Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The new GRO indexes are causing me problems!

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

  • The new GRO indexes are causing me problems!

    I am finding that some details that I thought were solid now look suspect. For example Mary Ann Colthup. I had her as the daughter of William Colthup and Harriett Cracknell.
    1861:
    Name Relation Condition Sex Age Birth Year Occupation Where born
    COLTHUP, William Husband Married M 58 1803 General Dealer ..., Kent
    COLTHUP, Harriett Wife Married F 49 1812 Paddington
    COLTHUP, William R Son Unmarried M 19 1842 Merchant Clerk Bishopgate St Brides
    COLTHUP, Jane Daughter Unmarried F 19 1842 Shopwoman ...
    COLTHUP, Mary Ann Daughter Unmarried F 15 1846 St Clement Strand
    COLTHUP, Frederick Son Unmarried M 8 1853 School Bethnal Green
    Piece:272
    Folio:111
    Page: 15
    Registration District: Whitechapel
    Civil Parish: Whitechapel
    Municipal Borough:
    Address: 19, Wells Yard, Whitechapel
    County: London
    The only person of this name and age is:
    COLTHUP, MARY ANN Mother's Maiden Surname: DUNDERDALE
    GRO Reference: 1845 S Quarter in OF SAINT GEORGE THE MARTYR SOUTHWARK Volume 04 Page 452

    Frederick who was born later has Mother's Maiden Surname Cracknell so it is not that William remarried.

    So I was quite happy until the GRO dropped the Dunderdale bombshell. Any ideas?
    People: Canton, Wiseman, Colthup, Scrace
    Places: Pembrokeshire, Kent.

  • #2
    Well it's the wrong district for where Mary Ann is said to have been born so maybe not your Mary Ann.

    The GRO search results are not always complete - my grandfather didn't show up on a search with his full name and details!

    Southwark District is south of the Thames and not really anywhere near Strand so I would say this is not your person.

    Margaret

    Comment


    • #3
      Perhaps this explains the birth you found:

      Name: Thomas Colthup
      Spouse: Ann Dunderdell
      Record Type: Marriage
      Event Date: 8 Aug 1827
      Parish: St Mary, Rotherhithe
      Borough: Southwark
      Register Type: Parish Register


      Elizabeth
      Research Interests:
      England:Purkis, Stilwell, Quintrell, White (Surrey - Guildford), Jeffcoat, Bond, Alexander, Lamb, Newton (Lincolnshire, Stalybridge, London)
      Scotland:Richardson (Banffshire), Wishart (Kincardineshire), Johnston (Kincardineshire)

      Comment


      • #4
        I would say this is your person

        Mary Ann Colthup
        Registration Year: 1845
        Registration Quarter: Jul-Aug-Sep
        Registration district: Strand
        Parishes for this Registration District: View Ecclesiastical Parishes associated with this Registration District
        Inferred County: London
        Volume: 1
        Page: 371

        Margaret

        Comment


        • #5
          Here you are:

          COLTHAP, MARY ANN CRACKNELL
          GRO Reference: 1845 S Quarter in STRAND UNION Volume 01 Page 371

          Last edited by Elizabeth Herts; 08-12-16, 22:24.
          Elizabeth
          Research Interests:
          England:Purkis, Stilwell, Quintrell, White (Surrey - Guildford), Jeffcoat, Bond, Alexander, Lamb, Newton (Lincolnshire, Stalybridge, London)
          Scotland:Richardson (Banffshire), Wishart (Kincardineshire), Johnston (Kincardineshire)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by margaretmarch View Post
            I would say this is your person

            Mary Ann Colthup
            Registration Year: 1845
            Registration Quarter: Jul-Aug-Sep
            Registration district: Strand
            Parishes for this Registration District: View Ecclesiastical Parishes associated with this Registration District
            Inferred County: London
            Volume: 1
            Page: 371

            Margaret
            This registration is missing from the GRO Index so I have reported it so they can sort it out.

            Margaret

            Comment


            • #7
              It's there, Margaret, but the surname is spelt differently.
              Elizabeth
              Research Interests:
              England:Purkis, Stilwell, Quintrell, White (Surrey - Guildford), Jeffcoat, Bond, Alexander, Lamb, Newton (Lincolnshire, Stalybridge, London)
              Scotland:Richardson (Banffshire), Wishart (Kincardineshire), Johnston (Kincardineshire)

              Comment


              • #8
                FMP has the surname as Colthup:



                First name(s) MARY ANN
                Last name COLTHUP
                Birth year 1845
                Birth quarter 3
                Registration month -
                Mother's last name -
                District STRAND
                County London
                Country England
                Volume I
                Page 371
                Record set England & Wales births 1837-2006
                Category Birth, Marriage, Death & Parish Records
                Subcategory Births & baptisms
                Collections from Great Britain
                Elizabeth
                Research Interests:
                England:Purkis, Stilwell, Quintrell, White (Surrey - Guildford), Jeffcoat, Bond, Alexander, Lamb, Newton (Lincolnshire, Stalybridge, London)
                Scotland:Richardson (Banffshire), Wishart (Kincardineshire), Johnston (Kincardineshire)

                Comment


                • #9
                  I wish in a way too they had not introduced it as I am having trouble with a family where the mother has a different maiden name to what its supposed to be, cannot even find the birth regs

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'm loving it. Have found a few records not in freevmd's index i had no clue about. Also maiden names included is so good for sorting families. I've found at least twenty siblings of ancestors i had no knowledge of.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I'm loving it too. I knew it would be useful but hadn't thought how much!
                      I'm lucky enough to be starting a new tree for my daughter in law. It's such a treat to start from the very beginning again and I turn to the new GRO index every day. You do need patience and methodical working through it though, with its clunky interface.
                      Anne

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I'm loving the index too!.. soo many names that I can now say for definite belong.. and finding the ones that didn't make it too. [Though I am STILL having issues with William Brown] but, I may just take a punt and get the one that has MMN of Larkins [even though my Williams mum was Larkin] though there does seem to be another Larkins family in the area, just need to be careful and try and plot those before I order!
                        Julie
                        They're coming to take me away haha hee hee..........

                        .......I find dead people

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I was talking to a family history group the other day and was asked about the new indexes and what became clear was how many people were now having to make changes (sometimes major) to their research because for many years they had added people by making assumptions from the existing index entries, without getting certificates to confirm, and which they could now see were wrong, or at least didn't fit in the way they thought.

                          Time to go back and do some review work !
                          Retired professional researcher, and ex- deputy registrar, now based in Worcestershire. Happy to give any help or advice I can ( especially on matters of civil registration) - contact via PM or my website www.chalfontresearch.co.uk
                          Follow me on Twittter @ChalfontR

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by AntonyM View Post
                            I was talking to a family history group the other day and was asked about the new indexes and what became clear was how many people were now having to make changes (sometimes major) to their research because for many years they had added people by making assumptions from the existing index entries, without getting certificates to confirm, and which they could now see were wrong, or at least didn't fit in the way they thought.

                            Time to go back and do some review work !
                            Unfortunately those same people will carry on collating garbage as they will never realise that they need to purchase the certificate (or an uncertified copy of the entry) to be sure of the full details.
                            Not only do they need to purchase the certificate but they also need to view additional evidence to confirm what the certificate claims.

                            Cheers
                            Guy
                            Guy passed away October 2022

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The indexes are not without their problems (really could do with a wild card facility) but I've been able to confirm a few births I'd just pencilled in (not direct line so didn't want to get certificates). Its been particularly helpful looking for the "missing" children that the 1911 census show as born & died who never made a census.

                              I've also managed to fill in a few earlier gaps. Always wondered why there was a 10 year gap between my 2x gt grandfather's oldest children. I've not been able to find the family on the 1861 census. Too common a surname to start sending off for birth certificates (compounded by several spelling variants), and so far no online baptism records for likely areas. I found they had a total of 10 children of whom only 3 made it to adulthood. Three died within the same week, of scarlatina. I did get certificates for some of these missing children, and as Guy says, the additional info can be quite useful sometimes. (I have the precise address where they were between March 1861 and Sept 1865, so now I know why they are missing from the 1861 census.)

                              The gains from the new index so far outweigh the problems with it. Hope they take on board the comments people have made about the search facility.
                              Vicky

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                It is an expensive hobby!! I bought all my BMD certs for direct Ancestors as I went along, plus a few sideways ones if needed to confirm. I have about 12 that are wrong MMN's but eventually got the right ones. The new GRO indexes will make things a lot easier (and cheaper) for those starting off now but still going to be difficult for those who have really common names. As Guy said you need other evidence too to be absolutely sure - I read somewhere - at least three sources if you can.

                                I have still a problem with two brothers who married sisters so MMNs are the same. I have the families on censuses but some babes that lived and died between 41 and 51 are difficult to place. Have these down as possibles
                                Last edited by Katarzyna; 09-12-16, 11:46. Reason: another para
                                Kat

                                My avatar is my mother 1921 - 2012

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  When I first started my family history research, I got as much info as I could from my mum about her family. She did remember quite a lot.

                                  But I ran into problems with Annie, my gt gran. On her birth registration, her mother's maiden name is not what I expected, and for quite a while I wondered whether there was a skeleton lurking that no-one knew about! I was 200% certain I had the correct birth certificate, as I knew her exact DOB & place of birth, and that she had a twin sister.

                                  After I'd done a bit more digging, I could explain what happened.
                                  Annie's mother is called Agnes.
                                  Turned out that when Agnes was about 8 years old, her mother had remarried a Mr POWELL. Agnes never took on her stepfather's name - she married using her real father's name of TOVEY and her first 5 children were registered using TOVEY as her maiden name. However, she gave her step-father's surname of POWELL when she registered her youngest 3 children.

                                  I realised that her mother had died before the last 3 children were born. I can only think she wanted her name remembered in some way.
                                  Vicky

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    I love it really was just fed up yesterday trying to pin down a whole families birth regs

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      I just wish you could go more than the 2 years, it gets rather annoying having to swap that bit.
                                      Lennon. Phillips. Thomas. Peacock. Tubridy. Burton.

                                      I am the girl from that town & I'm darn proud of it.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        The new GRO indexes have thrown the cat amongst the pigeons as far as I am concerned. I have already identified someone whose mother's maiden name does not match where I have him. Either his father remarried or I have put him in the wrong family. I have not done much with deaths yet but I fully expect the new age at death on early records will reveal similar errors.

                                        So my quandry is how much checking of existing records should I do? I have 4700 records in my tree and a substantial number of births, possibly a majority, prior to 1911, plus quite a lot of deaths that now have age at death.

                                        Checking all of them will be a massive job and will require careful record keeping of what has been checked. The severe restrictions on searching make it more difficult. Since these restrictions appear (to me) to have no useful purpose I wonder if they will be removed eventually which would make the job easier, and provides me with an excuse to prevaricate.

                                        What are your plans?
                                        People: Canton, Wiseman, Colthup, Scrace
                                        Places: Pembrokeshire, Kent.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X