1
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Occupation in 1851 census
« on: Today at 05:19 »
None
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
Wexford / Re: Fox Born In Taghmon
« on: Thursday 05 March 26 21:26 GMT (UK) »
You're welcome. Always good to hear of a "success story"!
And maybe give Bree a lookin, in addition to Taghmon!
And maybe give Bree a lookin, in addition to Taghmon!
3
Waterford / Re: Richard Fitzgerald Claddagh Clashmore Co Waterford
« on: Thursday 05 March 26 00:41 GMT (UK) »
There are more children in 1859, 61 and 63, Catherine, William and Brigid. All in parish register.
William is divergent - mother Anastasia, but probably an error.
No sign of a marriage, which is strange. Registers in Clashmore an adjacent parishes cover the period. in question.
William is divergent - mother Anastasia, but probably an error.
No sign of a marriage, which is strange. Registers in Clashmore an adjacent parishes cover the period. in question.
4
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / Re: I've Been Naughty
« on: Thursday 26 February 26 18:17 GMT (UK) »
Interesting mix of replies!
Yes, deliberately, but not to deliberately confuse people.
I control several DNA tests, which I bought and had processed. No problem. Until I had one processed in Britain. Then there was a problem.
Absent written confirmation from the subject of the test, they wouldn't associate it with anyone on my family tree. Other than myself. So I've been my aunt for some time now.....
Yes, deliberately, but not to deliberately confuse people.
I control several DNA tests, which I bought and had processed. No problem. Until I had one processed in Britain. Then there was a problem.
Absent written confirmation from the subject of the test, they wouldn't associate it with anyone on my family tree. Other than myself. So I've been my aunt for some time now.....
5
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Help with maiden name
« on: Thursday 26 February 26 05:22 GMT (UK) »
Many variations on this surname - McPartlan, etc
6
Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing / I've Been Naughty
« on: Thursday 26 February 26 04:37 GMT (UK) »
My Ancestry profile/Family Tree does what some of you rail against.
I appear to be an aunt of mine.
I appear to be an aunt of mine.
7
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Re: Marriage Entry help
« on: Wednesday 25 February 26 22:22 GMT (UK) »
It is in Latin,
Thomas Lynch = Thomas Lynch
Catherina Roche = Catherine Roche
Both of them parishioners, were married with no canonical impediment intervening.
Something dispensed.
Witnesses were Mary Hurly and William Roche
Thomas Lynch = Thomas Lynch
Catherina Roche = Catherine Roche
Both of them parishioners, were married with no canonical impediment intervening.
Something dispensed.
Witnesses were Mary Hurly and William Roche
8
Donegal / Re: Matilda Stevenson born about 1881 - is father James or Isaac
« on: Monday 23 February 26 00:14 GMT (UK) »Even her name?
The thing about her surname is that it might be that of her father. Or mother. And if it were that of her father, then she may have been registered and/or baptized with that of her mother. Who is to say!
9
Donegal / Re: Matilda Stevenson born about 1881 - is father James or Isaac
« on: Monday 23 February 26 00:02 GMT (UK) »What about her age at the time of her marriage? Full age on 1 January 1901. So she was probably born in 1879.
Seems to me that we can't trust anything she said at the time of her marriage. She could have been 21 or much older. Or indeed under 21, and misstating that too.