Genealogy Chat

As mentioned above, you'll need to buy her marriage certificate before you can be sure. This will have her husband George's father's name & occupation, which may tie in with this family in the census. Without the cert, it is merely guesswork, though it does seem quite possible. By the way, I think that the address is Carcroft the town, not the name of the house - as all the entries on that page and the previous page have address as Carcroft. Incidentally, I think that this is her future husband George in 1871 - he was a servant on another farm in the neighbouring village of Norton (which supports your theory that Rebecca could have with her future in-laws at the time): Name: George Hirst Age in 1871: 19 Relation: Servant Gender: Male Where born: Carcroft, Yorkshire, England Source information: RG10/4722 Registration district: Doncaster Sub-registration district: Campsall ED, institution, or vessel: 9 Folio: 46 Page: 14 (click to see others on page) Household schedule number: 77 Richard

So do you think that could be her future in laws she was working for. Her husband was called George Hirst born 1854, Carcroft, Yorkshire, but I noticed the house was called Carcroft and it is near to Carcroft the town. So do you think it is George's family she is woking for. Fern.

Yes, I agree with Christine. It looks as though the enumerator had first written ''Lum'', and then corrected it to ''Lunn''. The tail of the over-written ''m'' crosses under the second ''n'', making it look like an ''a''. Also, if it was Luma, there would be more of a gap between the ''m'' and the ''a'', with a connecting stroke between them. There's no Rebecca Luma on any other census or on FreeBMD. I think that you could quite safely assume that she is your Rebecca Lunn. Richard

Thanks I will have to order the certificates, but I'm a bit broke. I think I'll ask mummy!!

I had a look at that image (Ancestry) and notice that she is the ONLY Rebecca LUMA in English records, according to them! Also, assuming George was a similar age to her, that would allow him to be a (near) eldest son named for his father - the Head's name is George and old enough to have a son of that sort of age. The enumerator seemed to have trouble with her name - the first name isn't as neat as others on the page. The last letter of the surname has been re-written; it could be an attempt to correct to a double-N. I suspect it's a mistranscription at both original and Ancestry stages. In your shoes, I'd probably treat her as 'mine' with a note that there's a small doubt. Christine

Hi Fern,have you got the marriage cert of George junior and Rebecca???That would confirm it for you,if Georges father is a George and a Farmer.. Have you managed to find George junior elsewhere on the 1871??? Regards Ross.

Yeah everything matches apart from the last 2 letters of her surname. Fern.

Anything is possible. Have you looked at the image to check the spelling of her surname?

Please help I need to know that I am investigating the right family. I was looking for a Rebecca Lunn in 1871 and found a Rebecca Luma although she was about the same age and she was born in the same place Wadworth. I think this could possibile be her. She was working for a family called Hirst and infact she married George Hirst, could she have been working with her future in laws. George Hirst (her husband) isn't listed in that census. But I think this could be George's family. Let me know what you think because I always have this doubt in the back of my mind. Fern.