RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: KGarrad on Thursday 24 August 17 21:46 BST (UK)
-
I really enjoyed this episode! ;D
2 really good threads followed, a a great story about William and his life.
-
I can't believe I was the only one who was shouting at the TV "Find them in the census!" or "Did she remarry? Look it up!!!", after one ancestor died leaving a wife and 7 children.
Sorry, I found it interesting in parts, but very few parts. A
-
You were not alone Anne.....why did they not show census records? There must have been some when the family were in England.
-
I can't believe I was the only one who was shouting at the TV "Find them in the census!" or "Did she remarry? Look it up!!!", after one ancestor died leaving a wife and 7 children.
Sorry, I found it interesting in parts, but very few parts. A
Not alone Annie. I was shouting the same thing, but I suppose they cut out chunks to allow time enough for the story they want to tell. :-\
-
Was thinking the same & more so why Fearne herself didn't enquire about the widow & children, who were they, what were their names, did she remain in England etc. :-\
Annie
-
I too wanted them to refer to censuses, (they probably did, which we didn't see) but it is tailored for television. All the same interesting in parts.
-
I must admit, I enjoyed it, but then I regard the programme purely as entertainment for the masses, not as something geared towards the serious researcher.
Jebber
-
In previous years, the production team have stated that for every hour of televised program, there are at least 10 hours left on the cutting room floor! ;D
They obviously thought that showing Fearne looking up censuses was not as important as the research they did show.
And, I tend to agree with them! ;D ;D
-
Looking at it from the other side, it didn't really show amateurs how to research, where to look, how to find them.
I think anyone who didn't know how & where to research would be left rather confused as to how they found the info. as there was nothing there to egg them on to start their own 'family tree' :D
Enjoyable when you know how it was done...a bit like showing someone some nice cakes they would like to try themselves but not giving them the recipe ;D
Annie
-
I have previously had the complaint about the '' 1 hour left on the cutting room floor'' and still find it frustrating at times.
I wonder in these times they cant have a secondary addition on the BBC website that does show all the ins and outs of how they found the families etc. Those that have or want an interest in FH research can then see how '' the professionals' do it.
Just an idea
-
They obviously thought that showing Fearne looking up censuses was not as important as the research they did show.
More important/interesting than watching her driving, walking, sitting on a bench reading etc. & it is a big part of research ;)
Annie
-
I feel they did a great disservice to William Gilmour by suggesting that he was not a qualified doctor as he had not been to university and gained his MD and that he was just making it up as he went along. He was actually a qualified doctor, he had received his licence to practice from the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons Glasgow in 1854. This was before the Medical Act of 1858 which required a medical degree or licence before you could practice medicine. He would have served an apprenticeship of around three to five years learning from a "master" and maybe also attending lectures at a medical school or university. He was registered as doctor on 1 January 1859 when the 1858 Act came into force. He also gained his Double Qualification in Medicine and Surgery in 1860 by becoming a Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians Edinburgh in 1860. The 1854 newspaper report contained the clue to his being a qualified doctor as he is shown as Member of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons, and Licentiate in Midwifery of Glasgow. So we had a young newly qualified doctor looking for adventure.
-
I hope this information gets to Fearne Cotton,how on earth did the researchers miss it.
-
William's wife didn't re-marry and the surviving children didn't get a great start in life.
I can assure you that the 'researchers' were given all the census records, William's medical details, a family tree and much, much more!
There was another aspect of the Crimea period of his life which wasn't mentioned which was quite interesting and revealing but not sure why it was left out. Two of the newspaper clippings they did film had quite interesting bits of information which could easily have been included without taking up much time.
They were also told where he lived in Garvagh, details of his parents & siblings, etc. They were also sent copy of an 1830s lease for his father in which he and 2 brothers were mentioned but the programme seemed to ignore it completely (as far as I know they never even filmed it although earlier it was shown to production team in pre-filming visit to N.I.). Ironically the lease was in a box not far from where Fearne Cotton was standing when they showed her looking at the Chronicle ::)
I would hope that the celebrity is given ALL the information that was found in researching the programme.
-
The celebrities are given a full report on everything that has been found - and a vast amount of information will have been obtained and sifted through and then distilled down to make an interesting story. I'd agree though that this episode hinted that William was somehow faking his training as a doctor, which wasn't really fair.
A WDYTYA director I worked with acknowledged that occasionally documents seem to magically appear, and some things get skipped over but then explained "we are making a prime time entertainment programme that is based on family history - not a genealogy training video".
The extra section showing how things were found was tried in the first series, but didn't prove very popular.
Unused sections of filming have previously been posted online by the producers, but not for every episode.
-
Thanks AntonyMMM and aghasowet for some insight into what goes in and out of making this programme.
It was good to hear that William did have some qualifications and shame that it was rather glossed over making it look like he was a bit of a chancer!
Like others commented she didn't seem to be very interested in finding out about the wife and children of William and what happened to them.
Regarding her Welsh connection, surely her gt. Uncle would have been able to impart some what happened to his father before any research was done!
I found it interesting in parts but felt she seemed a little detached despite her wanting to have some heritage for her children.
Not one of my most favourites I'm afraid.
Pity the BBC can't put another few programmes on after the series with 'best left out bits' from the series! Or something like David Attenborough's where they have a short bit at the end of each programme.
Ah well, it's for the masses not how to research as someone else said, pity though!
Caroline
-
Woah!!
Thanks for all the information.
I must say I feel quite outraged that William was portrayed as a charlatan when the programme makers had been given proof of his extensive medical training.
Surely there must be other descendants who will have been embarrassed by this calumny?.....
And how tragic that due to class issues he became bankrupt and his family suffered.
-
They obviously thought that showing Fearne looking up censuses was not as important as the research they did show.
More important/interesting than watching her driving, walking, sitting on a bench reading etc. & it is a big part of research ;)
Annie
My thoughts exactly. Far too much wandering through fields and posing on fallen tree stumps, for me. Could have done without the kids and cakes bit at the start as well. She's always struck me as a very 'appearances' kind of girl.
Her mother Linda's face looked very familiar - does anyone know if she's an actress or some other media figure?
Jill
-
it annoyed me how at the end, just before the Doctor died, she was saying ''how would he be able to feed the kids'' but surely by that time they would have been pretty much grown up ?
-
Maybe they could show people looking up censuses in other episodes? ;D
Hang on a minute! Don't they do that almost every week? ::)
-
it annoyed me how at the end, just before the Doctor died, she was saying ''how would he be able to feed the kids'' but surely by that time they would have been pretty much grown up ?
And the idea that they became poverty stricken and destitute. They certainly wouldn't have been as badly off as the actual workhouse inmates or the many agricultural labourers there would have been in the area.
Again with WDYTYA. I would like to see them follow up more about English working class ancestors. We don't seem to get many of their ag lab or industrial labourer stories represented in the programme. That is what most people watching the programme ancestors would have been
-
And the idea that they became poverty stricken and destitute. They certainly wouldn't have been as badly off as the actual workhouse inmates or the many agricultural labourers there would have been in the area.
Since the programme wasn't able to go into details on William Gilmour's family after his death you have no idea what became of them ::)
-
it annoyed me how at the end, just before the Doctor died, she was saying ''how would he be able to feed the kids'' but surely by that time they would have been pretty much grown up ?
And the idea that they became poverty stricken and destitute. They certainly wouldn't have been as badly off as the actual workhouse inmates or the many agricultural labourers there would have been in the area.
Again with WDYTYA. I would like to see them follow up more about English working class ancestors. We don't seem to get many of their ag lab or industrial labourer stories represented in the programme. That is what most people watching the programme ancestors would have been
All true, but I suppose we are back to the question of the audience for the programme. Is it supposed to be light entertainment or more instructive?
They did mention how difficult life was for the miners.
Perhaps we could have something about the mariners/sea fishing fraternity too?
-
And the idea that they became poverty stricken and destitute. They certainly wouldn't have been as badly off as the actual workhouse inmates or the many agricultural labourers there would have been in the area.
Since the programme wasn't able to go into details on William Gilmour's family after his death you have no idea what became of them ::)
I was referring to what was shown in the programme ::)
-
My thoughts exactly. Far too much wandering through fields and posing on fallen tree stumps, for me. Could have done without the kids and cakes bit at the start as well. She's always struck me as a very 'appearances' kind of girl.
I'm glad I'm not the only person who thought this! ;D I haven't watched it all yet, but the part with her parents has left me feeling a bit ho hum about it.
-
it annoyed me how at the end, just before the Doctor died, she was saying ''how would he be able to feed the kids'' but surely by that time they would have been pretty much grown up ?
And the idea that they became poverty stricken and destitute. They certainly wouldn't have been as badly off as the actual workhouse inmates or the many agricultural labourers there would have been in the area.
Again with WDYTYA. I would like to see them follow up more about English working class ancestors. We don't seem to get many of their ag lab or industrial labourer stories represented in the programme. That is what most people watching the programme ancestors would have been
All true, but I suppose we are back to the question of the audience for the programme. Is it supposed to be light entertainment or more instructive?
They did mention how difficult life was for the miners.
Perhaps we could have something about the mariners/sea fishing fraternity too?
Yes. A swing rioter from Kent or Surrey. A plug rioter or chartist from Bradford. A striking coal miner from Staffordshire or Durham or an overworked mill labourer from Leeds or Manchester are all interesting, but maybe just not 'exotic' enough for the BBC. Perhaps the researchers and crew like their jolly's on boats and planes a bit too much?
It isn't that difficult to find an English ancestor connected to one of the above in my list. But it's as if the BBC don't even bother trying to find the interesting political or 'peoples history' stories in England. They will touch on it for a short while, Jerry Halls episode did five minutes on the mills, but then it's off on some boat or plane to find an ancestor whose origins are further away
-
Nice to get an insight into how the show is made and how much of it ends up on the cutting room floor. You can tell that when they look on Anc and type their ancestor's name in and lo and behold there he/she is within a few seconds, even with a common name. Welcome to the real world where we spend hours trying to hunt down the correct ancestor on Anc.
-
I feel they did a great disservice to William Gilmour by suggesting that he was not a qualified doctor as he had not been to university and gained his MD and that he was just making it up as he went along. He was actually a qualified doctor, he had received his licence to practice from the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons Glasgow in 1854. This was before the Medical Act of 1858 which required a medical degree or licence before you could practice medicine. He would have served an apprenticeship of around three to five years learning from a "master" and maybe also attending lectures at a medical school or university. He was registered as doctor on 1 January 1859 when the 1858 Act came into force. He also gained his Double Qualification in Medicine and Surgery in 1860 by becoming a Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians Edinburgh in 1860. The 1854 newspaper report contained the clue to his being a qualified doctor as he is shown as Member of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons, and Licentiate in Midwifery of Glasgow. So we had a young newly qualified doctor looking for adventure.
Thanks very much for this information. Instead of questioning the credentials of Dr Gilmour perhaps we should be questioning those of the historian on the programme who told Fearne that he wasn't a real doctor, just a chancer! ;)
-
I feel they did a great disservice to William Gilmour by suggesting that he was not a qualified doctor as he had not been to university and gained his MD and that he was just making it up as he went along. He was actually a qualified doctor, he had received his licence to practice from the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons Glasgow in 1854. This was before the Medical Act of 1858 which required a medical degree or licence before you could practice medicine. He would have served an apprenticeship of around three to five years learning from a "master" and maybe also attending lectures at a medical school or university. He was registered as doctor on 1 January 1859 when the 1858 Act came into force. He also gained his Double Qualification in Medicine and Surgery in 1860 by becoming a Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians Edinburgh in 1860. The 1854 newspaper report contained the clue to his being a qualified doctor as he is shown as Member of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons, and Licentiate in Midwifery of Glasgow. So we had a young newly qualified doctor looking for adventure.
Thanks for the rundown which beggars belief this wasn't shown.
We will all recall the great lengths the team went to regarding Claire Balding & her ancestors' status!
Is it a case of 'Wealth or Health' which is of importance when doing their researching ???
Can someone clarify, when Dr. Gilmour was ill & the little girl died was this not in the time of his own lengthy illness prior to his death?
Annie
-
Interesting programme and an interesting thread. I agree with the comments on here about how facts can be lost and a particular narrative given that might misrepresent the true events. I've been trying to overturn years of damage done by authors about a Victoria Cross winner:-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Connolly_(VC) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Connolly_(VC))
http://williamconnollyvc.webs.com/ (http://williamconnollyvc.webs.com/)
Blue
-
The celebs are lucky to have a team of researchers who are scouring all records they can find to look for info on their ancestors so they seem to have it all handed to them on a platter with bells on it. No trundling off to record offices and spend hours trundling through jittery microfilm machines looking at registers which can be faded, have blobs on them or gaps in them. And finding some of the reels have been wound up the wrong way by a previous user or put in the wrong place.
Normal genealogists have to do this all ourselves and it can take years to crack down a brick wall on one single line. I guess even the celebs have ancestors who reach dead ends though.
-
Was thinking the same & more so why Fearne herself didn't enquire about the widow & children, who were they, what were their names, did she remain in England etc. :-\
Annie
I thought this too. She seemed uninterested in William's wife and children even though Elizabeth was her 4x great grandmother and one of the children was her 3x great grandparent. Maybe that bit was on the cutting floor!
-
You'd have thought they'd have heard the great massed voices of Rootschatters all chanting "Census, census, census......."
-
You'd have thought they'd have heard the great massed voices of Rootschatters all chanting "Census, census, census......."
No indication that the family were listed in 1831 census living in Garvagh next to Surgeon Robinson ::)
http://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/reels/c19/007246492/007246492_00235.pdf
-
I think this has been the most controversial one to date :-\
Too many important facts missing & what exactly was the need to visit Ireland, given that nothing of much interest was given & the interesting stuff completely hidden ::)
A 2nd version could be put together in honour of The 'fake' Doctor by RC Sleuths & name it "The Real William Gilmour" ???
Annie
-
Not having read all the posts. :)
My thoughts were ... why did they choose a 4.gg.
did they pluck him out of the air?
Or had it all been decided that he was the most interesting rellie to work with..
uhm...
not excited by this didnt watch it all..
xin
-
One of the more tedious episodes I thought... I gave up before the end.
Romilly.
-
Ancestry have the surname transcribed as Gilman in 1851. Family living in Park Road, Toxteth, Liverpool. If you look at the previous image also in Park Road is doctor James Gilmour, perhaps a relative?
Blue
-
Ancestry have the surname transcribed as Gilman in 1851. Family living in Park Road, Toxteth, Liverpool. If you look at the previous image also in Park Road is doctor James Gilmour, perhaps a relative?
William's brother James was also a doctor in Liverpool and came to a tragic end. Both brothers were mentioned in the first newspaper article in the programme but Fearne stopped before the bit about James.
-
Very interesting about his brother James. Did William serve his apprenticeship under his brother? James' qualifications are interesting and show the transition from apothecary to doctor.
-
think I will re-name the prog to
A 'glossary' of Grandparents. AGOG.
xin
-
AGHADOWEY.....
From your comments here, I am inferring that some Rootschatters are diligently researching possible celebrities to be invited for filming, if Rootschatters can uncover a story worth showing?
And that the WDYTYA team including "researchers" then construct an episode from the information that Rootschatters have provided?
How intensely frustrating then, to find key pieces which have been provided, are not used or only tell half the story! :-X
-
Interesting programme and an interesting thread. I agree with the comments on here about how facts can be lost and a particular narrative given that might misrepresent the true events. I've been trying to overturn years of damage done by authors about a Victoria Cross winner:-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Connolly_(VC) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Connolly_(VC))
http://williamconnollyvc.webs.com/[/url
Blue
(http://williamconnollyvc.webs.com/)
Good on you Blue.
It just takes one person with some doggedness and FACTS to sort it out.
-
AGHADOWEY.....
From your comments here, I am inferring that some Rootschatters are diligently researching possible celebrities to be invited for filming, if Rootschatters can uncover a story worth showing?
And that the WDYTYA team including "researchers" then construct an episode from the information that Rootschatters have provided?
How intensely frustrating then, to find key pieces which have been provided, are not used or only tell half the story! :-X
Dont tell me that people on Roots are doing the work of the Researchers... for goodness sake. !!!! Well if so surely they could find someone worthy of an hours long programme.
I mean who the heck is Fearne Cotton!!!!!!!!!!!! and Ruby Wax........ etc.... its about time Someone who had been around for a reasonable amount of time and had made an impression on more than one particular area ...
It (to me maybe only) is becoming a case of going through whats left... So far this series only ONE was excellent and maybe one or two others had interest.
This is of course just an old ladies opinion... NEEDS more 'grit' No more Eastenders or Kids show people for me...
Judi Dench please ( have they done her yet) ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHZtHlqdemM
Mickey Mouse, would be better than Emma Willis ('Who is she')
sorry...
::) :-X ;)
xin
-
Xinia
I think it might be more about linking an interesting (to some,) ancestor to a mildly famous celebrity, rather than finding a hugely successful celeb who also has fascinating ancestors.... though of course, many do. :-\
-
I totally do understand.. just sometimes think ...... then remember it is just a TV prog.
onwards and upwards.
xin
-
Well I met Ross Kemp once and his family come from Norfolk and he often spoke of his grandfather so I did some research and found that one of his great grandmothers was born in London to a single mother who was a servant. The baby grew up in Norwich. Alfred Hoskins. His mother was born in Oxford and in 1911 she said she never had any children yet she had a base child she gave up for adoption. All of Ross' other rellies seemed to be from Norfolk. A head start for anyone who would ask him to appear on WDYTYA.
-
Well I met Ross Kemp once and his family come from Norfolk and he often spoke of his grandfather so I did some research and found that one of his great grandmothers was born in London to a single mother who was a servant. The baby grew up in Norwich. Alfred Hoskins. His mother was born in Oxford and in 1911 she said she never had any children yet she had a base child she gave up for adoption. All of Ross' other rellies seemed to be from Norfolk. A head start for anyone who would ask him to appear on WDYTYA.
Well done Coombs. :D
-
in 1911 she said she never had any children
But the question is "Children born alive to present marriage" (bold bit on original form), So not a lie at all.
-
Xinia
I think it might be more about linking an interesting (to some,) ancestor to a mildly famous celebrity, rather than finding a hugely successful celeb who also has fascinating ancestors.... though of course, many do. :-\
I seem to remember a series that did something similar to this a few years back, except I don't think the link was to a celebrity but just to an 'ordinary person'. It was mildly entertaining but I prefer the WDYTYA set up as it occasionally hits the jackpot. However, I do think they've now abandoned their 'Michael Parkinson: not sufficiently interesting' approach and have adopted the 'lets get someone from popular culture and try to make it sound interesting' angle.
I wasn't feeling too well the other day and happened to catch Heir Hunters which I haven't watched for donkeys years because I've always found that 'going after the money' just a bit unsavoury. However, they seem to be showing a lot more of the method of investigation and detective work nowadays and I actually found it very interesting. Perhaps they could somehow combine that approach with the WDYTYA machine?
Jill
-
Just watched this one ...
REALLY enjoyed it.
Her 4x Gfather was a bit of a chance on the boat LOL ... but did well.
-
Just watched this one ...
REALLY enjoyed it.
Her 4x Gfather was a bit of a chance on the boat LOL ... but did well.
I'm glad it wasn't just me! ;D
-
As i said earlier, overall this series has been far better then the previous one ... or two.
-
As we're on The Lighter Side here, I have to admit that the thing that distracted me most was Fearne Cotton's choice of finger nail varnish. Sometimes is was white, sometimes it was green, and sometimes it was bright orange (though I suppose it could be interpreted as red). Made we wonder whether she already knew that her 4-times gt-grandpa was Irish, these being the three colours of the Irish flag.
But, contrary to some of the comments on here, I did find it an interesting programme, solely concentrating on two of her male ancestors around whom some good historical stuff was woven...
Keith
-
As we're on The Lighter Side here, I have to admit that the thing that distracted me most was Fearne Cotton's choice of finger nail varnish. Sometimes is was white, sometimes it was green, and sometimes it was bright orange (though I suppose it could be interpreted as red). Made we wonder whether she already knew that her 4-times gt-grandpa was Irish, these being the three colours of the Irish flag.
But, contrary to some of the comments on here, I did find it an interesting programme, solely concentrating on two of her male ancestors around whom some good historical stuff was woven...
Keith
;D I noticed the continual nail varnish changes too.
-
My reactions to this episode were somewhat coloured by my own political prejudices, I have to admit. I found the first half about the conscientious objector totally fascinating and brought something new to my awareness of WWI history. A very courageous pacifist that fella, and quite sad to think that he was possibly shunned by his own community after his ordeal in prison.
Turned off a bit during the second half when Fearne got totally excited by William Gilmour having tea with Queen Victoria. I'm glad I read this thread though, as I had taken away the impression that William Gilmour was a charlatan, not someone to be admired, but now I now that this isn't fair or accurate.
-
The celebs are lucky to have a team of researchers who are scouring all records they can find to look for info on their ancestors so they seem to have it all handed to them on a platter with bells on it. No trundling off to record offices and spend hours trundling through jittery microfilm machines looking at registers which can be faded, have blobs on them or gaps in them. And finding some of the reels have been wound up the wrong way by a previous user or put in the wrong place.
Normal genealogists have to do this all ourselves and it can take years to crack down a brick wall on one single line. I guess even the celebs have ancestors who reach dead ends though.
Well put, coombes. The celebs miss all the fun! Imagine starting research into our family history and at every turn having en expert miraculously appear with a transcript ... it'd soon lose its excitement.
-
The celebs are lucky to have a team of researchers who are scouring all records they can find to look for info on their ancestors so they seem to have it all handed to them on a platter with bells on it. No trundling off to record offices and spend hours trundling through jittery microfilm machines looking at registers which can be faded, have blobs on them or gaps in them. And finding some of the reels have been wound up the wrong way by a previous user or put in the wrong place.
Normal genealogists have to do this all ourselves and it can take years to crack down a brick wall on one single line. I guess even the celebs have ancestors who reach dead ends though.
There are some excellent amateur researchers on this Rootschat, with good suggestions to check out!!
I've been stuck for about 18 years at a marriage 202 years ago and a -/+ 2 yrs birth year.
If my good lady and I, can find one record, up in Yorkshire to link up, I could be back another 60 or 100 years (as suggested documents are already checked / photographed for two plausible lines)!
Checked loads of Wills at York etc. but nothing!
Yes microfilms wound back wrong previously and lost or uncatalogued records are a great nuisance!
Mark
-
Its a bit like horse racing tipsters, or TV programmes on football teams, one usually hears about rantings of winners but little about losers. I think WDYTYA will only put on vetted ancestry of celebs to find one who's ancestry can be found in confirming evidence records by researchers that go back a fair way.
I bet if a survey was done on RC of all members, bet a lot would be the ones who's ancestry got stuck with a brick wall, who's oldest known ancestor was a death record with age known going back into the 1700's then get stuck, who died say 1812 to 1850 or a marriage post July 1837 with a fathers name. The survey would be many being stuck around the suggest above aforesaid !! with a few lucky ones who could find confirming evidence records further back or grave burial records or gravestone epitaphs, that have other family members buried near with epitaphs or identifying Will/probate records.
I was recently lucky, a RC member found a Will the help me by it eliminating a fiffy thought ancestor by IGI submissions.
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=502634.36
-
It can be fun but it can also be frustrating and you could leave a record office with more questions than answers. And some may still say that is the thrill of the chase but surely that thrill has a limit when you keep trying.
-
::) I think sometimes it feels like!! ??? its not so much following the twigs back in a tree to the roots, it more a question of finding which tree has the right nest in it, in a wood, :-\ after siblings flew the nest and which wood has the right tree in it, as questions coming out of a register office.
I'm not 100% sure on one line, as the fathers name seems to be wrong on as a Charles, on a marriage 1867, as all very strong evidence points to the father as George, (witness was George with same surname) and nothing anywhere came up for a Charles as the father. But that little doubt always lingers. All the family line were illiterate country ag lab type folk - so if vicar got names mix up - no one would have noticed.