Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
New eyes needed please for 1861....
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
Tillot | Report | 4 Dec 2005 23:49 |
See below in a min |
|||
|
Tillot | Report | 4 Dec 2005 23:57 |
I'm struggling with an image on 1861 and I'd really appreciate any thoughts please. Ann Earwaker, b1820, Hambledon, Hampshire. In 1861, in the county of Somerset. Firstly, am I right in thinking Ann's occupation is 'Laundress' The chap at the end, transcribed Henry Matthews, do you agree his first name reads Henry? I'm not 100%. Relationship states brother in law. Ann hasn't been put down as 'Head' (husband is away being a butler in Walcot) I'm hoping Ann was a Matthews as found a marriage that fits. Am I therefore correct in assuming the relationship 'brother-in-law' refers to the actual 'Head' that is away, thus confirming he is Ann's brother? Also, he was born in Hambledon, the same as Ann. Henry has been transcribed as being 19, to me it looks more like 29 - what do you think? Lastly, his occupation reads ? Maker - any ideas folks? Sorry for waffling and I hope I at least make a bit of sense! Many Thanks Helen |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 5 Dec 2005 00:01 |
Is it definitely 1861? I can't find her. Got her now. I'll have a look. Yes, I think you are right. Launderess, and I would imagine that the brother-in-law would be Ann's brother. Not too sure about Henry's age. I think it could be 19, as the one looks more like the one's in someone else's age further up the page who is 11, and not so much like the other twos on the page. Kath. x |
|||
|
Tillot | Report | 5 Dec 2005 00:05 |
Hi Kath, Well I did just have to double check (lol!!!) but yes, it's definitely the 1861. Does this help? Piece - 1689 Folio - 102 Page 10 |
|||
|
Tillot | Report | 5 Dec 2005 00:06 |
Cheers Kath. Do you also think it definitely says Henry aged 19? I think possibly Henry but more like 29. Helen x |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 5 Dec 2005 00:08 |
See above - I've updated my reply. Kath. x |
|||
|
Tillot | Report | 5 Dec 2005 00:11 |
Thanks for your help Kath - you don't fancy a stab at his occupation do you?? I keep seeing Harness Maker but I could be completely wrong! |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 5 Dec 2005 00:11 |
I think it possible there is a big age difference between Ann and Henry, as that would be a reason for him living with her - perhaps the parents are dead. Kath. x |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 5 Dec 2005 00:13 |
Yes, I think you are right with Harness maker. I can't make anything else out of it. Kath. x |
|||
|
Tillot | Report | 5 Dec 2005 00:16 |
Thanks for your help tonight Kath, I appreciate it x |
|||
|
Georgina | Report | 5 Dec 2005 01:30 |
Helen I think he was 19 on the 1861 census because this looks like him in 1851...... Ann Matthews abt 1799 Eastmeon, Hampshire, England Head Hambledon Hampshire Henry Matthews abt 1842 Hambledon, Hampshire, England Son Hambledon Hampshire Source information: HO107/1676 Registration district: Droxford Sub-registration district: Bishops Waltham ED, institution, or vessel: 3a Folio: 330 Page: 26 (click to see others on page) Household schedule number: 86 GSU Number: 193584 Georgina. |