RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Topic started by: jonnybrowne1956 on Wednesday 07 November 18 11:17 GMT (UK)
-
Help!
I'm trying to track down the birth and parentage of my 3 x GGM Prudence Clayton.
I have Prudence's marriage record, which states that she married John Dainter on 7th June 1829 (Birmingham St Martin) - no age or name of father are stated.
John's full name was John Ward Dainter but this middle name is not shown.
In the 1861 census Prudence (with the incorrectly transcribed surname Dainty) is recorded with her age given as 54 and birthplace as Shropshire.
I cant'f find Prudence at all in 1841 or 1851 - although I have found her daughter Prudence (aged 4) in 1841 - and I believe she died in 1871.
If any one has any info it owuld be hugely appreciated.
Thanks.
Jonny
-
I think you first need to build up as full a picture of her married life as possible, which may help find the 1841/1851 entries. I see that John and Prudence also had a son:
John Ward Dainter born 24 Feb 1830 bap 12 Apr 1830 St Martin Birmingham.
Parents: John (plaisterer) and Prudence, of Dale End.
-
Also a son Henry, privately baptised on 21 March 1850, St Peter Birmingham.
Parents: John Ward Dainter (chimney sweep) & Prudence, of London Prentice St.
Birth reg as Henry Ward Dainter, mmn Clayton, Mar qtr 1850 Birmingham.
Sadly his death was registered in the same quarter.
-
Have you put together a list of known children? So far I can see:
1830: John Ward Dainter
1832: Thomas Ward Dainter
1833: William Ward Dainter
1835: Prudence Dainter
1839: Charlotte Dainter mmn Clayton (died 1839 aged 7 weeks)
1840: Henry Dainter mmn Clayton (died 1840)
1842: Charlotte Dainter mmn “Claton” - could be “Caroline”, 18 in 1861
1845: Edward Dainter mmn “Claton”
1850: Henry Ward Dainter mmn Clayton (died 1850)
1852: Mary Ann Ward Dainter mmn Clayton
-
In 1851 Birmingham on Ancestry as DANTY. Prudence is listed as Pandence born 1811 Philips Hke, Shropshire, England. I can't open the image,sorry.
Maureen
-
In 1851 Birmingham on Ancestry as DANTY. Prudence is listed as Pandence born 1811 Philips Hke, Shropshire, England. I can't open the image,sorry.
Maureen
Great find :). But a bad day for the transcriber.
Prudence’s birthplace is in fact Bishop’s Castle, Salop (Shropshire).
-
Possibly related? Baptised at Bishop’s Castle:
18 Feb 1809 Thomas Clayton, son of Thomas & Esther
28 Jun 1810 John Francis Clayton, son of Thomas & Esther
-
That's an amazing find - I've been trying to find her on the 1851 census for years, using what I thought was every possible permutation of Dainter and the "soundalike" settings.
In 1851 Birmingham on Ancestry as DANTY. Prudence is listed as Pandence born 1811 Philips Hke, Shropshire, England. I can't open the image,sorry.
Maureen
Great find :). But a bad day for the transcriber.
Prudence’s birthplace is in fact Bishop’s Castle, Salop (Shropshire).
-
That's extremely helpful, thank you - I was missing Henry (1840-1840), Edward and Mary Ann. It's interesting that people sometimes "re-used" names after children had died in infancy. I've found that elsewhere in my family tree. Was this common practice I wonder?
Have you put together a list of known children? So far I can see:
1830: John Ward Dainter
1832: Thomas Ward Dainter
1833: William Ward Dainter
1835: Prudence Dainter
1839: Charlotte Dainter mmn Clayton (died 1839 aged 7 weeks)
1840: Henry Dainter mmn Clayton (died 1840)
1842: Charlotte Dainter mmn “Claton” - could be “Caroline”, 18 in 1861
1845: Edward Dainter mmn “Claton”
1850: Henry Ward Dainter mmn Clayton (died 1850)
1852: Mary Ann Ward Dainter mmn Clayton
-
PS I believe that it is Caroline.
Have you put together a list of known children? So far I can see:
1830: John Ward Dainter
1832: Thomas Ward Dainter
1833: William Ward Dainter
1835: Prudence Dainter
1839: Charlotte Dainter mmn Clayton (died 1839 aged 7 weeks)
1840: Henry Dainter mmn Clayton (died 1840)
1842: Charlotte Dainter mmn “Claton” - could be “Caroline”, 18 in 1861
1845: Edward Dainter mmn “Claton”
1850: Henry Ward Dainter mmn Clayton (died 1850)
1852: Mary Ann Ward Dainter mmn Clayton
-
Yes, the daughter born 1842 (registered as Charlotte) is down as Charlotte in 1851 and Caroline in 1861.
It is very common to find names reused in a family - usually after the death of a previous child of that name. One of my families named 3 of their daughters Rebecca, but sadly all of the Rebeccas died young.
Rarely you find reuse even within the older child’s lifetime, perhaps because the older one is known by a nickname or middle name or (in a very large family) they have run out of ideas and a name comes round again!
-
That's fascinating - a practice I would assume died out with, in this country at least, lower infant mortality and smaller families
That explains of ocurse why I've never been able to find a Caroline Dainter that fits in terms of birth date -just weondering if the 1861 household return was misread by the enumerator as the census image clearly shows "Caroline".
Jonny
Yes, the daughter born 1842 (registered as Charlotte) is down as Charlotte in 1851 and Caroline in 1861.
It is very common to find names reused in a family - usually after the death of a previous child of that name. One of my families named 3 of their daughters Rebecca, but sadly all of the Rebeccas died young.
Rarely you find reuse even within the older child’s lifetime, perhaps because the older one is known by a nickname or middle name or (in a very large family) they have run out of ideas and a name comes round again!
-
It could well be a misreading - obviously for the censuses pre-1911 the household returns don’t survive so we will never know what sort of handwriting, inkblots etc the enumerator had to contend with.
However it is also possible that Charlotte and Caroline were treated as interchangeable, being etymologically linked (both feminine versions of Charles). I am not sure whether I have seen an example of this particular one, but it’s a common enough phenomenon with other groups of names, e.g.:
Ellen, Helen, Helena, Eleanor
Emma, Emily, Emmeline
Mary Ann, Marian(ne)
Isabel, Elizabeth
-
Interesting, I hadn’t thought of the etymological aspect, and it’s also possible I suppose that Caroline was an adopted name? If say a neighbour of friend filled out the household form for them they might have only known her as Caroline.
Names can get so easily mixed up in genealogical research anyway - I have a 2 x great aunt Eliza who is transcribed in one census as Elner and a number of researchers have her down as Elenor.
It could well be a misreading - obviously for the censuses pre-1911 the household returns don’t survive so we will never know what sort of handwriting, inkblots etc the enumerator had to contend with.
However it is also possible that Charlotte and Caroline were treated as interchangeable, being etymologically linked (both female versions of Charles). I am not sure whether I have seen an example of this particular one, but it’s a common enough phenomenon with other groups of names, e.g.:
Ellen, Helen, Helena, Eleanor
Emma, Emily, Emmeline
Mary Ann, Marian(ne)
Isabel, Elizabeth