Would anyone be willing to check my thinking for me on this man? I have found some information but for some reason that I can't explain, I'm not feeling 100% sure that he's the right man. Just a niggle as if I might have overlooked something. There are actually three James Emersons in successive generations as you will see.
So working backwards...
My great grandmother was Lydia Louisa EMERSON b 1864 St Pancras. I have her birth cert which gives her parents as James EMERSON- shoemaker and Louisa nee ROBERTS. Her siblings were Emily b 1865 in Northampton and James baptized (as James Eccles EMERSON) 1868 in St James, Picadilly but died age 7 mnths. Both confirm parents' names as James and Louisa.
I have never bought the marriage cert for James and Louisa but have put it on my tree as Bef 1864.
James and Louisa are consistently together in 1871, 1881, 1891 and 1901 - he as a bootmaker born in Kendal, Westmoreland, she as a tailoress. The appearance of the daughters Emily and Lydia confirm that I have the correct family.
1871 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...36?pId=1743583 1881 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...2?pId=13653277
1891 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...27?pId=8764890
1901 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...682?pId=678948
Looking to go back a further generation, I have James in 1861 at home with his parents James and Mary. His father (James snr) is described as Sergt of Militia and Chelsea pensioner born in Fermanagh Ireland c 1807.
1861 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...7?pId=23535325
The recent Occupations thread about soldiers made me revisit this family and I have found what I believe are his army discharge papers but I wanted to go back over my old research to make sure I had the right man. To me, James Emerson seems a fairly common name but it doesn't appear often in the records.
So, first I went back to basics to check the marriage of James jnr EMERSON and Louisa ROBERTS but could only to find a marriage in 1876 - more than a decade after I expected to find it. This seems very unusual in those days to have three children before getting married and also to put the mother's name on the birth certificates as Louisa formerly Roberts implies that they were married. I wondered if 'formerly' instead of 'nee' means that she had been married previously and Roberts was not her maiden name.
At this point I am getting very confused and can't decide where I should be looking next.
Any thoughts please?
So working backwards...
My great grandmother was Lydia Louisa EMERSON b 1864 St Pancras. I have her birth cert which gives her parents as James EMERSON- shoemaker and Louisa nee ROBERTS. Her siblings were Emily b 1865 in Northampton and James baptized (as James Eccles EMERSON) 1868 in St James, Picadilly but died age 7 mnths. Both confirm parents' names as James and Louisa.
I have never bought the marriage cert for James and Louisa but have put it on my tree as Bef 1864.
James and Louisa are consistently together in 1871, 1881, 1891 and 1901 - he as a bootmaker born in Kendal, Westmoreland, she as a tailoress. The appearance of the daughters Emily and Lydia confirm that I have the correct family.
1871 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...36?pId=1743583 1881 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...2?pId=13653277
1891 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...27?pId=8764890
1901 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...682?pId=678948
Looking to go back a further generation, I have James in 1861 at home with his parents James and Mary. His father (James snr) is described as Sergt of Militia and Chelsea pensioner born in Fermanagh Ireland c 1807.
1861 https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageview...7?pId=23535325
The recent Occupations thread about soldiers made me revisit this family and I have found what I believe are his army discharge papers but I wanted to go back over my old research to make sure I had the right man. To me, James Emerson seems a fairly common name but it doesn't appear often in the records.
So, first I went back to basics to check the marriage of James jnr EMERSON and Louisa ROBERTS but could only to find a marriage in 1876 - more than a decade after I expected to find it. This seems very unusual in those days to have three children before getting married and also to put the mother's name on the birth certificates as Louisa formerly Roberts implies that they were married. I wondered if 'formerly' instead of 'nee' means that she had been married previously and Roberts was not her maiden name.
At this point I am getting very confused and can't decide where I should be looking next.
Any thoughts please?
Comment