Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My ancestors have gone missing...how rude!

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

  • My ancestors have gone missing...how rude!

    Hi all,

    Wondering if anyone could shed any light on some missing ancestors of my husband. I have them in a couple of censuses, and then they vanish - ridiculous! Did they not know we were going to be looking for them....!?

    I know I'm being silly and rude, but it just gets to you a bit after a while, do you know what I mean?

    I'm looking for Thomas and Elizabeth Vaughan (nee Hughes), married in 1861. I have them in the 1861 census (pre-marriage) and 1871 census (married) living in St Asaph Denbighshire Wales, where they were both born, lived, etc. Here are the details in the 1871 census:

    Thomas Vaughan, b 1841 Head.
    Elizabeth Vaughan, b 1840 Wife.
    William Vaughan, b 1859 Son.
    Mary Vaughan, b 1864 Daughter.
    Samuel Vaughan, b 1866 Son.
    Hugh Thomas Vaughan, b 1871 Son.

    (c/o TNA census ref RG10 5669 69 11)

    ...and then they vanish.

    I can't understand where they go. Can anyone see something I'm missing?

    Hubby's direct ancestor, Hugh Thomas Vaughan, gets married in 1892 - still in St Asaph - and then have children there from 1897 to 1906. Hugh and his family appear in St Asaph on the census in 1911.

    It seems unexpected that the parents (Thomas and Elizabeth) would have just moved out of the area completely, but I can't find either of them on 1881/91/01/11 census. They may have died, but that could be odd because they were both quite young to have died before 1881.

    Any ideas?

    Thanks in advance,
    Rachel
    P.S. Not sure what it means, but I've chosen the little green circle arrow as my post's icon - to signify that I am going round and round and round in circles with this!!

  • #2
    Possible death for Elizabeth (freeBMD)
    Deaths Mar 1874
    Vaughan Elizabeth - age at death 33
    St. Asaph 11b 282
    Elaine







    Comment


    • #3
      Could Thomas have remarried - there is one in 1891 with wife Mary

      RG12; Piece: 4627; Folio 109; Page 14

      Might be worthwhile trying to trace them back to see if you can eliminate them.
      Elaine







      Comment


      • #4
        Any possibilty that the name was mis-transcribed ?

        Comment


        • #5
          Presumably you have the North Wales BMD info about their marriage 1861 at St Cyndeyrn in St Asaph?

          The 1874 St Asaph death appears there, too, but they haven't put the ages in yet, for some reason.

          Was Thomas married before Elizabeth? Or did they just not get around to marrying until sometime after the birth of their first child?

          Christine
          Researching: BENNETT (Leics/Birmingham-ish) - incl. Leonard BENNETT in Detroit & Florida ; WARR/WOR, STRATFORD & GARDNER/GARNAR (Oxon); CHRISTMAS, RUSSELL, PAFOOT/PAFFORD (Hants); BIGWOOD, HAYLER/HAILOR (Sussex); LANCASTER (Beds, Berks, Wilts) - plus - COCKS (Spitalfields, Liverpool, Plymouth); RUSE/ROWSE, TREMEER, WADLIN(G)/WADLETON (Devonport, E Cornwall); GOULD (S Devon); CHAPMAN, HALL/HOLE, HORN (N Devon); BARRON, SCANTLEBURY (Mevagissey)...

          Comment


          • #6
            Hiya

            Thanks for looking for me, I really appreciate it.

            Elaine - I think you are right about the Elizabeth; I had discounted it at first because she was so young - but that did happen, and I've no reason to think it didn't. I don't think the Thomas that is with Mary is the right one because it seems to be a separate family, with children who's ages co-incide with Thomas and Elizabeths. I'm quite often wrong though, so never say never.

            Alan - I have looked under all the mis-transcription ideas I have had, and with just first names etc but just can't find it. That's not to say it hasn't been mis-transcribed, it could well have been. :(

            Christine - I'm going to sound really rubbish now, but "what North Wales BMD info"? LOL. Everything I have found has been from freeBMD, Find My Past and Ancestry - is there something else I should have looked at? I'd like to find more details on their marriage, is it an online source that I can view or is it a CD or something?

            Thanks again, I always feel so much better knowing I'm not alone in my quest!

            Rachel

            Comment


            • #7
              Answering for Christine; www.northwales.org.uk is a very useful Site for this area.

              Comment


              • #8
                1881: Thomas has remarried to a Mary:



                Rachandgarry, did you know there is a tree on ancestry...??
                Julie
                They're coming to take me away haha hee hee..........

                .......I find dead people

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hiya

                  Alan, I clicked on the link but the page it goes to is blank :( (like my mind half the time, ha ha)

                  Julie - I did wonder about that, but on that census, the Thomas is only 29 which would put him being born in 1852, whereas the Thomas I'm looking for (and in the 1871 census) was born in 1840 - that's too big a gap surely? I can't actually find the marriage of Thomas and Mary - anyone have any idea? Tracing that family in to the 1891 census, his age then jumps 20 years and is then correct, so it is possible I guess. It seems strange that Thomas would have had children with Mary (1871 and 1873) before Elizabeth died (1874).

                  Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr I wish it was more clear cut - but then where would be the satisfaction in solving it, eh!?

                  Thanks again
                  Rachel
                  P.S. Yes, I'd looked at the tree on Ancestry but other than the 1881 and 1891 census, I can't see much other information that I don't have. I've sent them a pm anyway, see if they connect at all. :o

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I think that the age on the 1881 is wrong, the image is clear enough but, the childrens names fit, the other children could possibly have died or working as servants somewhere. Just had a thought! what about Susannah? maybe she is Elizabeths natural child? and was born before she died? Thomas could be 'Hugh Thomas' couldnt he?

                    If Elizabeth died in 1874 then Thomas would have young children to look after so would need to find a surrogate mother? might it be that they married after so many years and not when you expect to find a marriage?
                    Julie
                    They're coming to take me away haha hee hee..........

                    .......I find dead people

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      oh and this is the page that Christine was referring to Rachel

                      Julie
                      They're coming to take me away haha hee hee..........

                      .......I find dead people

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X