
Happy Valentines...you wonderful people you!

Gadget I agree it is so great that this important information has come to light. It has opened up new generations and introducing some new ancestors for Roger.
karen, that does look like an AnnK all written together, that's for sure...I can also see how a "d" with such a flourish could pass for a"ds"
so frustrating as can't always get on....

computer problems big time...anyway, earlier I couldn't see the next part of the submissionon LDS Fam search but some parents are listed for that Ann...
but Roger this is a SUBMISSION so not reliable, we do use the information as possible stepping stones, though as names sometimes are reliable, but dates aren't. In this case no names were left on site. There is an exact date listed, which might make it plausible...but don't see information on submitter to check with about documents...
Ann Addicott born about 1849
Parents listed as Edward Addicott & Anne Ingram
Married Henry Trott ( no parents listed) Feb. 10 1872, Parish Church, North Petherton
However there are other submissions for even an earlier birth of an Ann / other siblings listed....Amelia, Louisa, Job, William, Richard, Joseph
As it is we figured was getting on to a ripe age when she had the boys, There is a birth 1848...but age 54/55 is a stretch. Not impossible, though and if Charles was many several her junior, he'd never know her true age...so now I am curious, are these on a census together, or is that bits of them farmed out on the 1861...
My head hurts
( but then, what else is new?)
I thought I'd better not update more information until more positive results...
HUGS TO ALL!!! J.J.
Just looked back at Gadget's 1861 and it seems to look like the family that matches above...not that it absolutely proves a match to our Ann.
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php/topic,283110.msg1690939.html#msg1690939