Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How likely is this

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How likely is this

    My great great grandmother born 1857 had 3 illegitimate children after her husband died in 1892 , twin girls in 1894 and a son in 1895 ,the father is named on all 3 Birth records , I have been trying now for a few years to narrow down exactly who he was as he isn't with her on any census records, somebody has her in his tree saying the childrens father was born in 1880 ? is this feasible as he would have been 14 when the twins were born ?

    Thanks
    Last edited by Guest; 10-10-15, 20:36.

  • #2
    I would say possible but very unlikely.
    Anne

    Comment


    • #3
      Same as Anne, possible but unlikely. Are you sure it doesn't say/mean he was born BEFORE 1880? I have noticed that my Tribal Pages tree puts "b 1880" when what I have entered is "born before 1880".

      OC

      Comment


      • #4
        This person has the right mother for the 3 children and the right wife and children for the son, I did contact him some time ago but he wasn't willing to share , shame as I have all the certs and would have been happy to let him see them.
        I think the father was born in 1866 but trying to prove it is a nightmare.
        Thanks both.

        Comment


        • #5
          I take it the father has a common name Val?
          Chrissie passed away in January 2020.

          Comment


          • #6
            It's also possible that the tree owner has either miscalculated year of birth (e.g when subtracting age from year of death) or made a typo. Also some people have such huge trees (created by adding on someone else's research about a twig and all their extended family) that they don't "know" everyone on their tree and haven't even checked all the information about the newcomers.
            In one tree I've found one of my family married to three different wives (all producing children at the same time and living in different locations) and with 3 different census sheets for him and each family, in the SAME census year. I've had people with a date of death before their birth year or marrying when still an infant.
            I think the dates in your above scenario are suspect, but it could just be that the year of birth that has been miscalculated and that the later events are correct.

            Jay
            Last edited by Janet in Yorkshire; 11-10-15, 10:45.
            Janet in Yorkshire



            Genealogists never die - they just swap places in the family tree

            Comment


            • #7
              Were the twin girls and their younger brother baptised?

              A baptism entry might name their father with an occupation and / or an address, which might help locate him in a census.

              Comment


              • #8
                No Chrissie actually its not such a common name thats why its so infuriating it should be easy,this contact is a bit suspect with his dates Janet, and Gwyn that's the problem they aren't together on any census records ,the twins died the year they were born 1894 and I cannot find the son born 1895 and his mother in 1901 with or without the father.
                I have asked for help with this lot before and dont really like to ask again but they must be somewhere in 1901.
                Last edited by Guest; 11-10-15, 19:40.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Unless this researcher's tree has source citations to support the fact, I would simply ignore that fact - especially if it doesn't fit with other data that you have. Since the person in question was apparently born within the era of civil registration (i.e. 1860's-1880) and has an uncommon name, then surely you can at least confirm whether a birth under that name was registered in the claimed year?

                  edit: it also seems highly unlikely that a 14 year old boy would be having a long term relationship with a thirty-something widow. I certainly wouldn't accept such a hypothesis into my tree unless I had very firm evidence to support it.
                  Last edited by Richard in Perth; 12-10-15, 03:19.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    thanks Richard had a real good look at his tree and it does not make sense ,so sticking with what I do know.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X