Ancestry Member Trees

[SmallTownGirl]

If you get hints to "Ancestry Member Trees", which contain information that you don't have/haven't yet found for yourself, is there a way of finding out which of the Trees was the one to post the info first - you know, the one that everyone else has copied from - or do you just have to look at them one at a time to see if you can find it?

Hope this makes sense!

Thanks
STG

[JBee]

I've just sent a message to someone asking where they got their info from - they were the ones with the most info on.

Recently I contacted someone who then told me he'd just copied someone else's tree but couldn't remember whose!!!!

[Anne in Carlisle]

I do think that sometimes the 'original' (whoever that was) had access to a private tree. Then, either the infomation on there was vague OR they copied it imperfectly.
A couple of times recently I have seen something vague and thought "What rubbish" then with some detailed investigation of records I have found the proof needed the properly substantiate the statement. Why anyone would put anything on their tree with no sources at all is beyond me! And those whose list of sources is a long list of 'Ancestry Trees' ........ well!!

For what its worth, the 'best' sourced trees are at the top of the list so I don't bother to look at more than the top 3 or 4, if that. Often just for a laugh!
Anne

[SmallTownGirl]

For my current Person of Interest*, the hint is to 10 other Trees.

Nine of the ten have a surname for the woman (that I don't have/can't establish) and none quote a source other than "Ancestry Family Trees".
Two of those nine Trees name her parents and give her dob, but neither has a source other than "Ancestry Family Trees".

Arghh!

STG

* This is Hannah, who, from later census records, was b. abt 1809 in Cromford, Derbys. She and Samuel Hallows (b. 1807, Cromford) baptised what I think is their first child, Ralph, in 1829 in the Wesleyan Methodist Chapel in Cromford. I've not been able to find a marriage for Hannah and Samuel. Hannah is named on the other Trees as Hannah Young, and the two which name her parents (John and Dorothy) have her dob as 2 Nov 1808. Now I can see a local baptism for that Hannah, which gives that dob, but I still can't connect her by marriage to Samuel Hallows.

PS : I appreciate that this isn't exactly that I was asking for in my opening post - to find the Tree with the original info - because neither Tree quotes a source, but it is the one that got me thinking about how to find The One.

[Katarzyna]

Is Hannah listed in any private trees on Ancestry?
I agree with Anne that someone probably contacted the private owner and never bothered to record the source. I think a lot of us were guilty of not recording the sources correctly when we first started our trees only to regret that later and gave ourselves a lot of work in order to correct them - if we were bothered!
If the Wesleyan Methodist Chapel 's records are not yet online (I no longer have Ancestry) then only a trip to the archives is going to sort that one out.

edit: of course she could have got the original info from a relative who has not put the tree online.
It doesn't answer your question about how to find "the One" but it is possible that as ALL the trees give the source as "other Ancestry trees" then the original owner has probably removed the tree from Ancestry altogether.

[Darksecretz]

Hannah YOUNG
Samuel HOLEHOUSE Marriage 15 Sep 1828 Derbyshire Matlock (St Giles)

Freereg have this one, was just looking to see if I could find a possible [this is with soundex on too]

http://www.freereg.org.uk/search_queries/5741755df4040bafdd000001

[SmallTownGirl]

The first Private Tree that comes up has nearly 7000 people on it, so my instant reaction is that the owner is just a name-collector and it wouldn't be worth asking her. I could be wrong, but that's how I feel about such large trees.

I've found a Hannah Young who married at St Giles, Matlock in 1828 to a Samuel, but he's not Samuel Hallows, he's Samuel Holehouse. Cromford Wesleyan baptisms (1806-1837) are on Ancestry, but not marriages. :(

STG

[SmallTownGirl]

Hannah YOUNG
Samuel HOLEHOUSE Marriage 15 Sep 1828  Derbyshire Matlock (St Giles)

Freereg have this one, was just looking to see if I could find a possible [this is with soundex on too]

http://www.freereg.org.uk/search_que...040bafdd000001

The image for that one is on FS and it says they're both OTP, which would be Matlock. Not a million miles from Cromford, but still a different surname for the groom.

https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HT-D1C9-73C?i=53&wc=34JF-7MW%3A1581159903%2C1581165201%2C1581163813%3Fcc%3D1911752&cc=1911752

STG

[Olde Crone Holden]

Hallows and Holehouse sound more or less the same to me! As probably neither Samuel nor the clerk knew how to spell it (nor cared) I'd go for it being the same man.

(Try saying HOLEHOUSE in a rustic accent, imagining you have few or no teeth, lol).

OC

[Chrissie Smiff]

I have been thinking along the same lines as OC and Cromford and Matlock are only 2 and a half miles apart.

Even a trip to the archives may not help either. I did that and the marriage I was looking for gave the bride as what looked like Lisna Viga Beach - it turned out to be Ligna Vita Revil. So you still need to do some research even after the visit. The birth cert of a child after 1837 or later is your best bet for a more accurate name.

[SmallTownGirl]

I have been thinking along the same lines as OC and Cromford and Matlock are only 2 and a half miles apart.

Hum, not convinced, sorry. The surname Hallows is a fairly common one in that neck of the woods, and on the marriage certificate for Samuel Holehouse, there's a witness William Holehouse who signed his name.

Think I'm well and truly stuck without a visit to Matlock Records Office :(

STG

[Chrissie Smiff]

Ahh that puts a different slant on it then STG. Never mind, Matlock is lovely and if you find it quickly you could enjoy the day

[Olde Crone Holden]

No, I'm standing by my guns, lol. It may be that Hallows was a corruption of Holehouse further back.

One of my relatives was a church clerk in the late 1700s, early 1800s. He signed off the parish records each year when he sent the BTs off to the Archdeacon. He spelled his own surname - HOLDEN - five different ways in 22 years.

OC

[Chrissie Smiff]

I know that it's possible that the Holehouse couple could have died before 1841, but after searching 1841 and not finding a likely couple, just the Hallows one, I am back to agreeing with OC. The birth cert of George should solve the puzzle. Births Dec 1838 - HALLOWS George - Matlock & c ref 19 436

[SmallTownGirl]

I am back to agreeing with OC.

LOL! Hope you're going to be more decisive than this when it comes to voting in the EU Referendum ;)

STG

[Chrissie Smiff]

I'm afraid I'm just as indecisive about that too STG. I'm going to ask OC what she thinks and see whether I agree lol

[PhotoFamily]

No, I'm standing by my guns, lol. It may be that Hallows was a corruption of Holehouse further back.

One of my relatives was a church clerk in the late 1700s, early 1800s. He signed off the parish records each year when he sent the BTs off to the Archdeacon. He spelled his own surname - HOLDEN - five different ways in 22 years.

OC

When I started researching, I was putting my modern spelling standards on my pre-20th century ancestors. I was just starting to come to the conclusion that not all my ancestors were letter-perfect spellers, when I ran into someone who described a document written by her ancestor - the ancestor had spelled his name four different ways in one document.

Perhaps the rector used the Holehouse spelling because that's the way that William spelled it. Who knows. I think it's good advice to keep an open mind.

[JBee]

Didn't the Wesleyan's advocate adult baptisms?

Sure some of my West Yorkshire ones didn't get baptised until adults.

[Sylvia C]

One of OH's family lines is Hayhurst

However, the name variants seen up to around 1820/1830 include Hairst ............ not too difficult to see how that happens when said in a thick Yorkshire, Lancashire or Westmorland accent (the 3 coutnies where they lived, moving from one to the other quite regularly).

These men were usually corn millers and farmers, and had at least a smattering of literacy, yet even they let the mis-spellings go by the way.

I'm with OC ............ it is entirely possible that Holehouse and Hallows are mere variants, a result of the illiteracy of the day.