Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lailey/Hannell Hypothesis. Possible? + Q`s...

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

  • Lailey/Hannell Hypothesis. Possible? + Q`s...

    Evening everyone,

    Yesterday I was wondering why I couldn`t find my Gt grandparents Keen/Hannell wedding, when Merry Monty Montgomery suggested that the wife (Hannell) had been previously married, and suggested a possible first husband.

    Henry Leiley married Elizabeth Hannell (interestingly there`s also a Hawnell entry) 2/4 of 1901

    I`ve found a birth record 1/4 1855 in Newbury, Berks
    and a death For Henry Lailey 4/4 1910 Aylesbury age about 54 (makes him 44 at wedding, Lizzie 19/20)

    Alfred Keen married an Elizabeth Lailey 3/4 1911, and first child born 4/4 1911.

    Couple of questions:

    If Henry did die in the last 1/4 1910, was it normal for a widow to remarry and have a child in about a year?

    Regarding the indices, if something is recorded in Xth quarter 19XX, does that mean the event occured then, or was reported then? If it was only when it was reported, what sort of timeframe could we be talking about?

    I couldn`t find any Henry Leiley/Lailey on 1901 census, however living with Lizzie, her mother and siblings is a "Harry Tenny" - friend, age 35, born Reading, berks. Assuming this is Henry, how many levels of deception are involved! lol
    Fake name and knock 10 years of his age- would that be normal? Also if anyone can make out Harry Tenny`s occupation, I`d be grateful.

    Many thanks,
    Craig

  • #2
    If Henry did die in the last 1/4 1910, was it normal for a widow to remarry and have a child in about a year?
    Yes, very common. No welfare state in those days, so a widow with children would need a man to support her, and a widower with children would need someone to look after them. I have people on my tree marrying within 3 months of the first spouse's death.
    Last edited by Mary from Italy; 10-02-09, 20:59.

    Comment


    • #3
      I don`t think she`d had any children with Henry, but like I said this is all just supposition until I get some certs through.
      Thanks,
      Craig

      Comment


      • #4
        The image looks more like Harry (or possibly Henry) Lenny than Tenny, but I can't see a matching birth in Berks. Can't make out the occupation - might be porter, judging by the one a few lines above.

        The quarter that shows up on the BMD index is when an event was registered, not when it occurred. Births had to be registered within 6 weeks, and I think deaths were the same.

        Comment


        • #5
          Craig to answer your question about registrations.
          The BMD indexes are reported in quarters and cover all events reported for the 3 months preceding, so someone could be born in Jan and appear in the Mar quarter. Also someone could be born in December one year and be reported in the Mar quarter the following year. People had up to 3 months to report a birth I think.
          Marriages and deaths got registered at the time of the event usually and would appear in the quarter when it happened.
          You do of course need to get the cert to get the exact date of an event.
          Margaret

          Comment


          • #6
            This site tells you what you'll find on certs and when events had to be registered:

            Birth Certificate Tutorials

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi Craig
              A bit off subject but whereabouts do your Keens come from? I have come across the name a lot when researching my ancestor's village.


              Joanie

              Comment


              • #8
                Thanks Mary and Margaret,
                Those sort of timeframes do sort of de-clutter the death, marriage and birth a little.
                I guess potentially this would mean that when Lizzie remarried, she could only have been 3 months gone, so a bump wouldn`t have been too noticeable.
                Maybe I`m thinking too much about perceived respectability lol
                Craig

                Comment


                • #9
                  Joan,
                  My Keens are from Buckinghamshire, well until I discover otherwise- I`m not even breaking into the 19th century yet!
                  Craig

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Deaths have always had to be registered within six DAYS.

                    Women wore tight corsets in those days and wore them throughout their pregnancy, so only a very close family member would even know they were pregnant. It wasn't considered respectable for a noticeably pregnant woman to appear in public!

                    (That attitude was still alive in the 1960s, when my elderly aunt was shocked to the core that I was still out and about a month before my daughter was born).

                    OC

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X