RootsChat.Com

Thanks Ruskie - unfortunately the search doesn't return any results as it only shows names numbering more than one hundred individuals. Evidently there were fewer than 100 Granshaws in the UK in 1998 (and in 1881).

Gaie

You really have been working overtime! Thanks very much for all this information.

I didn't (and don't) think there was a direct link between George and this family, although there might be an indirect one. It is a strange coincidence that you should choose that example when I'd already got some information on them. That said, there weren't that many Granshaws in the country at that point, so perhaps it's not so strange.

The Huguenot society sent me that information just to illustrate the Huguenot connection, as claims to Huguenot ancestry had to be 'proved' before alms would be given. They hold copies of the documents (of which I hope to get copies myself) which were considered t have substantiated the Huguenot claim.

The variances in calculated birth dates are staggering! I can see why you say that the differences I have encountered may not be significant - perhaps George really was the 6 yr old showing in James' household in the 1851 census after all.

One thing does puzzle me - the 1841 census from which you extracted the information about Isaac and family shows not only Isaac but all his family as n, fp, implying that they were all born outside this county. However, from the Huguenot society information, Mary Annis shown as having been born 24th Jan 1839 at 21 Cross Street, Bethnal Green!

GRANSHAW <-> GRANDCHAMPS? ... another intriguing idea. I confess I also wondered about Bissey/Bissett. I suppose there are a number of possible origins of Granshaw, but going back to my earlier post, what I don't understand is how could various branches of the family end up with identical (or near identical) spellings if separated by years, decades or even centuries (ref the 17th C Granshaw as opposed to the ones that supposedly immigrated in the late 1700s)?

Intuitively one would expect all family members with the same (or nearly the same) spelling to have acquired their change of name at the same time surely?

I suppose the only chance of confirming the original name would be to trace a first generation Granshaw and hope to find some documentary clue...

Oh, and by the way; I assume it must be the first of your two MaryAnns asn the Huguenot Society information gives her date of birth as 24th Jan (as I've mentioned).

Thanks again.

Incidentally Gaie, you say that Isaac and Mary were apparently not born in the UK - how can you tell, and do the records suggest where they might have been born?

dawnsh - thanks for the reminder - yes, I did realise that registration wasn't compulsory at that point. The problem for me (being a comparitive novice at this) is how to bridge the resulting gaps...

Gaie - thanks for all your hard work (seeing the time of your post, I feel more than a little guilty!).

Based on the 1881 census, George would have had a d.o.b. of about 1853
Based on George's marriage certificate, he would have had a d.o.b. of about 1852

Based on date of birth alone, the closest match would seem to be the Grorge Grandshaw born June Qtr 1854. What worries me about this is the disparity over dates though (and I am taking into account the dates of events within each year) - can you or anyone else suggest why there should be such variations in calculated birth years? Even limiting this to the 1881 census and the marriage certificate, this suggests that either George didn't know his age (and guessed inconsistently), or the person writing in the register got it wrong.

I'm making the assumption that the two Georges are in fact the same person - they both married someone named Maria, and the marriage dates are consistent.

The marriage certificate I have must be for the right person (as James George's mother is shown as Maria nee Buck, and George's marriage certificate shows his wife as being Maria nee Buck). It shows George's father as James. This would seem to discount your second two Georges (1850 and 1856).

How else can one confirm that a person shown in one place (e.g. the 1881 census, or James George Granshaw's birth certificate) is the same as that shown elsewhere if the dates of birth are not the same? If George appeared on an earlier (pre 1881) census in a family group (i.e. before he was married) then this would provide a link with his parents, but as I can't find a George with the right d.o.b., and in any case his d.o.b isn't even shown consistently in places where I'm sure I have the right person, this seems to take away one of the main tools for confirming identity!

Do you have access to the detail of the 1871 census? There is a George Grandshaw listed with a calculated d.o.b of 1851 (which would be more or less consistent with the Marriage certificate I have, though not with the 1881 census). I haven't been able to check the census detail yet, but if the 1871 census shows any other family members (siblings perhaps) then it might be possible to tie them back to an earlier James Granshaw.

Sorry for this long and rather rambling explanation.

Thanks again for your help.

Well, this particular line of investigation starts with one of my great-grandfathers; James George Granshaw. He was born on 21st August 1873 to George Granshaw and Maria Granshaw (nee Buck), in Bethnal Green, London (Middlesex). James' birth certificate reveals a certain confusion over the spelling of Granshaw as in three places it was written 'Grandshaw' only to be crossed out and rewritten without the 'd'.

I also found James' parents' marriage certificate (showing that they married on 17th November 1872, also in Bethnal Green). This showed George Granshaw's father as 'James Grandshaw' (note 'd' in Grandshaw).

This is where the trail gets confused/confusing. I haven't been able to find a record of George Granshaw's birth in order to be able to trace which James (i.e. d.o.b) is his father, and hence follow the line. There is one possible George Grandshaw showing in the 1871 census index with a calculated d.o.b. of about 1851. The problem with this is that the 1881 census (which shows George Granshaw, Maria, and James) suggests a birth year of about 1853. To confuse matters further, George's marriage certificate gives an age of 20 in 1872, suggesting a birth year of 1852. Although some of these disparities can be explained through the timing of the census (etc), not all can. I suppose it is possible that he didn't know how old he was and just guessed each time...

The 1861 census shows a James Granshaw married to Sophia, and with several children, one named George, but he was aged 6 at the time, suggesting a birth year of 1855! There are no other references (that I can find) of a suitable combination of names.

There are two or three possible James Granshaws as candidates for George's father, but unless I can get some documentary evidence to link one to George, then I don't see the justification of pursuing any of them.

The one remaining line of enquiry (which I will explore as soon as I can get back to the Library) is the George Grandshaw showing on the 1871 census. If he is the same George who married Maria and became James George's father, then he does not appear to be in a household with a father named James Granshaw (as no none shows in the census index). Possibly James had dies by this time. My only hope is that either his mother or siblings will tie him back to a James Granshaw on an earlier census.

Gaie - the reference you found to a Granshaw in the 17th century seems even stranger given that this does not seem to have been followed by a slow but steady increase in Granshaws over the succeeding 150 years. Perhaps he was a lone member of the family in this country who either died without children, or returned to whichever country he'd come from. What is really strange though is that if the name Granshaw did come here from another country (rather than being adopted here by animigrant family - unlikely given that it appears aparently independently 150 years apart), then where did it come from? Granshaw sounds English - if anything! If it had originated in this country though, then why aren't there more Granshaws (it's a fairly uncommon name, even now)?

The suggestion (despite any other evidence) that the Granshaws were Huguenots is supported by the number of silk weavers (including severl I've identified) of that name.