, then the next number they print is 20 (ie you're supposed to put in the missing 2 yourself). Then they print 1, 2, 3 to 9 and then print 30 and so on. The exception to this rule comes at street corners etc, where they print the full house number (sometimes). It's not that easy to explain, but if you look at Richmond Buildings and Dean Street, you'll be able to see what I mean, I hope!
Alpinecottage - I'm afraid you've lost me. :-\
;D (no matter)
-
I think the largest building at the south west corner is no 8. No 9 is the medium sized mid-terrace house between that larger house and the house marked "10"
Thats the way I see it too. The newer building I was referring to is the one thats there now. There is nothing that looks like an old terrace at the lower left of street Richmond Buildings. And I think the row of 6 was on the right side of st as you walk down it, which now seems to be completly different - see birds eye photo view in thread 4 just finshed.
-
http://www.oldlondonmaps.com/horwoodpages/horwood11201.html
What Alpine's saying is - 'top' side of richmond buildings - right to left is
1,2,3,4,5,6
'Bottom' of richmond buildings shows as
8,9,10,1,12
which is really 8,9,10,11,12.
Nat lived @ 9 which looks to be under something that isnt a 1840's building on the maps / aerial views of today
-
morning all
I thought I would repost Dinkydidy's link to the 1846 map.
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/snow/1846map/3_2bw.htm
BTW ... Shaun, I love the 1790 map.
Ruskie ... Queen Street is really close ....would love to know if Ann was born there.
Off to see if I can spot Stephen Street...
deb
Deb. if you look at the 1868 map that Shaun posted, and look at the Queen St near Soho Square that I pointed out to you on the other map ... then look a couple of streets to the right, and down a little bit you'll see 7 streets converging to an area called Seven Dials (which we spoke about way back in part one when we were looking for the Phoenix Pub) - one of the streets off Seven Dials is also called Queen St!!! :-\ There are dozens of Queen Streets and Green Streets . :-\
Using the same map of 1868, if you go right to the top of the page in the middle you'll see Bedford Square. A little to the left of that is a yellow coloured street running to the top of the page. Stephen Street is the third one down from the top of the page running left off that long yellow street.
-
The Horwood map shows No 7 right at the far end of the 'lane' and much larger than the other houses.
I think I understand that numbering now and thanks steve for posting the larger version of the phto of Richmond Buildings (I didn't think to click on it to enlarge it :-[)
-
Ruskie's set me a challenge now, to explain so she understands. (I was a maths teacher in another life!)
If you go out from Richmond Buildings onto Dean Street on 1790's map, on your left is 58 Dean St, next door it has 9, but that means No 59, next door again it has 60, then the next house has 1 but that means No 61. You would have given your address as 61 Dean St, but it would have been shown on the street plan as the No 1 between nos 60 and 70. What an easy to use system - not! ;D
The No 7 Richmonds Buildings could have been bigger than all the others because it could have windows on all four sides.
Ah, and I follow your meaning too, Steve
-
Just to confuse matters, Dean Street was renumbered in the early 19th century and the properties on its corners with Richmond Buildings became 80a and 80b respectively.
-
Alpine - you explained that well - I understand now.
(Maths was always my weakest subject at school). ;D
-
Just to confuse matters, Dean Street was renumbered in the early 19th century and the properties on its corners with Richmond Buildings became 80a and 80b respectively.
This was what I was questioning at the end of Part 4. There was mention of 'tablets' on the ends of Richmond Buildings facing Dean St. If you look at Google maps streetview, the building on the south side is stll numbered '80'.
-
I'm a bit late in the day but wanted to bookmark and say thank you to noth Mongibello for the photograph, what a great success, and also to Deb for the occupation of printer/compositor, I wanted to try the 1901 online site since searches could be done by occupation which is difficult on Ancestry.
-
I did have a stroll up Dean Street this afternoon after a stint at the Archives (nothing to do with NB).
Richmond Buildings is indeed a street, albeit very short. The North side has been redeveloped. The West side is the entrance to the hotel. No. 9 was on the South side but 9 to 11 is amodern office block. No. 12 is a separate office building which looks old but I have my doubts. It looks too good to be true. Ironically the buildings along this part of Dean Street look quite old and rather run down.
The staff at the Archives are still enjoying the attention. One said "You are Mongibello aren't you?"
-
One other thing. There were so many duplicated names in London that great efforts were made in the late 19th & early 20th centuries to get rid of the duplications. The former London County Council published books at intervals giving all the names of the streets and showing names that had changed. Fine except where they amalgamated streets & renumbered them.
-
If the Westminster Archives people are reading this, I would like to congratulate them on a job extremely well done.
But perhaps they would talk to their IT people about that "Was this useful?" message - it's very annoying on days when there are no diary entries !
-
Hi Mongibello
That must have been fun ... to be recognised!!!
If the Westminster Archives people are reading this, I would like to congratulate them on a job extremely well done.
Shaun ... I second this!
deb
-
I did have a stroll up Dean Street this afternoon after a stint at the Archives (nothing to do with NB).
Richmond Buildings is indeed a street, albeit very short. The North side has been redeveloped. The West side is the entrance to the hotel. No. 9 was on the South side but 9 to 11 is amodern office block. No. 12 is a separate office building which looks old but I have my doubts. It looks too good to be true. Ironically the buildings along this part of Dean Street look quite old and rather run down.
The staff at the Archives are still enjoying the attention. One said "You are Mongibello aren't you?"
Thanks for having a look Mongibello. I wonder if there are any rootschatters who are architects or architectural historians (or know someone who is) who may be able to date these buildings for us? Or is there anyone at Westminster Archives who may have a contact who can give their opinions about the age of these buildings? I still think no 80, the one on the corner, might be old too.
It's good to get an impression about how the buildings may have looked in 1846, and it would be nice to know that some have survived.
If there is anyone clever enough able to do a mock up of the street using the photograph and drawing? Maybe we should take this to the photo restoration board for some help from those clever people? :)
It's great that the staff at the archives recognise you Mongibello! ;D Some of them must be following our journey.
-
Thanks for explaining about the street names Mongibello. I use this site which details streets which no longer exist:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050222103343/members.aol.com/WHall95037/london.html
(I don't know how complete it is)
Yesterday I used this to find George St where the new baths were located. :)
No diary entry today - very disappointing ... :'(
-
Nothing to add at the moment but I'm just bookmarking as well.
Carole
-
Hi All
I dont understand why people have to post something to create a bookmark.
All you have to do (assuming Explorer or similar) is to click on favourites at the top left of the browser window, Click add to favourites, then click add. It will bookmark the page you are on without having to post purely for the sake of a bookmark.
Perhaps your browser doesnt have this feature?
best regards
steve
-
:) or you can just click the NOTIFY button at the top of the thread on the right hand side, and you are notified as if you had bookmarked :)
Amazing photo of the grave...well done on finding it!
-
When I go to the Archives next Tuesday I will have a look at the Drainage Plans (euphemistically known as the Architectural Plans).
There MIGHT be a ground plan of some of the buildings. However I think the 1970 Drawing is probably the best there is.
-
Simple reason for bookmarking is because I manage to pop in and out from work computer while attempting not to leave any signs (cookies etc.) that I have done so, similarly I can't pick up my emails to tell me that there are new notifications.
When I log in it is easy to click the "Show new replies" link and go to the threads that have been updated.
Perhaps the regulars would prefer we don't clutter up the thread by doing this. Sorry about that, I would never know what is happening then.
-
When I go to the Archives next Tuesday I will have a look at the Drainage Plans (euphemistically known as the Architectural Plans).
There MIGHT be a ground plan of some of the buildings. However I think the 1970 Drawing is probably the best there is.
That would be wonderful, thank you Mongibello. There is the 1964 photograph as well as the 1970's drawing. See Steve's post towards the end of page one on this thread. :)
(interesting moniker Monigbello - is there a story behind it? :))
[Re bookmarking - I was once told by a moderator not to do this :-\, so instead of saying I'm bookmarking I try to think of something not too inane to add to the thread. I was only very recently told about the Notify button. As long as thousands of people aren't joining in and just saying that they're bookmarking, I personally don't see a problem.]
-
Mongibello is the Sicilian dialect name for Mount Etna. The only connection is we have friends (Australian/ Sicilian) who live on the lower slopes.
The two sides of my family have been in London for 200+ and 120 years respectively.
-
Mongibello is the Sicilian dialect name for Mount Etna. The only connection is we have friends (Australian/ Sicilian) who live on the lower slopes.
The two sides of my family have been in London for 200+ and 120 years respectively.
Thanks for the explanation.
No wonder you're such an expert with the London research with such a long history in the area. ;)
Getting back to Nathaniel Bryceson ... have you managed to trace any/many living descendants of Nathaniel? There are some of us who are keen to try, so if you can let us know which lines you've been able to trace successfully, maybe we can work on some of the others.
-
Hi
Forgive my ignorance ....re Richmond buildings in 1846
If NB lived at number 9 would he be the only tennant or would there be rooms above and below him occupied by other families? ie Like a block of flats
the reason I'm asking is that NB mentions taking Ann UP to his room and also Ann getting upset by Granny seeing her coming DOWN the stairs.
deb
-
Deb,
There are 11 separate households at number 9 in the 1851 census (including John Shephard and Nathaniel as one)
-
Thanks Shaun
Looking at the 1841 and counting the 'double lines' demarcating different houses, it looks like Matthew Ward was at #7
deb
-
As far as I understand it, we dont yet actually have a picture or a drawing of where Nat lived - everything posted or linked to so far is on the other side of the street, being numbers 1-6, not number 9 where Nat lived.
As 1-6 are four stories, and apparently built by the same 1700s developer (Mr Richmond) its possible they looked similar, and very likely at least the same amount of stories (4) as I doubt property was ever cheap in London and land could be wasted on low-rise accomodation. A 650 sq ft office is £1,500 (i think for a month) today (on a google search) - which compares well with Nats 2 shillings a week ( £0.10 or ten pence).
The Soho Hotel, on the site of number 7, is from £400 a night for a room.
-
hi
In 1841 Matthew Ward was at #7 .... NB has mentioned the Marshall family (births, moving etc) who were at #2 which is the same # as Nathaniel Vagg ...it's great to be able to look at the map and see where they were ... it's made a great difference for me.
deb
-
Well ...it looks like London is under rain again .... wonder what apparel NB wore to work ..hopefully not his beaver hat and lovely boots.
deb
-
Some information about Richmond Buildings from British History Online"
Sponsor- English Heritage
Publication - Survey of London: volumes 33 and 34: St Anne Soho
Author - F. H. W. Sheppard (General Editor)
Year published - 1966
'The Pitt Estate in Dean Street: Richmond Buildings', Survey of London: volumes 33 and 34: St Anne Soho (1966).
Some information which implies that these were originally single houses:
(Lived at )No. 2. The Rev. John Horne Tooke, politician. According to Tooke's biographer, he 'hired and furnished' a house in Richmond Buildings in c. 1780
The south side of Richmond Buildings has been rebuilt, (the tablet on the front says they were rebuilt in 1916) but the houses there were probably similar in all respects to the single-fronted houses (Nos. 1–6 consec.) of medium size and conventional plan forming a generally uniform terrace on the north side. Each house contains a basement and three storeys within the front, and a garret in the mansard roof. By 1833 most of the houses on the north side and two on the south had workshops in the garret storey.
So probably a mirror image. They'd look like the photo and the drawing of the houses on the opposite side of the road.
When Nat is living there it the buildings are let out as 'rooms' and I imagine each room would be occupied either by a single person like Nat and Granny Shepard, or by a family like the Marshalls. I'm not sure (but would love to know) what it was like inside the house, whether a family would have a larger room, what the sanitation was like, did they use their own furniture etc. We know that there was a problem with bed bugs which Nat spoke very matter-of-factly about. I imagine they were commonplace.
So Deb, the Vaggs were at No 2 in 1841, and the Marshalls were at No 2 in 1846. :)
1841 census
Richmond buildings
Richard Vagg, 39, Tailor, N
Catherine Vagg, 39, N
Nathaniel (surname dittoed) 13 Y
I found this:
Richard Vagg
Parish St Geo the Martyr
1844
Richard Vagg
5 East St
buried August 25 age 41 (so b 1803)
(so it looks like the Vaggs moved to East St between 1841 and 1844)
In 1851:
Catherine Vagg age 50 is a widow, milliner and visitor b Brompton Middx
Dates tie in well enough.
-
Well ...it looks like London is under rain again .... wonder what apparel NB wore to work ..hopefully not his beaver hat and lovely boots.
deb
Hi Deb. Nathaniel isn't giving us many details about work at the moment. Can you imagine the state of his fine boots with that downpour. I imagine he'd wear a hat but surely not the beaver. ;D Maybe he has one of those nice elasticated plastic covers for it. ;)
-
;D ;D ;D
Ruskie ...you so make me laugh
" Maybe he has one of those nice elasticated plastic covers for it. "
deb
BTW ...the maps have helped me so much ...I too wonder about how they lived in these buildings .... I do like the fact that NB was cognisant of what was happening with the Marshall family ...maybe because he had shared rooms/lived next door to them ...he could have mentioned anyone in the apartments but the Marshalls seem to be important/close to him ... I am so hoping that Nathaniel Vagg was our NB!
I looked for Mary Bryceson again in 1841 ...still can't see her although she claims she was living in Dean Street a few weeks before she married Mattie.
-
errrrr
didn't NB move into the Marshall's vacated rooms?? which would have been number 2 in 1841?
I think I will reread diary in the morning. ::)
deb
added ...I know we searched high and low for a Nathaniel Vagg on IGI and after 1841 and there were zero results
-
errrrr
didn't NB move into the Marshall's vacated rooms?? which would have been number 2 in 1841?
I think I will reread diary in the morning. ::)
deb
added ...I know we searched high and low for a Nathaniel Vagg on IGI and after 1841 and there were zero results
No birth found for Nathaniel Vagg either. Or marriage. Or death ... ;) I really hope he is our Nathaniel Bryceson. ::) Vagg is quite a rare name in this area.
Yes Deb, not sure if it was Nathaniel or Granny Shepard who moved into the Marshalls - or maybe if the Marshalls had two rooms ... Nat took one and Granny Shepard another? I don't have a number for the house though (but I believe you if you say it's 2 ;D)
I'm not sure if Mary Bryceson was mistranscribed or already living with Matthew Ward but omitted from the census accidentally or on purpose ;). Surely she can't be too far away if she was a resident of Dean St and marrying Matthew a few weeks later. Unless she was away somewhere visiting ... ?
-
Tuesday 12th May 1846
Granny Shepard at Richmonds Buildings cleaning the two rooms on the second floor back to be in readiness for our occupation next week.
Monday 18th May 1846
Took 2 rooms on second floor, 9 Richmonds Buildings, for self and Granny from this day.
So they had two rooms at the back of the building (ie not facing the road) - rent was probably a bit cheaper for rooms at the back. Still unsure if they are the Marshall's old rooms.
-
Thanks for that Ruskie .... Late here !
Will check again ...I do recall the Marshall's child being born then dying and then them moving out ...not sure why I thought they had moved into their rooms. I do like the fact that the Marshalls and Vaggs were in the same "building/room/number" as N. Vagg. NB didn't refer to many people in Richmond Buildings but seemed to have liked the Marshalls ...maybe we should revisit the diary to see who NB mentions as tennants of RB.
later ...night
deb :)
-
Night Deb..
I've just checked Richmond Buildings in the 1841. There aren't any numbers.
Matthew Marshall 42 occupation unreadable Not born in county + wife Jane 42 N + children. I suppose this is the same Marshall family? They're fairly old to still be having children in 1846.
Seem to be a reasonable selection of occupations for those living in Richmond Buildings - several Tailors and Musicians, engraver, brewer, picture dealer, painter clerk, wathcmaker, schoolmaster etc .... I suspect this may have only been one side of Richmond Buildings - the enumerator then goes into Chapel Place and before Richmond Buildings is Bull Yard ... I need to look a bit further ...
Matthew Ward (and some of the others) is a Tailor I - what is the I for? :-\
-
The only thing I can think of for I after Tailor is independent - he worked for himself rather than someone else? His job does explain his later back problems.
The fact that Mary can't be found on the 1841 census makes me think that it's possible she was away and Nathaniel was left living with the Vaggs. I'd love to know who educated Nat and where - in 1841 he's at the right age to be at school. There are quite a mix of occupations in Richmond Buildings including Isaac Sampson and his family. Isaac was a school teacher - perhaps he tutored Nat?
Carole
-
Thinking outside the box:
Looking at the 1841 census again - who is the Mary Brycson aged 20 Independent living with a Marion Bagg 30 dressmaker b. Scotland and her children George 4 and Marion 2 in William Street St Pancras H01017 piece 648 folio 12/39 page 73 ? The only Mary Bryceson of that age I can find is Mary who is living with her parents William and Mary in Hackney and she is on the census with them, so it isn’t her.
Perhaps there is a mistake on the census with the age of the Mary living with Marion Bagg?
Carole
-
George Bagg married Marion Bryceson (Ancestry has her as Bryerson) 4 July 1836 St Pancras both OTP one of the witnesses was H Bryceson - the signature is exactly the same as the H Bryceson who witnessed Mary Shephards marriage to John Bryceson in 1818. The other witness to the Bagg marriage was --- (I can't read the initial) White.
Right - so that's Henry Bryceson organ maker and presumably Marion was his daughter - is this odd Mary another daughter of his? Or did "our" Mary keep up some links with the Brycesons and the census has her age wrong The Mary Bryceson living with Marion Bagg was supposed to have been born in Middlesex.
Sorry for all this thinking out loud .... I'm very ??? ??? ???
Carole
-
Just to add...there was a diary entry that the Marshall's were moving out, and that Granny Shepard was seeing about moving in...I understood that NB & Granny took over the rooms the Marshall's had.
-
Matthew Ward (and some of the others) is a Tailor I - what is the I for? :-\
I believe these "I's" are probably J for Journeyman.
-
Matthew Ward (and some of the others) is a Tailor I - what is the I for? :-\
I believe these "I's" are probably J for Journeyman.
I think you've got it!
Carole
-
Struck by the similar sounds of Bagg and Vagg. I don't suppose there's a mis-spelled relationship there? Which might explain Nathaniel being left with a rellie?
Bit late for these kinds of musings, but.... :-\
-
Matthew Ward (and some of the others) is a Tailor I - what is the I for? :-\
I believe these "I's" are probably J for Journeyman.
I think you've got it!
Carole
I originally thought they may be J's too, but I think a few pages over there is "J" which actually looks like a J with the tail going below the line .... so I'm still not sure.
Carole, I like your thinking aloud. You've made some really interesting discoveries.
The trouble with the possible Bagg/Vagg confusion is that the Catherine Vagg who appears to be wife of Richard Vagg in the 1841 census, appears as a widow on the 1851 census - surname Vagg. And there is that death for a Richard Vagg in 1844. :-\
But there are some interesting coincidences especially the signature of H Bryceson.
-
Just to add...there was a diary entry that the Marshall's were moving out, and that Granny Shepard was seeing about moving in...I understood that NB & Granny took over the rooms the Marshall's had.
Yes I remember it but can't rmember when it was just to check.
When I was ferreting around in May's entries earlier today, I was interested to see how verbose Nathaniel was in May compared to the entries we're getting now. :(
-
Thanks Shaun
Looking at the 1841 and counting the 'double lines' demarcating different houses, it looks like Matthew Ward was at #7
deb
Hi :)
sorry about confusing the situation ...
-
Morning Deb.
Nite Deb.
I'm calling it a night and will see you in the morning/evening. How confusing is that? ;D
Interesting but puzzling finds that Carole has made (Vagg/Bagg :-\)
I'll leave it with you for now. ;D
-
The 1841 census has two families of Bryceson living in Middlesex, Henry the organ maker with Frances his wife and children Frances, Henry and John living in the Tottenham Court Road and William and Mary with their children Mary, Thomas, Ann Sarah, John and Ebenezer in Brunswick Terrace Hackney. There are two odd Brycesons - Henery Brycson 15 living at St Georges Hanover Square and this Mary Bryceson aged 20 living with Marion Bagg aged 30 (born in Scotland) who used to be a Bryceson. Marion's husband was George Bagg whose death (reg Dec 1838) left her with a baby George, and another due (Marion birth reg March 1839)
There just aren't that many Brycesons living in London. I know we don't know if Mary Shephard's husband John was related to the organ makers but the signature of the witness at their marriage Henry Bryceson is the same as the one who witnessed Marion Bryceson's marriage to George Bagg. I just can't see who this Mary Bryceson who was living with Marion could be. A Mary Bryceson married James Robinson in 1844 but she was William Bryceson's daughter.
I just wondered if it might be a mistake in the census and this Mary is our Mary - there may still have been some contact with the Bryceson family and poor Marion probably needed some support.
PS I'm glad I'm not a Bagg!
Carole
-
Hi all, I just got internet access! Excited to see the grave (though sorry by the faded inscriptions) and looking forward to seeing myself on afternoon of 15th August if anyone want to join me! All joy, Steven. ps. meanwhile I am exploring some glorious churches!
-
Hello Steven. I'm glad you've managed to log on and see the photo of the Nathaniels and Sarah's grave. Exciting, but disappointing that the inscription is not readable. But at least the stone is still standing.
Please take some detailed photos, closeups etc when you visit on the 15th. I'm not a photographer, but I've read that sometimes if you take photos of the stone at an angle shadows can reveal some letters. Even if you manage to get something, the folks on the photo restoration board may be able to enhance and work out what it says.
I would love to join you when you visit the grave. (oops sorry wrong country :'( - very very sad that I won't be visiting - for some time at least :'()
Are you able to tell us where you are visiting all these churches?
Looking forward to Monday and THE famous shorthand diary entry. I hope you'll be online when we're discussing that! ;D
-
The 1841 census has two families of Bryceson living in Middlesex, Henry the organ maker with Frances his wife and children Frances, Henry and John living in the Tottenham Court Road and William and Mary with their children Mary, Thomas, Ann Sarah, John and Ebenezer in Brunswick Terrace Hackney. There are two odd Brycesons - Henery Brycson 15 living at St Georges Hanover Square and this Mary Bryceson aged 20 living with Marion Bagg aged 30 (born in Scotland) who used to be a Bryceson. Marion's husband was George Bagg whose death (reg Dec 1838) left her with a baby George, and another due (Marion birth reg March 1839)
There just aren't that many Brycesons living in London. I know we don't know if Mary Shephard's husband John was related to the organ makers but the signature of the witness at their marriage Henry Bryceson is the same as the one who witnessed Marion Bryceson's marriage to George Bagg. I just can't see who this Mary Bryceson who was living with Marion could be. A Mary Bryceson married James Robinson in 1844 but she was William Bryceson's daughter.
I just wondered if it might be a mistake in the census and this Mary is our Mary - there may still have been some contact with the Bryceson family and poor Marion probably needed some support.
PS I'm glad I'm not a Bagg!
Carole
The stray Mary Bryceson may be ours. It's just the age that doesn't fit. I haven't had a look at the census entry but will do so in a minute. Another thing to consider is that if Marion Bagg was born in Scotland and we know that Bryceson is a Scottish name, maybe this Mary Bryceson has Scottish connections too?
Perhaps the Mary Bryceson who married James Robinson in 1844 is the same Mary as in the census. If her father is William then both her age and father are wrong and she's not our Mary.
It might be worth looking at Marion Bagg nee Bryceson - I wonder who her father is? The H Byrceson who is the serial witness - now that IS curious and proves a connection of some sort.
As you say, Bryceson is a rare name in London so not really surprising if we discover that they are all related.
-
I've been trying to find Marion Bagg and the children in 1851 (I was hoping that we might find whereabouts in Scotland she was born) but I haven't had any luck yet. I thought Marion may have remarried so searched for Marion b 1839 with mother Marion (no surname) and all I could find was a Wakefield family which I'm not sure is them.
Another thing that I'm not sure about with the Mary Bryceson living with Marion in 1841, apart from the age, is that she is 'Independent'. Does that seem feasible? :-\
-
Right, I've just had a look at the signatures of witness H Bryceson on the marriage entries for Marion Bryceson and George Bagg and Mary Shepard and John Bryceson.
They're not the same.
It looks like the entries on the same page as the Shepard/Bryceson marriage are all written in the same hand ie, none of the signatures on the page are in the handwriting of any of the parties involved. On the Bryceson/Shepard entries it looks like each person signed their own names.
Of course it is still possible that it is the same H Bryceson witnessing both marriages. :)
-
hi Steven
Would love to join you, but much like Ruskie, I am on a different continent. I will be happy to live vicariously through you though ;D
re the Gravestone of NB .... if the moss/lichen was removed carefully would you be able to do some etchings which may reveal some other detail ?
I could see the "SAH" BRYCESON ...ie his Wife ...
Maybe if the photo was taken from a different angle we may be able to spot more ....
Mongibello .... you did a great job finding the stone... many pats on the back again from me :D
deb
Morning Ruskie ...as usual night time here ;D LOL
-
I'm sure all the signatures on both marriage are by all the individuals involved - it's that darn copperplate handwriting that makes it difficult to differentiate between them. The two H Bryceson signatures are not exactly the same - but not that different, so I still think it's the same man.
I think Independant covered all kinds of things on the census - from 'I have a very large private income' to 'mind-you-own-business' I know I'm trying to get "our" Mary to fit the census - but then, we're also thinking Nathaniel is recorded as Nathaniel Vagg ;D
Carole
-
Yes, I know the copperplate makes signatures look similar. There weren't many H Brycesons in London so it is likely to be the same guy. However the "H's" are formed differently. :-\
I think it was Deb who pointed out to me that all the writing on all the marriages on the page including the Shepard/Bryceson marriage are the same.
I'll have another look. :)
-
I'm sure all the signatures on both marriage are by all the individuals involved - it's that darn copperplate handwriting that makes it difficult to differentiate between them. The two H Bryceson signatures are not exactly the same - but not that different, so I still think it's the same man.
Carole
I've had another look and compared the signatures of H Bryceson on both marriages.
To my eye I think these letters differ quite a lot:
the 'H'
the 'B'
the 'r'
and the 'n'
-
Hi
I have been going through the London Marriages for Bryceson people. A lot of them have been filled in and signed by the Curate :-\
Looking at Nathaniel's marriage to Sarah there is a witness: Maria Long.
I have found a Maria Long (52 single) in 1861 ...living at 16 DEAN STREET with the Hill Family.
Maria's occ is dressmaker
Henry Hill is a tailor
I wonder if she was a friend of Mary Ward, his mother.
1851 ..Maria and her sister, Arabella, are still at 16 Dean street.
deb
-
I must be looking at something different as I can't see the marriage entries have been filled in by the same person ???
The signature of the Henry Bryceson who married Louisa Gray in 1821 is definitely the same H Bryceson who witnessed John Bryceson's marriage to Mary Shephard in 1818. The marriage between George Bagg and Marion Bryceson doesn't take place until 1836 - quite some time after the first two.
Henry Bryceson of electric organ fame now appears to have his own Wiki entry. His actual birth date doesn't tie up with the census returns - he was born 8 Jan 1775 in Perth Scotland (IGI) and died in June 1870 in Huntingdon.
He was the son of John Bryceson and Anna Mackie (probably Ann Bryceson buried St James Pentonville 13 Jan 1827 aged 82) His siblings were John born 1767, Catherine 1768, William 1771 and Walter 1773.
I thought that Henry and William on the 1841 census were brothers but I now think William was his nephew and he was bapt 20 March 1796 at St Andrew Holborn s/o William Bryceson and Mary Whiting. There was also Ralph Wilson born 1802 and Mary Ann b.1804 It now get tricky as there is another family born to a William Bryceson and Margaret Peacock. I’m thinking this is a second marriage - Marian born 1807 in Edinburgh (who must have married George Bagg) Thomas Peacock b 1810 Scotch Church Westminster, John b. 1815 Scotch Church and Ann Bapt at St James Pentonville in 1818 - this is the church where all the early Bryceson burials took place - John Bryceson, “our” Mary’s husband in 1824 (born about 1785), Thomas Peacock in 1826 (born about 1810, Margaret in 1828 (born about 1779) and William in 1835 (born about 1771).
All I have to do is fit “our” John Bryceson in there somewhere!
Carole
-
This should help explain the William Bryceson line Carole. William junior's daughter Annie became a Mormon and wrote up the history of her direct line. She married Lashbrook Laker and they emigrated to the US. One of her descendants wrote a book entitled "William Bryceson 1796-1878 of London, England : (a guide to further research on the Brycesons)"
http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/Library/fhlcatalog/supermainframeset.asp?display=titledetails&titleno=524625&disp=William+Bryceson+1796-1878+of+London%2C+En
Also see:
http://boards.ancestry.co.uk/localities.northam.usa.states.idaho.counties.bearlake/108/mb.ashx
-
Note that a number of the William Bryceson family are buried at St James Pentonville. The John Bryceson who died in 1824 aged 39 is buried there too - probably not a coincidence?
-
Hi Carole
great searching on your part !
When I look at Mary Shepard's marriage to John Bryceson ....
Both Mary Sheppard and John Sheppard look like they have the same handwriting ...look at the flourish on the "d" of Sheppard.
Also where her name is filled in as "Mary Sheppard of this parish" ...look at the downward and upward stroke of the "y" in Mary ..then look at the signature part of Mary.
John Tillotson was the Curate ...If you look at all the entries on that page it looks like Tillotson filled everything in himself.
-
Another thing to note is that on the marriage ...Sheppard is spelt with 2 p's ... I thought NB spelled Granny's name with one ..... I could be wrong though. :-[
Wouldn't John and Mary have known how to spell their names?
deb
added ... or Maybe John and Mary had the same teacher who taught them to write :-\ ;D
-
H Bryceson signature on Bagg Marriage ...
-
Deb - I'm still seeing the handwritting of the John Bryceson of the parish and Mary Shephard bit as slightly different to the signatures but having said that she was then called Mary Sheppard and the witness was John Sheppard but when she married Matthew Ward the Mary is written quite differently and the witness becomes John Shephard. If the curate filled it all in he shouldn't have. Anyway I'm not going to worry too much about the H Bryceson signature/not signature as there are so few Brycesons in London that the chances of them not being one and the same are miniscule.
Shaun - you have no idea how long it took me to piece the Bryceson family tgether from Ancestry/the census/IGI and there you have it all summed up in a paragraph! ;D I can't see any way that John doesn't fit in somewhere with the family - perhaps he's the son of the elder John born 1767 in Perth - the dates would just about fit?
Carole
-
Shaun - you have no idea how long it took me to piece the Bryceson family tgether from Ancestry/the census/IGI and there you have it all summed up in a paragraph! ;D
Carole
Well done anyway on persevering, Carole ;D
yep ...as you say ... On mary's marriage to Mattie ...Mary is signed differenly and John signs as Shepard ..one p ;D
deb
-
I shall go mad if I look at John Bryceson/Mary Sheppard's marriage any longer. It's NOT right is it? but then the "B" of Bryceson in John Bryceson's signature is different to the "B" in H Bryceson's signature - oh blow it all - I'll be having nightmares about this tonight! ;D
Then I looked again at Henry Bryceson's marriage to Louisa Martin in 1827 and that really looks as if all the marriage entries were written out by one hand. That took place at St Martin in the Fields - which was the parish given as the address of John Bryceson when he was buried in 1824 at St James Pentonville. They MUST be connected.
Carole
-
;D ;D ;D ;D
Carole ... Breathe in, Breathe out ...Breathe in , breathe out ...repeat repeatedly
deb :)
Oh and remember Carole , NB is a White ::)
-
;D ;D ;D ;D
Carole ... Breathe in, Breathe out ...Breathe in , breathe out ...repeat repeatedly
deb :)
Oh and remember Carole , NB is a White ::)
I know - I don't know why I'm so fixated on the Brycesons - I think I need therapy ;D
Carole
-
;D .... Carole, I think we ALL need therapy LOL
Have been going through the diary again ...found some other things of interest that may keep us going for a while ...or at least until the 9th...
After dinner took walk with Ann through Piccadilly, Knightsbridge, Brompton, Chelsea and Battersea to Wandsworth to see house in which Matthew Ward received his education. It is an old white house at the corner of Garrett Lane and the High Street and directly facing the Ram Inn. It is now a Ladies Seminary and is called Wandsworth House.
Tuesday 12th May 1846
Granny Shepard at Richmonds Buildings cleaning the two rooms on the second floor back to be in readiness for our occupation next week.
Monday 18th May 1846
Took 2 rooms on second floor, 9 Richmonds Buildings, for self and Granny from this day.
So they had two rooms at the back of the building (ie not facing the road) - rent was probably a bit cheaper for rooms at the back. Still unsure if they are the Marshall's old rooms.
found this:
Tuesday 24th February 1846
Died this morning at 9 Richmonds Buildings, James, son of William and Caroline Marshall of the second floor back after a short illness, aged one and a half years
deb
added
Wednesday 29th April 1846
Received information from Mother of the Marshalls going to leave their lodgings in the second floor Richmonds Buildings, and the intention of Granny Shepard’s moving thence if terms can be agreed upon between the landlord and her, but at present it is only talked of.
-
Until very recently the Ram Inn, Wandsworth was part of the Youngs Brewery, which was the oldest brewery in London (16th Century). Sadly when old Mr Young (!) died the next generation sold the site and moved the brewery to Bedford.
-
Hi Mongibello
It's so sad when things like that happen ...I would certainly be hanging onto a buiding/brewery from the 16th century!!!!
Found another little snippet ... re: Dean Street ... where NB's mum lived before her marriage:
NB went to this place: Anchor Coffee House, Dean Street
I have also been searching for Ann/Eliza Thomas AGAIN:
from the diary:
Eliza, otherwise Ann Thomas, came to Richmonds Buildings for a short time after which I accompanied her to an acquaintance at 101 Chancery Lane
Ann's address was: 22 St James’s Street
another reference:
Ann Thomas paid us a visit and I had to lend her my company homeward to St James Street.
I am sure we searched for her a few times in the first parts of our saga, but I thought with new eyes and better maps we may be able to find her.
BTW William Marshall (9 Richmond buildings) was a TAILOR and from SCOTLAND ::)
(Carole ..... maybe he knew Henry Bryceson of Organ making Fame ;D ;D ;D ... breathe in breathe out LOL )
deb
-
What do people make of the inscription on the grave, especially the age of Sarah Bryceson? Peace, Steven.
-
hi Steven
I now have my husband, a US Marine, involved! He has blown Mongi's photo up (not literally mind you LOL ;D)
I see :
"In Loving memory"
"SA ..... ...YCESON"
........................... AGED 6..YEARS
........ BRY ......
I can't see anything else
deb
-
I now have my husband, a US Marine, involved! He has blown Mongi's photo up (not literally mind you LOL ;D)
I though it was a great photo Deb. Why'd he have to go blow it up....?? ;D ;D ;D ;D
Why do I always have a sudden craving for Smarties when I talk to you?? 8) 8)
-
Hopefully Mongibello won't mind if I post the photo here for everyone to see ...brought forward from part 4
-
I now have my husband, a US Marine, involved! He has blown Mongi's photo up (not literally mind you LOL ;D)
I though it was a great photo Deb. Why'd he have to go blow it up....?? ;D ;D ;D ;D
Why do I always have a sudden craving for Smarties when I talk to you?? 8) 8)
karen ... You are tooooooo funny ;D
On occasion Dave has had to blow things up ...he does NOT ask questions ;D ;D 8)
added ... ummmm smarties and peppermint aero ...oooo yummy .... crappie that there's none to be found here
-
If he blows them up on your request, does that mean we have to call you RSM Deb from now on?? ;D ;D
-
Karen
errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr what is RSM please ....Royal Smartie Majesty ;D
-
Regimental Sergeant Major.....sorry that's grunt talk not jarhead talk..... ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi
still Friday the 6th here ;D ...this is NB's post for Friday 7th Aug
Friday
Cut date in piece of quartering in brickwork inside hayloft over stable of Eccleston Wharf ‘AD 1844’ (when built); broke own knife over the job.
he certainly likes to carve things ...wish it was still there!
deb
karen ...thanks for clearing up RSM but I do prefer Royal Smartie Majestie ;D 8)
-
No worries Deb. I have to race off and do boring mundane things now.... like making a dent in the ironing pile before it topples over... ;D ;D ;D
Be back later...
-
Karen ...
Ironing ...bletch arrghhhh
I wonder if you and Ruskie live near each other?
WAKE UP RUSKIE!!! ;D
deb
-
hi guys
I wonder if the whole family is buried there .... I just looked at the photo again .... scroll down to near the bottom , right hand side, just above the brown dead vine ...there are still engravings of letters!
I wonder if it was carefully cleaned that more would be revealed?
deb
added ...I love the fact that we know something "fab" is going to happen on the 9th and NB + Ann have no clue ;D ;D 8) :o
-
I think it might be "..ears" as in "years"??
Just noticed that there is more writing over on the left side tooo
-
I think you're right, Karen
Supposedly Sarah and the 2 Nathaniels are buried there but when I look at the grave stone , going upward from the dead vine it looks like there maybe 3 "(Y)EARS" below Sarah's. So at least 4 people honoured !
I also see carvings on the left side next to tree trunk ...what I wouldn't give to be able to be there to clean it up!!! :D
deb ...soon off to bed
-
You and me both Deb.... wonder if they let you "prune" the foliage to really get close to it??
-
karen ...
strange you you mention that as I was thinking that it's not as overgrown as I would have thought it to be if Nathaniel was buried there in 1911 ...almost 100 years ago. I do wonder why Sarah's name is at the top if Nathaniel died 21 years after her?
deb
-
Maybe the headstone was erected over a multiple gravesite when one of the Nathaniel's died and they put Sarah on the top as she was there first... so to speak ;)
-
hummmm
I think I get what you're saying ... so they would maybe remove first head stone and make a new one with a new name added? or keep the old one and add a name ... ?
Nathaniel bc 1827 ..died march q 1911, Mile End Old Town
Nathaniel bc 1858 died march q 1911, St Pancras
Sarah Bryceson bc 1826 died Dec q 1890, Islington
Sarah Clark Bryceson died sept q 1855, Islington
Mary Ward Bryceson died June q 1865, Islington
there were other children but can't remember ...late here ::)
i wonder if they are all there?
deb
-
What I meant was... there may not have been a headstone prior to this one... so when they did this one for whomever they did it for, then they added the names of the others buried in the same grave previous to this interrment.
Make sense :o :o
Not sure if there is any kind of right order to put such things... but one would assume it was chronological.
-
It's usually chronological on old graves here in Oz.
I wonder if other photographs when the stone is wet (sprayed with water?) and lit from different angles (possibly by torch) would help show remains of other letters?
It's a great shot anyway, Mongibello, and adds a little "closure" to Nat's life story.
Didy
-
p.s. I'd be very careful about any "cleaning", or clearing. Any rubbing, particularly with cleaning products or abrasives, could damage the stone.
And perhaps it has only survived as well as it has because of being sheltered by bushes or trees.
Didy
-
What's on the other stone right behind it? It's very strange to find two headstones so close together as that ???
Carole
-
Oh dear! Hello everyone. I've just been catching up on all the work you've been doing since I was last on.
As you know, I hate weekends as I have little quiet time to myself. As it is I have to help child with Shakespeare homework in a few minutes so have no time to concentrate on Nathaniel mores the pity. :'( I'm just itching to get stuck in, but I can't! :'(
I'm just SO glad that Nathaniel's much anticipated Sunday the 9th of August diary entry is on a Monday. ;D
PS. With the headstone, I think if they plan several burials, the stone is erected with the first burial and the first name is engraved with space below for the next, then the next, and so on. I'm not sure if the additonal names are engraved with the stone in situ or if it's taken away, carved and re-erected. Steven will probably know.
-
Hi
This is what Mongibello had posted along with the photo;
If anyone wants to find it, get a general plan from the cemetery office; find block V2; walk up Straight Path passing Junction Path; a little further on is the prominent grave of John Marshall on the right. Just beyond and further in is the grave of Merrifield; follow this line in until you come to Spear's grave. Nathaniel is back to back with this one
I wonder if the Marshall grave has anything to do with the Marshalls of Richmond buildings?
deb
red post ,,,Hi Ruskie ....you've been missed :)
-
Hi Deb. I've really got to go, but am a bit hooked here. I'll regret it when I'm still reading Shakespeare at 2am. :'(
I don't have a lot of experience in the grave department but I've seen them head to head like that before. I thought they were usually buried facing um... east/west? So I'm not sure what head to head means. Steven will know. ;D
-
I recently visited a cemetery where there were rows all facing west and then turned back to back like that and the remainder of the area faced east. So it doesn't seem so very unusual.
-
I took a photo of the Marshall grave to indicate the spot. The inscription is much clearer than Nathaniel's. John Marshall was born in Crail, Fifeshire, N[orth] B[ritain], June 13th 1843 and died January 2nd 1916 in Highbury, London.
-
Hi all,
I hope you don't mind me butting in.
I've been keeping a watching brief on your wonderful progress and you seem to have a problem in finding out who is buried in the Bryceson grave because of the poor condition of the headstone.
I can't remember if anyone has the plot reference which shows where the plot is located, but if we have it then the local Council should have Plot Registers, as well as Burial Registers, and that would have details of all the occupants this plot. It should give name, age, date of burial and a reference to the entry in the appropriate burial register for each person buried in that plot.
It is also possible that a local library may have films of the registers.
Waiting for the 9th,
Colin
-
Colin
Welcome ...you are so NOT butting in! ;D
The only reference to the gravesite is what Mongibello posted ... unfortunately some of us cannot help becuase of distance but I am sure Steven will be happy to hear of your info.
deb also waiting for the 9th which will be the 8th here !!!! LOL :D
-
Hi Colin, You're most welcome to join us! ;D
Mongibello found the burial references for both Nathaniels back towards the end of Part 4 I think. I was hoping there may be some MI's for the cemetery which may have been taken when the stone was readable ...
Thanks for clearing up the Marshall inscription Mongibello. The surname must just be a coincidence.
The stone looks like it might have lost part of it's surface so you probablay shouldn't touch it. However water sprayed on, plus lighting and taking photos from various angles as suggested may reveal some more letters. I hope. :)
Once again, today I probably won't be able to spend much time with Nathaniel but I'll leave you all to analyse today's entry:
Saturday
Black cat at Wharf caught mouse this morning.
Wonderful isn't it?
I love Nathaniel! ;D
Just saw your post - morning/evening Deb. This time tomorrow all will be revealed!!!!!! (I hope!) ;D
-
Thanks for the friendly welcome, which I was half expecting :)
In my local library there are films of the closed cemetery registers. Apart from the very early ones, the burial registers have an alphabetical index at the start, which helps to locate a burial record in that particular register.
The burial record gives the plot reference, and from that you should be able to find the plot details in the plot register which shows all of the occupants of that plot.
I'm in the North-East of England, and feel as isolated as Deb, so I'll probably fade into the background and let you guys carry on the good work.
Regards,
Colin
-
ooo Colin ...join in ...regardless of what you find or not , it's always great to have someone's take on the diary :D
Morning Ruskie ...very much evening here 11;09pm as i type this ...
Nat seems to be really bored ...Cat caught mouse LOL ...ooooo NAT wait til tomorrow ...get your shorthand pencil ready ;D ;D
deb
-
Mornin' all (or evening if that's that it is where you are) and hello Colin - yes the cemetery records should be somewhere. The local council should know.
Back on the Brycesons - there was a reason for all the Bryceson stuff as I really did wonder if the Mary Bryceson aged 20 living with the widowed Marion Bagg on the 1841 census was "our" Mary and her age was wrong.
I now think it's more likely that her name was wrong and she was Ann Bryceson, Marion's sister. Marion Bryceson turns up in the 1851 census living back in Edinburgh with her two children George and Marion, Ann Bryceson aged 29 and 14 year old Mary Leithead. Ann Bryceson continues to appear in the Scottish censuses up to 1891.
That spelling of Bryceson is incredibly rare -there's a good chance that any one with it spelt like that is connected.
Right so where IS "our" Mary?
Carole
-
Hi Carole. :)
Where is our Mary? That's the million dollar question. :-\ I think we've all tried all we can think of to find her.
Deb's theory that she's already living in Richmond buildings with Matthew Ward and he didn't include her on the 1841 census (perhaps for the sake of respectablility) may not be too far off the mark. :-\
Granny Shepard and Uncle John are living in Stephen St in 1841. Is it worth checking the 1841 census for all of Stephen St, Richmond Buildings and Dean St (as she gives Dean St as her address when she marries Matthew on 27th of June 1841)?
Great detective work by the way tracing the Bagg/Bryceson's back to Scotland. It was well worth it even just to eliminate that particular Mary. ;D
-
In answer to Colin, the cemetery people did tell me that the grave is for four burials but only three people had been buried. They were Sarah, Nathaniel's wife in 1890, Nathaniel Junior in Feb 1911 and our Nathaniel in March 1911.
Since the rest of the family seemed to be spread out they would have been buried in their local cemeteries.
When the central London churchyards were full in the middle of the 19th C (some scandallously so) the London boroughs bought plots in the (then) outer suburbs. The one in Finchley was run by Islington & St Pancras. It is huge, over a mile from the main gate to the further point and still in use. The modern boroughs are Camden & Islington.
-
I know its been said previously - what are Mary and Mathew Wards marriage details ?
N
-
Hi nesta
Jun 27 1841
St Ann Westminster
By Banns
Matthew Ward full age bachelor Tailor Richmonds Buildings father: Matthew Ward Tailor
Mary Bryceson full age widow Dean St father: John Sheperd mason
both signed
wits: John Sheperd, Rich(?) Sawyer
deb
-
Brill, I am here at my Mum's and now got her logged on! Steven (Bryceson). Over to you from here Mum! x
-
Welcome to Mum!!
-
Brill, I am here at my Mum's and now got her logged on! Steven (Bryceson). Over to you from here Mum! x
Welcome Steven's Mum. There is going to be a lot of discussion about today's diary entry. :-[
;D I'm sure Steven has already filled you in on the details (but he wouldn't tell us! ;))
When you have a few spare hours (or days) you might like to go through our other threads about The Diary, which probably amounts to about 100 pages now. :o
-
oooo Welcome Mum .... :D
Just a few more hours til the 9th August entry is revealed!
deb :)
red post ...hi Ruskie ;D
-
Excitement is building ..... waiting with bated breath here in Aus for "the" entry... ;D ;D ;D
-
Hello Karen. I'm on tenterhooks here ...... ;D
I wonder if we'll have a record attendance on the thread this morning (or evening depending whereabouts in the world you are).
-
hello - steven's Mum
Thanks for that deb - easier than looking through all the threads.
Have now got my dear husband who is not that interested in family history interested ! He has decided that between my research and nathaniel that I spend half my time in the 19th century !! He has also downloaded the pic and is playing around with photoshop !
Its 00.30 on the 9th and I've already looked !!!! can't wait
Goodnight all
N
-
7:39 PM here (still Sunday) ..... England is 6 hours ahead of me ....arrrghhhh come on Westminster Archives ...post it already ...we have been so patient 8) ;D
hi all ... breathe In breathe outttttttttttttttttttttttttt ... repeat as needed !
deb
-
only 20 minutes to go N ....
-
waitinggggggggggggggggggggggggg
-
Are we there yet?? ;D ;D
-
YES!!!!!!! ;D
-
Now I know what Steven meant!!!!! ;D And I don't think we need anyone to fill in the gaps for us as we thought we might!
Oh Nathaniel. :o
PS. As we suspected Deb - a 'rude' word! ;)
-
Ahem... :-[ :-[
Oh dear... adventurous is not the word ;D
Can't get past his mentioning her new straw bonnet at that point though... ;D ;D ;D
-
:o :o :o
well, although he had never SEEN them does not say he had never ...well you know ;D...although now I tend to agree with Steven that they had not been intimate before....
was she wearing the straw bonnet at the time ....
Blimey ... my mind has images LOL
deb
-
ummmmm maybe Ann,being older, had never thought her friendship with NB would get this far! She's holding back .... well, for a while ....
-
My thoughts exactly Karen. ;)
What does he mean by this?:
Hope to get on better hereafter in matters of secrecy.
Does this mean that he wants to "go further" ( ;)) with Ann?
You're right Deb - just because he hadn't seen before .... ;)
I've got the same images in my head Deb. Oh yes, maybe she kept her bonnet on! I didn't think of that! ;D It does look like Steven's impression is right - drat! So it looks like Ann is not some kind of loose woman as some of us thought. But also Deb - no little Nat babies. :-\ Are you disappointed? ;D
No wonder he needed to go for a walk after that. And I wonder what he got up to at home for the rest of the evening? ;)
-
errrr does anyone remember what else he wrote ..... ;D...I have no clue ...need to reread LOL
-
ahhh Crapola ...no baby ....
deb :'(
-
What does he mean by this?:
Hope to get on better hereafter in matters of secrecy.
Does this mean that he wants to "go further" ( ;)) with Ann?
Yep I reckon so Ruskie... and it puts a new spin on getting up to their old tricks as well
-
not only old tricks but "wicked" tricks ;D (in the kitchen)
-
With regard to the two men he mentions after he drops his little bombshell.... there are at least 2 possible Henry KITCHINGMAN coming up on census. Will check out the other guy now.
-
I started reading it, but skipped ahead to the italics. I'm going back to re-read too.
-
Wonder what caused the two houses to collapse.... must check the papers and see if anything is mentioned about it at all.
-
I was just going to ask that Karen. I first thought they were being demolished but it seems they just 'fell down' - maybe something to do with the storms or water weakening the foundations?
What do you make of this?:
neither of whom spoke to me, not liking my appearance, being too ancient Does this sound like Benjamin Smart and Henry Kitchingman were a lot younger than Nathaniel? :-\
-
Ruskie ...
Sounds like they were the ancient ones .... "not liking my appearance, being too ancient" ...like they looked at him, maybe as being too foppish ...like us looking at younger kids and thinking "cover up your belly button" kinda thing
-
I thought the opposite ... they were much older than him. Perhaps NB didn't have gloves or a hat on or somesuch...??
-
Yes, I think you're right - that makes sense .... they were older than him!
And we all know that Nat is a bit of a Dandy. Probably fancies himself. :) And maybe with good reason. I expect he is quite handsome.
-
remember the day Nb wore his outfit and people looked at him, but he didn't care .... maybe feb/march time frame ...he seemed to enjoy getting stared at ...to me he seems to want to be "first in fashion' and everyone has to catch up.
deb
-
I know it's not the right year, but...
Illustrated London News
Saturday September 28th 1867
Middle Row Holborn
"The unsightly and inconvenient block of buildings, mostly in an indifferent state of repair, which have hitherto obstructed the great thoroughfare of Holborn, just opposite the entrance of Gray's Inn Lane, are now being removed"
Wonder if this is around where those two houses collapsed..??
-
It sounds like it doesn't it? Don't tell me those collapsed houses were still there so many years later? You'd think they would be rebuilt fairly quickly in a city whre space was at a premium. Maybe they rebuilt something quickly and it was the replacements that the Illustrated London News was talking about. :-\
-
:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o Naughty Nat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
;D Ted.
It looks like Gray's Inn Lane is now Gray's Inn Road. It runs into High Holborn.
-
Using google streetview have a look at the buildings opposite Gray's Inn Road. :)
Old maps show what looks like buildings in the middle of the street on Holborn just where Gray's Inn Lane meets it. It's called 'Mid Row" - it looks like it was here that the houses fell down and they were later demolished. There appears to be nothing there today and it's just part of the road.
-
I have to tell you the truth ....
today's entry was illuminating BUT I thought I was REALLY going to be shocked .......the 'word' is/was shocking but maybe there was no other word to use in those days ....
I wanted a 'love story' .................... :-[ :-[ :-* :'(
deb
-
I wanted a 'love story' .................... :-[ :-[ :-* :'(
deb
Not many of them in those days deb..... just bodice rippers and tales of lust... ;D ;D ;D
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staple_Inn
Is this it Ruskie?
-
I wanted a 'love story' .................... :-[ :-[ :-* :'(
deb
Not many of them in those days deb..... just bodice rippers and tales of lust... ;D ;D ;D
let me dream, Karen ..... :)
-
Oh alright then deb... just for you.... ;D
Not really seeing anything pertinent to the collapse of houses in Middle Row Holborn nor the storm that is mentioned.
There are several references in some of the UK publications of BRYCESON and Co who made organs and sold Hymn books etc.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staple_Inn
Is this it Ruskie?
Yep! ;D Isn't it loverly?! ;D
Deb I agree with you. I feel a bit deflated and I thought the whole entry would be in italics with lots of juicy details. Yes I was 'surprised' at Nat's use of that word as he's usually such a polite lad, but it wasn't as shocking as I'd hoped it would be. ;)
-
A mention of Middle Row:
Apart from Holborn, properly so called, Middle Row, an insulated row of houses, abutting upon Holborn Bars, and nearly opposite Gray's Inn Road, claims a notice here, for it was long a book-hunting locality, and two bookshops, at least, existed there until the place was demolished in August, 1867.
And a picture:
http://www.londonancestor.com/views/vl-middle.htm
-
What a strange way to build a building - looks like its on the road way.
-
Yes - it looks like the road splits in two. The Row appears to be closer to one side of the road than the other with an alleyway on the narrow side. It would have developed over the centuries probably from narrow lanes with small buildings on either side then the houses being enlarged and improved over the years. It's really interesting.
-
I've gone off on a tangent ...
I've just had a look at everyone living in Stephen Street in 1841. Granny Shepard and Uncle John Shepard are there (as is Ann Fox) so it seems like this is how these people knew each other. It's Matthew Ward who's living at Richmond Buildings, so perhaps the accomodation was better or cheaper there than Stephen St which is the reason that the Shepards and Nat eventually moved there. I thought that Nathaniel and mother Mary might be hiding in Stephen St somewhere but I couldn't see them. Maybe someone else might like to double check. :-\
Then I got to wondering again about Matthew Ward and the fact that he can't be found in 1851. I know we found a couple of possible deaths. I quite like this one:
Mar 1847
Matthew Ward
St Pancras
vol 1
page 287
I can't see this on the London PR's on Ancestry. Does anyone know if there is a way to view this d/c without purchasing it?
Mongibello, is this something you are able to look up? ;D
There is one burial on Ancestry for a Matthew Ward 23 Jan 1847 - he was living Marylebone age 75. :-\ Is this the same Matthew Ward as the one from FreeBMD above? If so, I don't think he's our Matthew Ward. Age is way wrong too ..... Would a death in Marylebone be registered in St Pancras?
Our Mary Ward was buried 29 Oct 1847. She was living Richmond Buildings. Is this her on FreeBMD?:
Dec 1847
Mary Ward
St Pancras
vol 1 page 328
I'm just trying to tally up the right deaths/burials with the right registration districts and of course the right Matthew and Mary.
I'd really like to find Matthew Ward ...
-
Well - I just think it shows that for many life really was a lot more innocent in previous times ;D
What I still find odd about Nat are all these people he knows - where did he meet them all and why does he know their names? Did he meet them when he was working for Mr Nodes? Just how friendly would you get with your customers as an undertaker? Nearly every time he goes out he meets someone whose name he knows but - put me right if I'm wrong here- whenever he goes out its either with Ann or one of the family. He is Nathaniel No Friends. It's really weird.
Carole
-
Hello Carole.
Yes he does know a lot of people. He sometimes reveals how he knows them (I think he mentioned a school friend and a couple he obviously knows through working at Leas) - I suppose he mixed in small circles even though he lived in the big city. And it is strange that he doesn't seem to hang around with any male friends of his own age. He's a funny lad.
St Margarets:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Margaret's,_Westminster
(no wonder Nat was amused)
-
I know it was a big city but do you think it was made up of smaller communities - yes they did move homes around but it did seem to be a around a smallish area so it would be possibly be similar to the smallish town / large village I live in where everyone knows everyone else or someone who does know them !
Just spent an hour walking round our local cemetery (LLoyd George's grand son - the 3rd Earl Dwyfor had just been buried in their family crypt on friday and as a friend had done the floral tributes we thought we'd pop up and have a look - yes I know just like our Nat ! ) and amazed my husband as I walked around by telling him who the the people who were buried were or who's parents or husband's and wives were buried there ! Mind you Lloyd George was just an excuse - I love it up there its so peaceful ! Sorry I digress !
Nesta
-
Mar 1847
Matthew Ward
St Pancras
vol 1
page 287
There is one burial on Ancestry for a Matthew Ward 23 Jan 1847 - he was living Marylebone age 75. :-\ Is this the same Matthew Ward as the one from FreeBMD above? If so, I don't think he's our Matthew Ward. Age is way wrong too ..... Would a death in Marylebone be registered in St Pancras?
Unfortunately there is no way of having sight of a death certificate without purchasing it, only the burial, however with a burial date of 23rd January, 1847 I believe he must have died within a few days before. The entry that you have found on FreeBMD is the only Matthew Ward for that quarter so it is the same one.
-
Mar 1847
Matthew Ward
St Pancras
vol 1
page 287
There is one burial on Ancestry for a Matthew Ward 23 Jan 1847 - he was living Marylebone age 75. :-\ Is this the same Matthew Ward as the one from FreeBMD above? If so, I don't think he's our Matthew Ward. Age is way wrong too ..... Would a death in Marylebone be registered in St Pancras?
Unfortunately there is no way of having sight of a death certificate without purchasing it, only the burial, however with a burial date of 23rd January, 1847 I believe he must have died within a few days before. The entry that you have found on FreeBMD is the only Matthew Ward for that quarter so it is the same one.
Just as I suspected ... maybe Mongibello might be kind enough to check elsewhere for Matthew Ward's death? :-\
-
Deaths with a search of 1846 to 1851 in the London area are
Q1 1846 St George Hanover Square
Q4 1846 Bethnal Green
Q1 1847 Pancras
Q2 1848 Chelsea
Q3 1849 Stepney
Q1 1849 Wandsworth (Matthew Thomas Ward)
Q1 1851 Strand
Q1 1851 West London
The 1847 Pancras would seem likely and fitting in with location for Mary also but would mean he died first .... but we've already proved it wrong???
-
Deaths with a search of 1846 to 1851 in the London area are
Q1 1846 St George Hanover Square
Q4 1846 Bethnal Green
Q1 1847 Pancras
Q2 1848 Chelsea
Q3 1849 Stepney
Q1 1849 Wandsworth (Matthew Thomas Ward)
Q1 1851 Strand
Q1 1851 West London
The 1847 Pancras would seem likely and fitting in with Mary also.
Yes, but I wonder if FreeBMD records are like the Ancestry London PR's which are not complete and are only (mainly?) records held at the LMA. Westminster holds other records not available on Ancestry. :-\
-
Can't get past his mentioning her new straw bonnet at that point though... ;D ;D ;D
Hairs on her coat?
or did I get that wrong?
-
There is no guarantee that the indexes are 100% accurate, and transcriptions only add to the inaccuracies, this has been proven over the years and even books written about it, but overall it's the best that is available. The only quarter during that time that hasn't been fully transcribed appears to have been Q3 1845, so we can't blame FreeBMD.
-
Can't get past his mentioning her new straw bonnet at that point though... ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D
Innocent mind, more than we can say for Mr Bryceson!
In the words of my late Nan...."how vulgar!".
Hairs on her coat?
or did I get that wrong?
-
I haven't mastered this quote business as you may have guessed!
-
Re: FreeBmd - Ruskie
FreeBMD is a transcript from the register indexes of the General Register Office which covers the whole of England & wales.
It has been built up over a number of years by volunteers.
The website contains charts which show the coverage by quarter. It is pretty well 100% for the period from the start of civil registration in 1837 to the end of the 19th C and they are getting on well with the 20th. You can in fact order certificates over the internet using the details listed.
-
Hi all,
It might be worth bearing in mind that a death had to be registered in the District in which it occured but the burial could be anywhere. I suppose in a place like London you wouldn't need to travel far to be in a different Registration District and we know many people went walkabout.
Colin
-
hehehehe!! Hadn't realized how OLD that naughty word was!! ::)
Can't get past his mentioning her new straw bonnet at that point though... ;D ;D ;D
Hairs on her coat?
or did I get that wrong?
;D ;D ;D - just goes to show what everyone else was thinking! ::) :o
It makes their relationship all the more odd to me. I could have understood it if there was more ermmm wicked tricks going on...but why on earth was she seeing him? And he ended up marrying someone one a lot closer in age, so what was it about Ann Fox?
-
See a lot has been happening and found. WTG
Not sure if this has already been mentioned. On 1841 census for Dean Street there is a Henry Shepherd 24 years J Carpenter and not born in county. Could maybe Mary was visiting with him just before she married Matthew. Henry - a relative, nephew maybe??
HO107/730/5
Linda
-
Hairs on her coat?
or did I get that wrong?
No no Steve - you are quite correct. :-X
-
Re: FreeBmd - Ruskie
FreeBMD is a transcript from the register indexes of the General Register Office which covers the whole of England & wales.
It has been built up over a number of years by volunteers.
The website contains charts which show the coverage by quarter. It is pretty well 100% for the period from the start of civil registration in 1837 to the end of the 19th C and they are getting on well with the 20th. You can in fact order certificates over the internet using the details listed.
Thanks - I just thought there may be a way to find out more without forking out the money. ;)
The age on that Matthew Ward burial is a fair way out. He doesn't look like ours. It would have been nice to find out if he was a Tailor though. This Matthew died before Mary Ward and his address Osnaberg St, Regents Park. :-\
When Mary died a few months later her address was Richmond Buildings. You would think they would both have the same address even if Matthew died in another parish.
I think our Matthew must be one of the others ....
-
See a lot has been happening and found. WTG
Not sure if this has already been mentioned. On 1841 census for Dean Street there is a Henry Shepherd 24 years J Carpenter and not born in county. Could maybe Mary was visiting with him just before she married Matthew. Henry - a relative, nephew maybe??
HO107/730/5
Linda
Um - it's a possibility. Was there anyone else living with Henry?
-
It makes their relationship all the more odd to me. I could have understood it if there was more ermmm wicked tricks going on...but why on earth was she seeing him? And he ended up marrying someone one a lot closer in age, so what was it about Ann Fox?
Maybe they just liked eachother. ;D I think he was pretty hot and she fancied him. She was pretty and petite and they both liked prints. ;D
I was thinking about the fact that Nathaniel doesn't mention any friendships with people of his own age. There are some young people who just get on better with people who are older. He's spent his life with his older relatives, mixed with their friends and formed friendships with them. He may not have gone to school (possilby was tutored?) which is where most children would make friends. He doens't hang about on the streets with young riff raff. He has no siblings ... and appears to be genuinely interested in and have an affinity for older people. His interests also aren't the interests that a young person has (even I imagine in 1846). He appears to have an old head on his shoulders. I can kind of understand him.
I think Nathaniel must have been a gentleman. He was obviously interested in 'going further', but Ann wasn't, so .... they didn't ... and haven't ... yet! ;D
-
Today's entry is very strange.
Nursery maid at Wharf left her situation. Mother went to a doctor’s in Gower Place and was so fatigued and ill that she was obliged to be brought home in a cab and was expected to die on the road. Bought penknife - pearl handle and three blades - Victoria Road, Pimlico.
I get the impression that NB is not very close to his mother and has no feelings about what happens to her. I haven't got round to going through the start of the saga but I have read the diary so far...
I reckon that NB was a bit unfamiliar with life and wasn't aware that some women have a hairy chest ;D ;D ;D
Colin
-
Aha... a new pen knife to replace the one he broke the other day. Now he can go on graffiti-ing bits of old London town for us. ;D
Not sure how he felt about his Mum to be honest. I wonder if she was somewhat distant with him, as would have been proper for the time - or because of the circumstances of his birth - and therefore he was not that attached to her as a child might be today.
I find it a bit difficult to understand these people really, as they were so different in some ways and yet so familiar in others.
I reckon that NB was a bit unfamiliar with life and wasn't aware that some women have a hairy chest ;D ;D ;D
There are quite early records of French women waxing, perhaps the English thought it a waste of a good candle or two... ;D
-
Ruskie that Henry Shepherd is District 9, page 10 and is on his own. I don't think he comes up searching by name.
Linda
-
I was thinking about today's diary entry - and yesterdays. It does seem odd the way Nat writes about something sad (as in his mother's illness today) and the next sentence is so upbeat. I've come to the conclusion that he may not sit down in the evening and write the day's events in one go. Perhaps he writes one thing, then returns later to add something else and so on. But he doesn't start a new paragraph so it reads oddly. Maybe this is why the entries sometimes seem a bit disjointed.
He doesn't seem to be very close to his mother. But he is her 20 year old son - isn't that normal? ;D
Thanks Linda - I was hoping there might be someone with Henry Shepard who may be Mary ... :-\
-
Mother went to a doctor’s in Gower Place and was so fatigued and ill that she was obliged to be brought home in a cab and was expected to die on the road.
Poor Mary would have had to walk about a mile from the doctor's in Gower Place, home to Richmond Buildings .... :(
-
I was hoping there might be someone with Henry Shepard who may be Mary ... :-\
Maybe Mary & Nat had a short stay and were not included in census.
There is a George Ridsdale, G.P. at 1 Gower Place in the 1846 London Medical Directory
http://www.rootschat.com/links/09fa/
-
I was hoping there might be someone with Henry Shepard who may be Mary ... :-\
Maybe Mary & Nat had a short stay and were not included in census.
There is a George Ridsdale, G.P. at 1 Gower Place in the 1846 London Medical Directory
http://www.rootschat.com/links/09fa/
Um, yes, perhaps ... ;)
Interesting finding George Ridsdale GP. That might be him. :) Does it mean that the family weren't too poor if Mary could afford all this medical treatment?
-
I can't see George.. I must be doing something wrong... :(
-
I can't see George.. I must be doing something wrong... :(
He's on the top right of the link provided by Linda. Page 128
-
No No NO..... I mean on Census etc.....
-
I was thinking about today's diary entry - and yesterdays. It does seem odd the way Nat writes about something sad (as in his mother's illness today) and the next sentence is so upbeat. I've come to the conclusion that he may not sit down in the evening and write the day's events in one go. Perhaps he writes one thing, then returns later to add something else and so on. But he doesn't start a new paragraph so it reads oddly. Maybe this is why the entries sometimes seem a bit disjointed.
He doesn't seem to be very close to his mother. But he is her 20 year old son - isn't that normal? ;D
Thanks Linda - I was hoping there might be someone with Henry Shepard who may be Mary ... :-\
NB's diary is a ledger book, so I was wondering if it was hidden among other books where he worked, rather than at home, and his entries were written at work. Or could they have been kept at home and it was his secret diary/diaries, expecting that nobody would be interested in looking at his ledger books?
Colin
-
I was thinking about today's diary entry - and yesterdays. It does seem odd the way Nat writes about something sad (as in his mother's illness today) and the next sentence is so upbeat
Hi everyone
Ruskie ...you and I must have ESP ;D
I was thinking about the 9th entry and how after all the excitement of seeing Ann and her new hat ;D that he just went on writing something else.
I have not read today's entry yet but earlier I was wondering if he would mention how he was going to go further with Ann and how thrilled he may have been by the night before's 'wicked tricks'
He does seems unusual for a 20 year old man/boy!
deb
-
He does seems unusual for a 20 year old man/boy!
deb
errrrr maybe BoyToy and not man/boy ;D
-
question:
What would a Nusery maid being doing at his job?
"Nursery maid at Wharf left her situation."
I remember him going to work one day and a young woman who worked there gave him a kiss ... (need to find that in the diary) , but what would a nusery maid be.... was she looking after children :-\
deb ...clueless ;D ...and needing chocolate
-
Maybe he was refering to the family for whom he worked...?? Did they live close by to the Wharf do we know??
-
thought before I go to bed...
Poor Mary had another year of illness to get through..... I feel such sympathy for her! Thank God, her mum was around to look after her. I cannot imagine her unbearable pain whilst living with fleas, the heat, the cold and the lack of good medical care. I am sure when her time came ... she was glad, relieved tired of tiredness and pain and was happy to go!
She was obviously not the only person suffering in those days, but NB's diary has given us a view of what it was like.
I shall say a pray for her tonight and to good old Granny Shepard!
deb
red post ...Hi karen ... Not sure ... I know George Lea his boss and cousin had family but I doubt that they lived near the wharf ...I think we have traced George and family. George was also the one who bankrupted the business by socialising and not being around too often. So I don't think the nusery maid had anything to do with the Lea children. :-\
I think George was the one who kept buying horses that kept dying for some reason or another
-
I have to say I find something depressingly callous about today's entry. His mother was was so fatigued and ill that she was obliged to be brought home in a cab and was expected to die on the road. Yet he seems more interested in buying a new penknife :(
I wonder if the nursery maid is a joke - perhaps he's talking about the dog who had the puppies a while back ???
Carole
-
I have to say I find something depressingly callous about today's entry. His mother was was so fatigued and ill that she was obliged to be brought home in a cab and was expected to die on the road. Yet he seems more interested in buying a new penknife :(
Carole
That's why I think he might have written the diary in stages throughout the day.
Say Mum got home at midday in the cab ... he might have helped her up stairs, tucked her into bed, made her a cuppa, written in his diary.
Then he popped out for a walk while Mum was sleeping and just happened to pass by the penknife shop, so he decided to buy a new one as he'd broken his old one.
Then he went home, made sure Mum was comfortable, checked out his prints, had tea then just before bed wrote in his diary that he'd bought a new penknife ...
What do you think? ;D
Just a different take on the entry. ;)
-
... I was wondering if he would mention how he was going to go further with Ann and how thrilled he may have been by the night before's 'wicked tricks'
You live in hope Deb! ;D
-
Karen, where did you check for George Ridsdale? That sounds like a northern surname.
We do have George Lea in all the censuses Deb - I'll try to dig them out. I also thought that the nursery maid may have worked for the Leas.
-
This is the stuff about the Leas I extracted from Part 2. All found by Deb. I'm sure I have some more somewhere but can't seem to find it at the moment :-\
"Sunday 15th February 1846
Clara Lea, eldest daughter of George and Anna Matilda Lea, this day completes her second year."
marriage:
George LEA = Ann Matilda DELL
22 Oct 1842, after Banns
St Pancras Parish Church
George = Batchelor, full age, coal merchant, father: CHARLES LEA dead
address: Northumberland wharf, Regents Park
Anna Matilda = Full age, spinster, father: William Mostly?? Dell, Gent
address: ?chol House, Havenlook? Hill
witnesses:
Charles Lea and Mary Lea
could Granny Shepard be his aunty?? There is a Charles LEA born about the same time as Granny Shepard in Birmingham. so George is s/o Charles Lea who could be Mary's brother...
By 1861 George Lea is 41, b St Pancras and is "out of business", Anna M is with him along with several more children:
at 5 Gloucester ter., Camberwell
Clara 17
Hannah 15
George D 14
Jessie M 12
mes?? G 1
Baptism:
St Pancras
George LEA 30 April 1820
s/o CHARLES and Lydia
Charles's Occ looks like Smith
can't make out address.
Guess who Charles married ...LYDIA WOOD who was present at Granny Shepards marriage :
10th May 1796
St Andrew by the Wardrobe
John Shepard batchelor of the parish of ??, Blackfriars and Mary Lea spinster of the same parish were married by banns
both signed
Witnesses: Charles Lea and Lydia Wood (?)
Charles Lea= Lydia Wood
Married by Banns on 2 August 1796 in the presence of John Dodd and Hannah Moody
St Andrew, Holborn
I think I have Lydia in 1851 ...she is b Stafford and living in Chipping Barnet, Middlesex.
The Leas travelled to Barnett in Jan or Feb 1846.
added The above Lydia Lea is living with her granddaughter Sarah Hawkins. Charles and Lydia had a daughter (IGI) named Lydia who married Charles HAWKINS in St Pancras, 1827
Where is Lydia in 1841
Lydia is buried 16 sept 1854, Barnet, age 82
Kensington & Chelsea
All Souls Cemetery, Kensal Green
I think this may be Charles Lea:
Buried 27 Feb 1838 age 62
Add: Augustus Street, Regent Park, St Pancras
buried at the same cemetery as Lydia
-
Karen I can't see George Ridsdale in 1841, but I found him in 1851:
HO107/1496/264/31
living at 1 Euston Square (age not known) living with wife Maria and loads of servants (maybe one of them gave the census info and didn't know his age). George is a Medical Practitioner and born in Ireland. :P Maybe he's there in 1841? They don't appear to have any children.
Marriages Sept 1843
George Ridsdale and on the same page Maria Henrietta Alewyn
St Pancras
1/295
And from the London PR's:
they married August 1st
St Pancras Church
both full age
bachelor/spinster
he's a surgeon from St Pancras
she's from St Marylebone
his father is George - dead
her father is James - merchant
:)
-
The other way of looking at Nat's apparent callousness is that he is self denial, and his way of trying to cope with his mother's illness is to try and distance himself from it. I feel so sorry for poor Mary. We know what they don't - that she has over another year to live :(
Carole
-
hehehehe!! Hadn't realized how OLD that naughty word was!! ::)
Go to Wikipedia and look up Pepys diary. You will see an extract of when he was caught with a housemaid by his wife in the mid 1660s and he uses a derivative of the word there. Also, at one time it was common, im told, that roads with much prostitution in them were called "gropec**t lane". I read this on the normally respectable BBC website in the last year or two. For some reason, all of these roads have been renamed.
-
The other way of looking at Nat's apparent callousness is that he is self denial, and his way of trying to cope with his mother's illness is to try and distance himself from it. I feel so sorry for poor Mary. We know what they don't - that she has over another year to live :(
Carole
Yes, it could be that ... he is a young lad after all and it must still be hard for him even though he appears not to be close to his mother ... :-\
Yes it is as though we are seeing Nat's (and his families) life through his eyes but we can also see into their futures. :-\ It feels weird.
I read that wiki article too Steve. It's interesting. I knew that many of today's 'rude words' had earlier origins. ;)
-
Ruskie not sure if they could afford a physician. They weren't paupers/poor house.
There is a Thomas Ridsdale age 35, living King St., St. Anne Soho in 1841 with wife Eliza, his occupation tailor and not born in county. Could have been friends with Thomas and Mary and somehow related to George.
-
hehehehe!! Hadn't realized how OLD that naughty word was!! ::)
Go to Wikipedia and look up Pepys diary. You will see an extract of when he was caught with a housemaid by his wife in the mid 1660s and he uses a derivative of the word there. Also, at one time it was common, im told, that roads with much prostitution in them were called "gropec**t lane". I read this on the normally respectable BBC website in the last year or two. For some reason, all of these roads have been renamed.
really amazing actually...this word has been around for hundreds of years it seems, and yet in the english speaking world, it is arguably the most shocking? I know of all swear words that there are, that particular one is the most hateful to me!
-
....I know of all swear words that there are....
;D
-
Nursery maid at Wharf left her situation.
I'm still thinking dog - it's nearly 3 weeks since Dummer had her puppies. This might be the first time she's left them on their own. I can't think there were any human nursemaids living at the wharf.
Carole
-
As one of the many 'lurkers' I have been enjoying following the diary and your various discussions :)
I just thought I'd add a comment about Nat, his Mum and her illness.
We have a diary written by one of my OH relations. During WW2 his only son was in the RAF.
There is a diary entry that reads - Mrs A and myself visited ........ for lunch. Today I recieved notification that my son was posted missing in action. My tax return for this year is.......
When I first saw it I was shocked that such awful news had been sandwiched between his social and financial affairs. But when I spoke to family who knew him said they were very close and he was devastated at the loss of his son and rarely spoke about it.
I wondered if it was the same with Nathaniel. Is it because he is simply giving the facts and not the emotion makes it look unfeeling?
-
I had a look at the drainage plans today. Nothing before 1906 when No. 10 was having its one toilet moved from the back of the house to the far side of the tiny yard. Perhaps the smell was getting bad?
In 1913 the Health Inspector was complaining to the owners (a building firm in South Norwood) that both 9 & 10 were filthy. No indication of what they were being used for.
-
Another comment about Nat, his Mum and her illness; these days, when we are ill, we expect to know and understand what we are suffering from and to have a reasonable chance of being cured. In Nat's day, there was little effective medicine, diagnosis was uncertain and people died suddenly from causes they didn't understand. Probably Nat and his mother had no idea whether she was chronically long term ill or terminally ill, and lots of people were probably off-colour a lot of the time and I imagine people just lived more in the present.
As someone said earlier on the thread, in some ways we are still so similar now and in others we are so different that it is difficult for us to understand. Also Nat was keeping a diary for his own reasons, but I'm sure he didn't anticipate complete strangers would be reading it 150 years in the future!
-
....I know of all swear words that there are....
;D
not written well at all was it!? ;D ::) rephrased: To me, of all the swear words that there are...etc... hehe
regarding NB & mother : We discussed before that NB doesn't write of his emotions and feelings...I think also, there is another way of looking at how he phrased it... was so fatigued and ill that she was obliged to be brought home in a cab and was expected to die on the road. perhaps he was noting more than his mother's illness, that she had to struggle home from the doctor alone and having to order the cab , and then cab driver left her on the side of the street, no one to help her to her home... just from the way he said "was expected" it's almost as if he is jibing at someone/thing
-
regarding NB & mother : We discussed before that NB doesn't write of his emotions and feelings...I think also, there is another way of looking at how he phrased it... was so fatigued and ill that she was obliged to be brought home in a cab and was expected to die on the road.
One thing that puzzles me with this, if she was so ill then why did the doctor allow her to go home? Perhaps this was his Mother's account of the event and she was laying it on a bit thick.
Colin
-
That's the thing...which is why I wondered if that was the whole point of his entry...
But what would be her options? Probably the workhouse infirmary? I'd say she'd prefer her own home...
Going back to NB being unfeeling about his mother...he hasn't recorded one single "feeling" about Ann Fox either...nothing that might say he was in lust (oops slip of the keys there.. ) love with her, or that he held her in high regard...his whole diary is literally recording facts...
-
In the days before antiseptics and antibiotics an infirmary with the easy spread of infection would have been the last place you would have wanted to be if you were ill.
I think they had a greater understanding of some cancers then than you'd think http://www.news-medical.net/health/History-of-Breast-Cancer.aspx
and mastectomy was practiced in the C18th. Fanny Burney underwent one in 1811 and described it in graphic detail http://wesclark.com/jw/mastectomy.html - major surgery without any anaesthetic :o but in her case it was successful and she lived another 30 years.
Carole
-
Ouch!!!!
Yes, clearly mastectomies were done, but not routinely even in 1846 and not on poorer people.
-
I had a look at the drainage plans today. Nothing before 1906 when No. 10 was having its one toilet moved from the back of the house to the far side of the tiny yard. Perhaps the smell was getting bad?
In 1913 the Health Inspector was complaining to the owners (a building firm in South Norwood) that both 9 & 10 were filthy. No indication of what they were being used for.
Thanks very much for looking Mongibello. So it looks like this is just before the buildings were refurbished. Might that also mean that there was no drainage prior to 1906? :-\
-
Welcome Icicle and thanks for the interesting insight into your relative's diary.
I think it's good that we're now giving Nathaniel the benefit of the doubt and feeling a bit warmer towards him. There may also be some element of embarassment as Mary has a "woman's" illness? :-\
Colin has a point too - Mary might have been trying for the sympathy vote. But we do know she died the following year, so perhaps not. I still feel really sorry for poor Mary ... :(
-
Nursery maid at Wharf left her situation.
I'm still thinking dog - it's nearly 3 weeks since Dummer had her puppies. This might be the first time she's left them on their own. I can't think there were any human nursemaids living at the wharf.
Carole
;D
Um a new dog arrived today. ;D
Tuesday
New nursery maid came to Wharf this day.
-
Maid -
A female domestic servant. Class included Scullery, Kitchen, House, General, Parlour,
Nurse, Laundry, Lady's etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nursemaid
There may have been some families who lived at the wharf - caretakers perhaps. Someone has to be there to take care of Dummer and her pups. :)
-
Thursday 5th February 1846
A letter directed to Mr Lloyd, postage unpaid, when opened proved to be a Valentine, supposed to be meant for me by my name being mentioned twice, or more, and which I suspect was sent by the nursery maid at Eccleston Wharf. If so, I feel obliged to her for directing it to Mr Lloyd, thereby saving me 2d. Her motive for so doing I know not, but she reversed the picture by sending an old house maid with mop and broom, thereby taking herself off rather than me.
08 June 1846
Monday
Mary Howard, maidservant at Eccleston Wharf, this day completes her 20th year.
A few mentions of the nursery maid .... ;) Bit of flirting between the two perhaps? I think she's too young for Nathaniel.
There are several Mary Howards of the right age in the right area in 1841 so impossible to know which is the correct one .... :-\
-
To quote from Ruskie's findings on the Lea family, perhaps a wharf was a general area, like Canary Wharf, and not just a place where boats cum in ;D
marriage:
George LEA = Ann Matilda DELL
22 Oct 1842, after Banns
St Pancras Parish Church
George = Batchelor, full age, coal merchant, father: CHARLES LEA dead
address: Northumberland wharf, Regents Park
Anna Matilda = Full age, spinster, father: William Mostly?? Dell, Gent
address: ?chol House, Havenlook? Hill
witnesses:
Charles Lea and Mary Lea
-
Yes, good thought Colin. It was certainly where all the action took place in those days.
I just tried googling Eccleston Wharf and just found links to Nat's diary. :)
-
Yes, good thought Colin. It was certainly where all the action took place in those days.
I just tried googling Eccleston Wharf and just found links to Nat's diary. :)
That's not surprising, that's where all the action is going on these days ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi everyone
Although I have grown to like NB, I still have to say that he is rather narcissistic (sp?)! I think i had mentioned it in part 1 .....or 2, or 3 or 4 ............. ;D ;D
Too late here to mention all references but I do not feel that he is not in touch with his mum ...I do think he likes/loves Granny Shepard ...he feels sorry that she had to get up to help her kids that were sick (his mum and uncle John) ...he mentions how granny lost her 2nd to last tooth etc etc ...he writes with feeling about HER ... so why not everyone else?
deb
I knew some maid had kissed him at the wharf ...didn't remember that she was the nursery maid! 8)
deb again
-
What an interesting coincidence. I have a Waite-Lee marriage 1840 with fathers John Waite, cordwainer/shoemaker born 1793 and George Lee of the same profession born abt 1789. I just came across this Bailey proceeding. What is interesting is there is John Waite, George Lee and also a Mr. Sheppard involved. 8)
http://www.rootschat.com/links/09ff/
-
Found these on the Bailey
ISAAC CLEWS, ROBERT WILKINSON, Theft > stealing from master, 11th June 1849.
1305. ISAAC CLEWS and ROBERT WILKINSON , stealing 1 1/2 a ton of coals, value 10s.; the goods of George Lea, their master: to which they pleaded
GUILTY. Recommended to mercy. — Confined One Month.
http://www.rootschat.com/links/09fg/
CHARLES CARTER, Theft > animal theft, 5th February 1877.
229. CHARLES CARTER (25) , Stealing a gelding, the property of Thomas Lea and others. Second Count—Feloniously receiving the same.
DAVID JOHNSON . I live at East End, Finchley, and am a carman, in the employ of Messrs. Lea & Co., coal merchants—they have several depots about town, and one at the back of the Wellington Tavern, Highgate Archway, where we stabled four horses ...
GEORGE LEA . I am a member of the firm of Thomas Lea & Co., coal merchants—the horse that was lost is ours and is worth 100 guineas—I caused these bills to be printed, they were circulated all over London, Hammersmith amongst other places; the description in the bills accurately represents the horse—I afterwards saw it at the Hammersmith police-station.
Cross-examined. I had had it about four or five months, I bought it myself with another and gave 172l. for the two, this was the more valuable one of the two.
JOHN SMITH . I am a labourer in Messrs. Lea's employment—I distributed bills
http://www.rootschat.com/links/09fh/
-
I just tried googling Eccleston Wharf and just found links to Nat's diary. :)
I discovered this thread a few days ago, and have been lurking ever since (after reading through all the pages of all 5 parts - phew!) It's really great that other people are as fascinated as I am. And some of the information turned up has been really informative, especially Ann's age. It's also clarified a few things that I'd been wondering about previously, such as where Nathaniel is buried, and whether he has any surviving relatives. (The picture of his gravestone is particularly evocative, knowing his fascination with churchyards and inscriptions, I wonder what he would have made of it himself...)
Anyway I had to respond to the post above, because googling "Eccleston Wharf" is how I discovered this thread in the first place. I often google places mentioned in the diary to see if they're still around, or to find out how long they've been gone for if they aren't. But this was the first time it's led to this forum.
Sorry I can't contribute anything genealogy-wise, as it's something I know very little about. The only thing I have discovered is a tiny bit more info about Aleck Abrahams' previous quoting from the diaries. Someone previously quoted from a 1914 "Notes and Queries" that suggested he had access to the 1848 diary; from poking around online it seems he had access to the 1846 one as well; see the following quote from Notes and Queries, 1911; s11-IV: 26:
......Gardens. Adieu to relics." This slightly corrects the date of demoli-tion ("1848-50") given by Mr. Warwick Wroth (' London Pleasure Gardens '). The writer was C. Bryceson, then a junior clerk at Messrs. Lea's coal wharf, Pimlico. ALECK ABBAHAMS....
http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/search.dtl
This is clearly quoting the diary entry from 8th March 1846. So it would seem that as recently as the turn of the last century, both 1846 and 1848 diaries (and therefore possibly more?) were either in the posession of Aleck Abrahams or accessible to him. AA does seem fond of quoting obscure books and journals to correct various points via "Notes and Queries"; searching his name via the above link returns a vast number of entries by him. Either he was a frequent library visitor or he amassed his own collection of books. If the latter then I can't help wondering what happened to them all.
- Ian
-
Welcome aboard, Drykid.
It is fascinating here - its amazing what these guys find about our NB
;D Ted
-
Hello Ian and welcome :)
Yes I wondered about Aleck Abrahams and how he got the copies of Nat's diaries - I didn't know N&Q published an extract in 1911. I speculated that ther Brycesons might have had a major clear out in 1911 after both the Nathaniels died and Mr Abrahams bought the diaries. I can't access N&Q - do you know the date when ithe article was published? Both Nats died at the beginning of the year so if the article was published at the end I suppose my idea might still work.
I'm sorry my idea about the dog didn't work - I was half hoping Nat might be showing a sense of humour - and I have been wondering what had happened to the puppies ;D
Carole
-
Yes I wondered about Aleck Abrahams and how he got the copies of Nat's diaries - I didn't know N&Q published an extract in 1911. I speculated that ther Brycesons might have had a major clear out in 1911 after both the Nathaniels died and Mr Abrahams bought the diaries. I can't access N&Q - do you know the date when ithe article was published? Both Nats died at the beginning of the year so if the article was published at the end I suppose my idea might still work.
If you look at the index page for 1911 (assuming you can access it) then s11-IV (80) is in the seventh of twelve boxes:
http://nq.oxfordjournals.org/archive/1911.dtl
If these correspond to months (which seems likely since all the boxes either have 4 or 5 issues in them) then this would make it mid-July 1911, so there's nothing there to contradict the theory that AA acquired the volumes after a sale of Nathaniel's posessions following his death. Given the contents of the diaries, I can't imagine NB having sold them himself prior to his death, and if he'd thrown them away then it would be unlikely that any would have survived.
Would be interesting to trace what became of Abrahams, although so much time has passed that I suspect that it wouldn't be very fruitful. But the lady who sold the 1846 diary to Westminster Council in the 70s seems like a more positive line of enquiry; she could still be alive, and even if she isn't then it's likely that a son or daughter will be.
I'm sorry my idea about the dog didn't work - I was half hoping Nat might be showing a sense of humour - and I have been wondering what had happened to the puppies ;D
If it's any consolation then I thought it sounded plausible. Given that it's a diary then there's no reason why NB wouldn't make obscure jokes that would probably pass people by if made publicly. I still don't see why a wharf would have a nursery maid. But clearly it did.
- Ian
-
I searched for ecclestone wharf several times, and nothing comes up. The 1846 map i have linked to a few times shows the Grosvenor canal going up to the basin that is now the site of victoria station. The map shows Ecclestone rd running north south to the left of the canal. Several wharfs are on the map, but Ecclestone isnt. My theory is that the wharf would have been towards the topleft of the canal possibly on the basin itself which would be better for unloading coal barges.
Canary wharf isnt a working area anymore, its now houses, so the modern concept of a wharf is a housing area. I would expect a wharf that moved over 1000 tons of dusty coal each month on an industrial canal in 1846 to be a bit different.
Perhaps George Lee was 150 years ahead of his time in workplace childcare :) But all the coal workers were men, and the women would be at home.... so why a nursemaid on an industrial coal wharf?
I hope the pups are OK, but there is a convenient canal nearby :(
-
I have a sub to The Genealogist where you can enter addresses into the census searches (and no other details). Putting in "Wharf" for 1841 and 1851 brings up 20 or more wharves where people are living, but none called Eccleston or anything like it. Putting in Eccleston brings up Eccleston Mews, Street etc in Westminster. Most of the occupants seem to be servants, either people with families or houses full of unrelated individuals who are all servants. Perhaps NB was just referring to a particular house which had its entrance by the Wharf Office.
-
Welcome to rootschat drykid and in particular our Nathaniel Bryceson thread. ;D It's great that you have joined us and well done for managing to read ALL of our discussion. You have great staying power!
I have spoken to Westminster Archives about how they obtained the 1846 diary and they were going to look into it. I haven't heard anything more about this unfortunately. Perhaps Mongibello could do a bit of detective work when he's next at the Archives. ;) And you're right drykid, perhaps there is a descendant of the diaries previous owner who may know more about how it came into their family.
To be honest, I would rather not have known that Nathaniel wrote other diaries. It is extremely frustrating to not know their whereabouts if they still exist. I know that there will be a great emptiness come December when the diary finishes.
-
Aleck Abrahams is very elusive - he writes lots of articles for N&Q, and corresponds with people and a search on Google Books comes up with lots of results but he's very hard to trace as a person.
I don't think you need to be Sherlock Holmes to imagine him - a solitary academic minded bachelor living in rooms stuffed full of books with piles of papers everywhere and a lot of spare time on his hands - but who was he ???
Carole
-
Eccleston Wharf lay between numbers 37 and 41 Upper Belgrave Place per the 1851 PO Directory
-
I wonder if Aleck is traceable through the censuses, bmd's etc? (or have you already tried Carole). I wonder if he has any living descendants who may hold some more clues? :)
-
Eccleston Wharf lay between numbers 37 and 41 Upper Belgrave Place per the 1851 PO Directory
Thanks Shaun - I'll see if I can locate it on a map.
-
It was between Eccleston Street and the end of Upper Belgrave Place.
The 1851 Directory has:
35. Hill, William hairdresser & perfumer
37. Day Miss Ellen, teacher of music
Lea Geo & co, Coal Mers, Eccleston Wf
Read Fras. builder & stone saw mills
Pimlico Slate Works
G E Magnus, proprietor
Lambert Joseph, timber & Brick Merchant
41. Irvine Alexander Robert esq
Lambert Thomas coal merchants St George's Wharf
43. Ball Thomas William esq
(end of street)
-
Eccleston Wharf is no longer listed by 1856:
36. Lefeu George, Dyer
Read Fras. builder & stone saw mills
39 & 40. Pimlico Enamlled Slate Works
G E Magnus proprietor
Lambert Joseph, timber merchant
St George's Wharf:
Lambert Thos. wharfinger & coal merchant
43. Bell Thomas William esq
Bennett & Holdsworth, builders
(Bridge row wharf)
-
Welcome to rootschat drykid and in particular our Nathaniel Bryceson thread. ;D It's great that you have joined us and well done for managing to read ALL of our discussion. You have great staying power!
Thanks :) Well to be honest I couldn't stop once I'd started. It's like a detective novel.
I have spoken to Westminster Archives about how they obtained the 1846 diary and they were going to look into it. I haven't heard anything more about this unfortunately. Perhaps Mongibello could do a bit of detective work when he's next at the Archives. ;) And you're right drykid, perhaps there is a descendant of the diaries previous owner who may know more about how it came into their family.
I hope Westminster can come up with something, although realistically it's unlikely that whoever sold them the 1846 diary had the other ones in their posession, even back then. Surely the question would've been asked about any other diaries, and efforts made to acquire those too at the same time. (Unless I guess there was a huge amount of them, and for cost reasons it was decided one was sufficient for the archive. But that doesn't seem very likely.) But they may have information nonetheless about what became of the other ones.
To be honest, I would rather not have known that Nathaniel wrote other diaries. It is extremely frustrating to not know their whereabouts if they still exist. I know that there will be a great emptiness come December when the diary finishes.
Yeah, I'll feel the same way come December. But it's best to look on the positive side; if other diaries have survived this long, then they're probably in the hands of someone who has taken good care of them. And I'm sure a lot of these kinds of things do exist in private hands. Take this for instance:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1877-Daily-Diary-Jan-Dec-Manchester-Clara-Hems-Chapel-/350279562034?cmd=ViewItem&pt=Antiquarian_Books_UK&hash=item518e49f332
I doubt that will show up in any public archive listings, but nonetheless it's still managed to survive almost as long as the NB one has. So there's always hope :)
-
See the area marked "Wharfs" in bottom right of this 1825 map - Eccleston Wharf was just there http://www.oldlondonmaps.com/greenwoodpages/greenwoodsouth13a.html
-
Thanks Shaun - I'll have a look at that (I haven't had any luck finding it on another map I've been examining).
Drykid, that's a nice diary on ebay. I'm afraid I couldn't sell that even if I was a dealer as this person appears to be ... :-\
I hope Westminster can help us find out some more about where the diary has been between Nathaniel's ownership and the person they purchased it from. The people currently working there know nothing about it's acquisiton, but they were going to try to contact a previous archivist who may know more. It also makes me wonder if Nathaniel kept hold of the diaries he wrote in his youth till his death, or whether a family member had them, or someone else? :-\ Of course there could be more of Nathaniel's diaries in lofts somewhere ... :-\ We live in hope. :) It's also worrying because still today people are throwing out this kind of precious history.
-
See the area marked "Wharfs" in bottom right of this 1825 map - Eccleston Wharf was just there http://www.oldlondonmaps.com/greenwoodpages/greenwoodsouth13a.html
Presumably where Eccleston Street is, as Steve suggested. :) (that Greenwood map is excellent)
-
It would have been just a little way south of Eccleston Street, which was between numbers 30 and 31 Upper Belgrave Place.
-
This is quite good too, although it still simply says 'wharfs' rather than naming them individually:
http://archivemaps.com/mapco/cross1861/cross37b.htm
-
I don't think you need to be Sherlock Holmes to imagine him - a solitary academic minded bachelor living in rooms stuffed full of books with piles of papers everywhere and a lot of spare time on his hands - but who was he ???
Carole
Yeah I think that description sounds about right. Although the more I read his entries the more I become convinced that he actually collected these books for himself.
(Hopefully) Here's a scan of the 1911 reference, note the wording "A diary now before me." It also confirms the date as early July 1911.
-
and see this map from 1851 which has outlines of the buildings, but no wharf names :
http://london1851.com/cross19.htm
-
Re the nursemaid, isn't it likely that she was looking after little Clara Lea?
-
Re the nursemaid, isn't it likely that she was looking after little Clara Lea?
Hm, but why would you take your child to work at a coal wharf? Didnt George lea live elsewhere?
The Wharf is a bit south of where I had guessed, but at least it didnt have Victoria Station dropped on it 1850s :)
The scanned page of the diary quote pretty conclusively puts the diary in the hands of the writer - the same person who quotes from a later NB diary?
The diary on ebay - the bits I read sounded like she "got God" pretty bad.....
-
The scanned page of the diary quote pretty conclusively puts the diary in the dhands of the writer - the same person who quotes from a later diary?
Yep, it's the same person who quotes from the diary in the 1914 "Notes and Queries", although that one seems to be from the elusive 1848 diary instead. If the online N&Q search function is complete then it seems that those are the only two occasions he quotes from one of NB's diaries, sadly. Or at least the only two where he refers to NB by his surname.
The diary on ebay - the bist I read sounded like she had god pretty bad.....
Yeah based on the bits I could decipher I don't think that one would make for a very exciting serialisation. I guess it proves that diaries aren't inherently fascinating, but only as interesting as the person writing it. NB is a bit odd, but that's part of the appeal imho. Although even the eBay one doubtless contains vaulable info buried in there somewhere.
-
Aleck Abrahams seems to have been contributing to N&Q since 1902. I'm thinking that had he he owned the diaries before 1911 something from them would have appeared before. The diarist was recorded as C Bryceson which is either a transcription mistake, or perhaps Mr Abraham made a mistake as they were new to him?
The interesting thing about diaries is how people see them through time. Mr Abrahams was an antiquarian, he was using them for what Nat wrote about the changing topography of London. I don't suppose he was interested in Nat's private life, which is what we are more interested in today.
When James Woodforde's eighteenth century diary was first abridged and published in the 1920s, it was done as a kind of celebration of "Olde England" A lot of the emphasis was on food and his social life. Most of the diaries entries about buying things was left out - now there is more interest in his domestic life, his servants and the accounts - the things he bought and how much was paid for them.
Carole
-
Aleck Abrahams seems to have been contributing to N&Q since 1902. I'm thinking that had he he owned the diaries before 1911 something from them would have appeared before. The diarist was recorded as C Bryceson which is either a transcription mistake, or perhaps Mr Abraham made a mistake as they were new to him?
The interesting thing about diaries is how people see them through time. Mr Abrahams was an antiquarian, he was using them for what Nat wrote about the changing topography of London. I don't suppose he was interested in Nat's private life, which is what we are more interested in today.
When James Woodforde's eighteenth century diary was first abridged and published in the 1920s, it was done as a kind of celebration of "Olde England" A lot of the emphasis was on food and his social life. Most of the diaries entries about buying things was left out - now there is more interest in his domestic life, his servants and the accounts - the things he bought and how much was paid for them.
Carole
-
Sorry - not sure what I did then!!!! ;D
Carole
-
Does anyone get what Notes and Queries is all about? To me it just looks like random odd little articles in no particular order written by various people. :-\
I think I need to read more to find out ....
-
Does anyone get what Notes and Queries is all about? To me it just looks like random odd little articles in no particular order written by various people. :-\
I think I need to read more to find out ....
Well, the description on the front page of each edition sheds a bit of light (see scan.)
The reference to intercommunication suggests to me that it was in some ways a very early precursor to a message board such as this one. People could write about any odd things they'd found, or that they needed more info on, and others would contribute whatever they could in return. If you page through enough issues (and I've gone through a few by now) then there are threads of conversation like you would have a thread on a modern forum / message board. It's quite fascinating actually. Imagine if - instead of clicking 'reply' - you had to write out your response by hand, stick a stamp on it, and then head for the post box. And then wait a few weeks to see if anyone had responded...
-
I must have missed the reference to a diary on ebay? what's that about? found it...sorry :)
-
Does anyone get what Notes and Queries is all about? To me it just looks like random odd little articles in no particular order written by various people. :-\
I think I need to read more to find out ....
Well, the description on the front page of each edition sheds a bit of light (see scan.)
The reference to intercommunication suggests to me that it was in some ways a very early precursor to a message board such as this one. People could write about any odd things they'd found, or that they needed more info on, and others would contribute whatever they could in return. If you page through enough issues (and I've gone through a few by now) then there are threads of conversation like you would have a thread on a modern forum / message board. It's quite fascinating actually. Imagine if - instead of clicking 'reply' - you had to write out your response by hand, stick a stamp on it, and then head for the post box. And then wait a few weeks to see if anyone had responded...
Thank you Ian - that's very helpful. I was almost correct. ;)
Is N&Q on Google books? I wouldn't mind looking through some. :)
I love the little quote from Captain Cuttle. ;D That explains it very clearly.
-
Is N&Q on Google books? I wouldn't mind looking through some. :)
Don't know about Google Books; but a lot of them are on archive.org; here's the 1911 one I quoted from earlier:
http://www.archive.org/stream/s11notesqueries04londuoft#page/n3/mode/2up
It's extremely hard work to search for a specific edition on there though due to sheer quantity and the haphazard way they're labelled.
If you look through the index at the end you can see a lot of contributors just use their initials; again there's a similarity to message boards and the idea of a "screen name."
-
Hi everyone
Nice to meet you drykid ...thanks for your interesting finds on N&Q ...I too have read articles in the books ...ones not related to NB ... sometimes I got lost in them for hours .... fascinating articles.
I am still trying to figure out who the nurserymaid was....
so back to the Lea family
In 1851 Clara Lea and sister Harriet (hannah in 1861) were living with their Grandfather, William W Dell, Fund holder, 55, b Enfield at 5 Augustus Squ(are), St Pancras.
Also in 1851 George (31 b St Pancras) and Anna M (26, b Holborn) Lea are living at 11 Little Queen Street, George is a lighterman. So where are George D bc 1847 and Jessie M bc 1849.
I did spot a George Lea as an inmate of a workhouse in 1851.
why wouldn't the other children be with Granddad Dell as well?
wobbly screen ... bbs
-
'Notes and Queries' was very helpful to me, as someone had gone around writing down all the tomb inscriptions in the church of St Nicholas, Deptford. It was done in the early 1900s but was only found among the papers of an officer who had been killed in the First World War and submitted to Notes and Queries in the 1920s. He'd transcribed the inscription of what he called an 'altar tomb' which listed all the deceased children of my 4x great grandfather who had died before the censuses began. It was a brilliant find for me, and I gladly paid the £4 or whatever it was to access the Oxford University Press website and see it. I now note it's available for free on some other website!
-
ooo that's so cool Aniseed ...
Found Jessie Lea in 1851 transcribes as JOSIE Lea
She is 2, b Middlesex, London and a visitor in the home of Thomas and Charlotte WHYTE ... (coincidence??)
address: Kew Wharf Road, St Anne's , Kew
ummm all the kids not at home with George and Anna Matilda .... bad times for George ?
deb
-
Or maybe a new baby was expected? I know children got sent away when their mothers were due to give birth, sometimes. Interesting find though, Deb.
-
Hi Aniseed
In 1861 they also have a 1year old dau ...Minnie Gertrude b in Surrey ...Minnie is with her sister Jessie M in 1891, i Think, both single!
I can't see George and anna Matilda's other children's baptisms on the London PRs ...Clara is there !
I thought it would be interesting to see George's address circa 1846/7.
Clara's = Nothumberland Wharf
the other children POB = Pimlico (except for Minnie) ... so why can't I see their baptisms ...?
deb
-
In 1844 the parnership between George Lea and his brother Thomas who were then jointly running the coal merchants business at Northumberland Wharf Augustus Street, Regents Park was dissolved (I reckon Thomas thought it wise to get out before George took them both down) George was declared bankrupt at the end of 1850 and the lawyers were dealing with his creditors in 1851.On 12 August 1851 George was of Eccleston Coal Wharf Upper Belgrave Place Pimlico and his home address was Belgrave Cottage Nunhead Lane Peckham Rye. I reckon the bankruptcy was the reason why the family were spread around at the time of the 1851 census.
Carole
-
I think it's probable that George Lea and family were living at Eccleston wharf in 1846.
As has been mentioned, Clara's baptism in 1844 shows that they were then living at Northumberland Wharf.
-
Now here's a funny thing.
If I have the right family, George Lea by 1871, aged 51, has become a "physician New York US" and is living with Anna Matilda, 40, and daughter Minnie Gertrude aged 11 in Chumleigh Street, Camberwell RG10/736 /74/ 26.
Anna Matilda's 1881 probate index entry refers to her husband as George Lea MD.
Clara's marriage record (to Charles Anckorn 27 December 1866 at St Mary, Newington) shows her father's occupation as MD. Witnesses are George Dancer Lea and Harriett Leo.
-
It's possible that they may have moved between Clara's Birth/Baptism and the others. I was just hoping if we could find a baptism closer to 1846 .... hope that make sense :-\
Clara is registered in St Pancras whereas Jessie Matilda lea is registered in a different area:
Jessie Matilda Lea
Sept q 1848
St George Hanover Square, London, Middlesex
1 13
George bc 1847 goes through his life using the middle initial "D" ...possibly for DELL ... can't see his birth.
deb
red post ....OOOOO Very INTERESTING, Shaun .... how could he have been a lighterman to MD ??
-
George DANCER Lea Blimey!!! :o
and here I was thinking he was George Dell Lea ... mmn as middle name :-X
How did George become an MD?? :o
-
Clara's marriage record (to Charles Anckorn 27 December 1866 at St Mary, Newington) shows her father's occupation as MD. Witnesses are George Dancer Lea and Harriett Leo.
Harriet Leo must be Harriett LEA ...her sister
-
George Dancer Lee is in Steven Saxby's "Nathaniel Bryceson" tree on Ancestry
-
George Dancer Lea marries twice ...first to Sarah Hatchman (Sarah's siter is with them in 1881 and 1891) and then to "not sure" as he marries in sept q 1901.
George Dancer Lea leaves his money to George Edward Dancer Lea, porter.
need to find out more on GL lighterman turned MD....
deb
-
If George did genuinely go to the US and retrain as a doctor it must have been during the Civil War - between the UK census in 1861 and Clara's marriage in 1866.
-
George Lea is a physician in 1881 ...NY Medical College ...will try to find a passenger list.
deb
-
Minnie Gertrude Lea is with sister Jessie Matilda in 1901
RG13/655/37/8
-
I was told some time ago that the diary was bought in 1974 from Miss W Myers who was an antiquarian bookseller. Probably long gone.
Incidentally Eccleston is a small village in Cheshire on the estate of the Duke of Westminster who, of course owns a great deal of that part of London.
-
I was told some time ago that the diary was bought in 1974 from Miss W Myers who was an antiquarian bookseller. Probably long gone.
Incidentally Eccleston is a small village in Cheshire on the estate of the Duke of Westminster who, of course owns a great deal of that part of London.
Hmmm it seems there was a Winifred A. Myers who was an antiquarian bookseller based in London around that time; her name comes up quite a lot while googling as a source of various rare documents accessioned into public collections. I'm guessing they're one and the same.
-
Hi again
I have been searching passenger lists England to NY, to no avail.
I wonder if George Lea would have taken Anna Matilda and Minnie Gertrude with him?
How long would it have taken to become an MD in those days?
deb
-
The New York Medical College seems to be flourishing today - it was set up in 1860. I wonder if they have an archivist?
Carole
-
George Lea died 2 February 1890
15a Tidemore Street Battersea
Letters of Administration granted to George Dancer Lea in October 1908 - over 18 years later !
Effects £10
-
You have all been so busy while I was offline. Some great finds. I'll have to re-read so I can take it all in.
George became an MD? :o
Thanks for the link to notes and queries Ian.
Mongibello, I suppose there'll be no chance of finding out more about the diary if it was purchased from a bookseller. :( That's very disappointing. Ooo, I wonder if Miss Myers had the entire Nathaniel Bryceson collection? :-\
Aniseed, your story about the MI for your family is amazing! :o
-
Just musing....
I expressed concern about NB's mother, who was at death's door, being allowed home by her Doctor. And now we have George who suddenly becomes a Doctor ???
In this era there was a vast increase in population due to the Industrial Revolution and many 'quack' Doctors found it an easy way to make a living, especially if they were cheap(er).
My vote on both Doctors goes to them being QUACKS.
(but still musing)
Colin
-
Colin, it looks like George Ridsdale was qualified:
http://www.rootschat.com/links/09fa/
Not sure about George Lea. Maybe you could 'buy' the relevant qualifications in America if that's where he miraculously got them from? ;)
I wonder if he turns up in any UK gazettes or UK medical organizations as having qualifications?
Regarding Nat's mother being 'allowed' home. I imagine there was little or no option, and perhaps she insisted on going home. We can only guess at the extent of Mary's illness (and remember that we know her date of death), but we don't know what the doctor advised about treatment, prognosis etc.
Different times ... :-\
-
I can't believe that we've reached 20 pages again so soon. I've locked Part 5. The discussions will continue here:
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=474726.msg3341789;topicseen#msg3341789
I hope the new members will join us. :)