Author Topic: Ancestry tree rubbish  (Read 77718 times)

Offline BushInn1746

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,741
  • George Hood, born Selby, Yorkshire 31st Jan'y 1847
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry tree rubbish
« Reply #405 on: Monday 03 June 19 16:38 BST (UK) »
Thank you StevieSteve and eadaoin

Yes very plausible:- an approximate Birth year intially taken from a Census or Burial record (before obtaining the actual Birth Certificate) and leaving both year dates on a Tree.

 ----------

Surely the Priest would say at the Baptism, oh your Birth date must be before today's Baptism date?

However, I can see, if the person guesses one date on official paperwork later, how it could happen.

Mark

Offline Edward Scott

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,246
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry tree rubbish
« Reply #406 on: Monday 03 June 19 16:58 BST (UK) »
So the priest would just think 'good grief, this is very large 2 week old baby? '  :)
Scott - Lincolnshire
Jobson - Lincolnshire, Suffolk
Needham - Lincolnshire
Wayet - Lincolnshire

Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Maiden Stone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,226
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry tree rubbish
« Reply #407 on: Monday 03 June 19 17:21 BST (UK) »
My Irish grandmother's date of birth is different in baptism register to civil birth registration. D.o.b. in baptism register was a few days before baptism so I consider that is more likely to be correct than the birth registration several weeks later. Her father probably registered her birth when he was in town for the market and was likely more concerned about the price of pigs than the particular date his daughter was born. One of her younger sisters doesn't seem to have been registered. He also neglected to buy a dog licence and was fined.
Cowban

Offline andrewalston

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,965
  • My granddad
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry tree rubbish
« Reply #408 on: Tuesday 04 June 19 14:55 BST (UK) »
I have come across baptism registers where there is a proper column for date of birth and another for date of baptism. What should you do when the clergyman has obviously written the dates in the wrong columns?

Well, if you are transcribing, you ought to deal with the entries as written. If it's your relative, you obviously take the common-sense approach.

Both options are "right" in their own way.

And of course it is perfectly possible for a child born in November 1735 to be baptised in February the same year!

I have also come across a child whose baptism took place two weeks before the date shown on the birth certificate!
Looking at ALSTON in south Ribble area, ALSTEAD and DONBAVAND/DUNBABIN etc. everywhere, HOWCROFT and MARSH in Bolton and Westhoughton, PICKERING in the Whitehaven area.

Census information is Crown Copyright. See www.nationalarchives.gov.uk for details.


Offline Maiden Stone

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,226
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry tree rubbish
« Reply #409 on: Tuesday 04 June 19 15:46 BST (UK) »
Family tree on another site - not Anc. A woman buried the day before she died.  :o  A quick look at parish register showed 2 women with same name buried in the parish a few days apart - 1st a spinster, 2nd, (correct one) a widow. Same tree - woman's grandson buried a month after death.  ??? Again the parish register revealed burials of 2 individuals with same name within a few weeks, 1st was a child or minor, so the person in question was obviously the 2nd burial.
Cowban

Offline pinefamily

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,810
  • Big sister with baby brother
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry tree rubbish
« Reply #410 on: Wednesday 05 June 19 00:02 BST (UK) »
Family tree on another site - not Anc. A woman buried the day before she died.  :o  A quick look at parish register showed 2 women with same name buried in the parish a few days apart - 1st a spinster, 2nd, (correct one) a widow. Same tree - woman's grandson buried a month after death.  ??? Again the parish register revealed burials of 2 individuals with same name within a few weeks, 1st was a child or minor, so the person in question was obviously the 2nd burial.
Those examples are a too common fault unfortunately.  Too many inexperienced (lazy?) researchers look at an online record without looking at the original image.
Personally I find great enjoyment in looking at the old records, not only to see my ancestors' names but to see their friends, neighbours and community as well.
How much extra information these researchers miss by not looking at the originals.
I am Australian, from all the lands I come (my ancestors, at least!)

Pine/Pyne, Dowdeswell, Kempster, Sando/Sandoe/Sandow, Nancarrow, Hounslow, Youatt, Richardson, Jarmyn, Oxlade, Coad, Kelsey, Crampton, Lindner, Pittaway, and too many others to name.
Devon, Dorset, Gloucs, Cornwall, Warwickshire, Bucks, Oxfordshire, Wilts, Germany, Sweden, and of course London, to name a few.

Offline Drayke

  • RootsChat Extra
  • **
  • Posts: 97
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry tree rubbish
« Reply #411 on: Wednesday 05 June 19 03:39 BST (UK) »
Yes very plausible:- an approximate Birth year intially taken from a Census or Burial record (before obtaining the actual Birth Certificate) and leaving both year dates on a Tree.
It also can depend on what happened when registered. For example with my grandmother, the informant for her birth was the attending midwife/nurse and she didn't like the name her mother gave her so registered her as Henrietta. Her mother had to get it changed when she saw it like that.

Also another case in my tree was my grandfather who was registered 1 year later after his actual birth. Consequently even though he was born in 1909 the official birth certificate shows him as 1910.

Offline brigidmac

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,471
  • Computer incompetent but stiil trying
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry tree rubbish
« Reply #412 on: Wednesday 05 June 19 06:12 BST (UK) »
Ive just seen a tree where life story didnt match tbe person s dates at all

I wondered if they.d realised there was an extra generation between father and son and changed date and name on quick edit function assuming it would change the life story builder ....

Ive been doing that ...so will now have to check everyone on my tree to see if story matches the person ...

Apologies to anyone who has fallen.foul of my Ancestry rubbish ...i still feel like a beginner sometimes
But would love to be told if id made any glaring mistakes .
Roberts,Fellman.Macdermid smith jones,Bloch,Irvine,Hallis Stevenson

Offline ms_canuck

  • RootsChat Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Ancestry tree rubbish
« Reply #413 on: Wednesday 05 June 19 17:34 BST (UK) »
On the other hand, I found one yesterday where there were 2 wives listed (first one died, so he married the second); however, the children of both wives overlapped!  I thought "how careless", until I read a message posted by someone from the family - the husband had been having an affair with the woman who eventually became wife #2!  So the birth dates were completely correct (4 children)!

You just never know...

Ms_C
1. Paul - Guernsey 1801
2. Ettenton / Eltenton - Guernsey 1806