If you are new to research it is suggested you start with the FIRST Blog (see right).
There are 34 research links in this presentation. So it is not just an article, it is a searchable resource. It looks at the gaps in the historical records. This means records which were supported by laws, and relied upon witnesses & consistent content in creating records; comprising mostly government ("civil") or "parish" (church) records. The 'gaps' referred to exist not because of the lack of application by internet publishing services, but because of the gaps in the ORIGINAL data. These gaps exist due to (i) the turbulence of politics prior to democratic institutions, and (ii) the slow take up rates of family registration under the new civil registration laws.
The same general principles apply in every country where government started a record system, for example France, Republic of Ireland, Australia; but especially in Canada and India.
The approach in this Blog is to assume you know very little on this subject. It might be more reading than you expect, but if you get the 'big picture' your understanding will grow, block-upon-block; and your confidence will be assured. You might read this in several "bites".
Church Structure & Terms
Do you understand the terms used to describe the structure of the 'established' (aka "state") church in the UK? This means the Church of England, or its equivalent in Ireland, Scotland, Wales, etc These are the state sponsored churches in the UK (the meaning of UK is defined below). You are going to learn about the structure of the main churches, one way or the other! When researching ancestors you eventually encounter church records, and references to church entities like "parishes" or "dioceses". The same in Commonwealth countries like Australia and New Zealand.
A systematic approach to research in this "challenging period" (that is the time of crossover from parish to civil records) is to consistently check you have the correct parish, and check the logic of where your ancestor was MARRIED. Marriages are the foundation of sound research. You may have found a promising record, but does it sound logical? If you do your research systematically, by discovering the parish CHURCH of your ancestor, you will visit these old churches online and in library records, and develop an affinity for old churches. They are the 'touchstones' (of your ancestors) which still exist! Take the fast track now, by learning about the structure of the Church of England from a professional presenter, here.
There is also the Catholic Church hierarchy to consider (including chapels of ease); especially in Ireland. In the Roman Catholic Church a parish is defined by the laws of the church as:
"...a certain community of Christ's faithful stably established
within a particular Church, whose pastoral care, under the authority of
the diocesan Bishop, is entrusted to a parish priest as its proper
pastor. (Canon 515) ".
But for most people it is the records of the 'established' (state) church, the Church of England (and its equivalents in the different countries) which are encountered the most. Here is a 'snap-shot' of the structure of the disposition of the Church of England, in the field.
Area
Title
|
Leader
|
Consists
of
|
Province
|
Archbishop
|
A number of dioceses
|
Diocese
|
Bishop
|
One or more archdeaconries
|
Archdeaconry
|
Archdeacon
|
A number of rural deaneries
|
Rural Deaconry
|
Rural Dean
|
A number of ecclesiastical parishes
|
Parish
|
Vicar or Rector
|
Smallest 'self-governing' unit of Church of
England
|
Chapelry
|
Parish Clergy (Vicar or Rector)
|
“Chapel” building within Parish; limited
functions; like may not have been able to perform marriages; inexplicably causing patrons to go to a parish church some distance away.
|
Geography
It should be noted that this Blog covers Australia, the UK, the Republic of Ireland and New Zealand.
A word about Ireland. There is often confusion about the the 'two' Irelands. Northern Ireland is the province in which the more recent "troubles" occurred, and which is still part of the UK. To remind you:
"Under the Good Friday Agreement, properly known as the Belfast Agreement, voters elected a new Northern Ireland Assembly to form a parliament. Every party that reaches a specific level of
support gains the right to name members of its party to government and
claim one or more ministries...
"On 8 May 2007, devolution of powers returned to Northern Ireland. DUP leader Ian Paisley and Sinn Féin's Martin McGuinness took office as First Minister and Deputy First Minister, respectively. (BBC). "You Raise Me Up", the 2005 track by Westlife, was played at their inauguration." (Wikipedia)
There is also confusion about the terms 'UK' and 'Great Britain'. The terms have become somewhat interchangeable, at street level, but really have different meanings.The following is the differentiation in the historical context (Wikipedia):
"Wales...was
officially united with England in 1535...but the two countries remained separate
entities until the Act of Union in 1707 forming 'Great Britain'. Ireland had
been claimed by the English...since the 12th Century but was not officially
joined to Great Britain until 1801...For three days from 6 December 1922 Northern Ireland stopped being part
of the United Kingdom and became part of the newly created Irish Free State [known as "Republic of Island"], but the counties of Ulster opted
out and (as Northern Ireland) remain part of the 'United Kingdom'.
So, today, the 'United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' includes
'Great Britain', which in turns includes England, Scotland and Wales".(refer "Why is England or the UK Sometimes called Britain?")
So the term 'UK' means 'Great Britain-and-Northern Ireland'; one single entity comprising two parts, but the term 'Great Britain' means 'England, Scotland and Wales', but not Northern Ireland.
It is also noted that the 'English Census' from 1841 included the census of Isle of Man and the Channel Islands.
An area called a "county" is a government administrative unit, like a province in France, or State in Australia.
First Informational Gap
There is the "respect of privacy effect". This is best explained by using a specific 'jurisdiction': that is, a geographical area administered by a sovereign state.
Case Study: Western Australia
So, as an example, the online Western Australian Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages will only give out information on births, deaths and marriages within a specific range of years (below). "Access conditions apply to births, deaths and marriages that occurred less [i.e. closer] than the periods stated. The recent certificates held by the Registry [closer in time than the periods shown] contain sensitive and
personal information and are restricted to eligible people only." This means that eligible, close relatives have to produce identification and demonstrate their relationship.
BIRTHS (1841-1932)
DEATHS (1841-1971)
MARRIAGES (1841-1936)
This privacy effect between now and the above end dates is typical in most countries. It is because of this 'informational gap', among other things, that the expert advice to those starting their family history is to obtain all the information you can from "family records" and from living members of the family; including their stories; in order to bridge the gap.
This tentative 'cross-generational' information might be supplemented to a degree from other sources. Fortunately, in Western Australia the gap from 1936 to present day is offset by a privately compiled "Reverse" Western Australia Marriage lookup, but only from 1837- until 1965.
Also, online copies of "The West Australian" newspapers in Western Australia, starting in 1803, provide information until 1954; which for births and marriages brings you about another 18 years closer! From there you need to look up microfiche copies, in the State Public Library (The "Battye Library" area); or LDS Family History Libraries, until you get to July 2004. At this point "The Western Australian" newspaper becomes available online , with notices right up to the present day! An explanation of the actual coverage (which does not include Good Friday or Christmas Day), and 'subscription-options' is seen here.
The Second Informational Gap
The most
significant gap you will encounter, however, is the relative 'thin air' before
civil-registration began in a country. This is the "pre-registration" gap, or more correctly 'space', before the government got involved in record keeping.
For example, civil registration of births, deaths
and marriages began in England and Wales in 1837; and in Western Australia in
1841. Many Australians trace their ancestry back to Britain, Europe or Commonwealth countries, like South Africa, Canada, Pakistan, India, due to immigration policies.This is fortunate because wherever the British went they largely implemented good record keeping. In the USA record systems were implemented less fastidiously, and Americans envy Australia's.
Regarding Australian composition by origin:
"At 30 June 2011, 27 per cent of the estimated resident population [of Australia] was born overseas (6.0 million):
"The countries representing the highest overseas-born populations are the
United Kingdom (1 180 160, 19.6 per cent of overseas-born), New
Zealand (564 920, 9.4 per cent), the People's Republic of China
(391 060, 6.5 per cent), India (343 070, 5.7 per cent) and Vietnam
(212 070, 3.5 per cent). Overall, the proportion of overseas-born
residents from European countries of birth is declining, while the
proportion of migrants coming from Asia and Africa is increasing. (Source:Dept of Immigration & Border Protection; 2011)
The starting dates in the rest of Britain are as follows:
- Scotland: 1st January 1855;
- Northern Ireland: 1864, but many Irish records were destroyed
in 1922 and during WW1; and
- Isle of Man: births 1849,deaths in
1878.
The beginning dates of civil registration in some other places are:
- Ireland, Republic of: 1864, but many Irish records were destroyed
in 1922; and during WW1 the government destroyed more.
- Canada: problematic & variable, province by province. For example, in Ontario, from 1908 a new act made the system more reliable:
"In Ontario, Canada, for example, the compulsory civil registration of births dated from the province’s Vital Statistics Act of 1869, but the law was widely ignored for some years. In 1930, the eminent demographer Robert R. Kuczynski cited the 1865-1895 period of birth registrations as a “thirty year’s war against passive indifference’’ and the 1896-1920 as one of “slow progress.” He estimated that provincial birth registrations were only two-thirds complete for the 1875-1895 period and a maximum of 85 percent complete for any year in the 1896-1919 period. Kuczynski also judged that registration was“more complete from 1913 on” and “at least 90 percent” complete by 1920." ("Incomplete Registration of Births in Civil Systems; The Example of Ontario Canada; 1900-1960";by George Emery, Department of History; University of Ontario).
It is beneficial to realise that even where there were systems in place, they did not get total support.
- India: registration of births was not compulsory and very few are entered in
the records. Registrations do not generally appear until the 1920s. A review of India's system was conducted in 2010 and the level of registration at that date is shown here by state, at page 5, on a map of the states. A plain list of states is at page 15. A good source of births of Brits born in India is the census back in Britain (starting from 1841), where they show up with their families back "home". There was a recorder for each family, in a tribe-specific village; you just have to ask around the village(see TV series: "Who Do You Think You Are?").
The best source is the British Library’s "British in India Collection" and records from FIBIS (Families in British India Society).
- New Zealand: from
1848,civil records cover a large part of the population and the records are indexed. They are easily accessible at BDMHistoricalRecords.DIA.GOVT.NZ and Ancestry.com.au and contain a rich amount of
genealogical information. Evolution of the record quality is shown here. Registration was not compulsory until 1856. Historical records can be printed out with more information.
Parish Records
Returning to the UK example, beyond 1837 in Britain (meaning away from now), researchers largely resort to 'parish records' (church records; mainly by the Church of England); and not all of these are online! The principles which apply in Britain apply to most localities in the old British empire. FamilySearch has digitised billions of these records and made them available online. Nevertheless, beyond these registration dates, there are still historical gaps in the records, not within the control of data service providers; that is: whether the suite of records is online or not, there are gaps in the original data. Here are some of them in the UK:
- Closer than 1899 all churches could record their own official
data
- Closer than 1811 the
UK Parochial Registers Act required the state Church to use specially
printed registers, not just 'rule up' pages, with separate books for baptisms, marriages and burials.
Baptismal entries were to now include the names, address and occupation or non-working 'status' of the parents (e.g. "domestic duties"). This format became the basis of the later civil registration, with financial penalties for non-compliance. In the previous parish record coverage there is not as much 'compliance' in providing the information. Burial entries
in the register were now required to include age and place of residence of the deceased, which is a big help to researchers.
- before 1811 the parish records were not as informative: that is 'somewhat abbreviated'; by not including the mother's surname. Fortunately, in 1711 "...an Act had been passed requiring that proper
register books be used with ruled and numbered pages" (refer JoinerMarriageIndex.Co.Uk, for history of marriages), so from this date there was at least improvement in the presentation of the information; improving the organisation and legibility of the record, but not necessarily the content!
- from 1783-1793 the 1783 Stamp Act called for a duty of 3d to be paid for every entry of a birth,
christening, marriage or burial. This acted as a disincentive to register, so events went missing.
- from 1754 marriage
rules were tightened up. Marriage in England was
required by Act of Parliament 1754 to be performed by a clergyman of the Church of England, and only in a
Church of England parish church or public chapel. Catholics and non-conformists were required to marry in the Church of England, which logically created a disincentive. Such restrictive
requirements led to manipulation of the system. The parish of the
bride was usually recorded; but often the groom's parish was omitted, and, due to complex rules, neither the bride nor the groom may have married in their home parish! Instead, meeting eligibility in another parish, by using a temporary address.
The Act needs deserves more explanation:
"...known as Hardwicke's
Marriage Act, 1754 [ it ] affected England and Wales,
[and] came into force from March 25th 1754. The Act stated that a marriage could be
solemnised only in a parish church or public chapel after the publication of
banns [public announcement of a proposed marriage] OR by a special licence issued by the Bishop of the diocese [if there were grounds for relaxation of the rules; for example: they wanted a quick marriage]. Banns books and
marriage registers were required to be kept separate from the books containing
baptisms and burials. With the exception of Jews and Quakers, marriages
were required to be performed by [clergy] of the Church of England. Parties
under the age of 21 (minors) required the consent of parents, or guardians, to
marry. Those embracing the Catholic faith or other non-conformists [Protestants and Jews] married in
the Church of England and [then] their own chapels/churches; just to be sure the
marriage was recognised as 'legal' ". (quote).
So, for many years in England and Wales, until 1899, only the Church of England had the right to record official
data. From 1899 the "Non-Conforming" Churches could send their records
directly to the General Registry Office in London. In August, 2013
with historic celebration Ancestry.com put the private Registers of these other Churches online : England & Wales, Non-Conformist and Non-Parochial Registers, 1567-1970 .
So if you could not find your person in the Church of England registers, this is where they may be found.
- before 1754 there were parish registers but inconsistencies in a particular event's coverage (like details of a marriage),supplied on an individual record, dependent upon the diligence of the individual Parish Clerks.
- Another inconsistency is that:
- from 1087 to 1155 the English year began on 1 January,
- from 1155 to 1751 on 25 March!
- in 1752 it was moved back to 1 January.
So you need to remember this when doing searches. In the British Empire (including the American colonies), Wednesday 2 September 1752 was followed by Thursday 14 September 1752. Goodbye to 12 days!
- from 1694-1706 the
register entries were used as a means for a tax to raise money for a
war against France. This tax resulted in some events not being recorded
in parish registers at all, due to the individual's lack of funds to pay the tax! It created suspicions of registration laws for ever after
- from 1649-1653,
during the "English republic", there are large gaps in a newly required
'Civil Register', which placed the responsibility for the
records in the hands of appointed officers called "Parish Registers" [Registrars, meaning officers]. Marriages
were no longer to take place in a church; instead before a 'Registrar'. Hence there was a gap in the normal Parish registers. The records kept by the new parish Registrars became known as "Civil Registers" (confusing?), but many
do not survive. After the system reverted, the clergy diligently destroyed them and required re-marriage under their supervision. This time period is sometimes referred to as the
"Commonwealth gap" by family history researchers; due to the experiment with a Republic.
- from 1598, due to the 'ecclesiastical mandates' of 1598 and 1603 the Provincial Constitution of
Canterbury required that the Act of 1563 was enforced throughout the country. These re-enacted laws stated that henceforth registers were to be kept in parchment books and that all
previous entries made on sheets should be copied to the new books, and
especially all those entries since the accession of Queen Elizabeth. Clergy tended to implement only entries in the latter bracket, which led to many registers beginning
in the year 1558, rather than copied from 1538. The original paper registers from the earlier years rarely
survive. Those that do survive indicate the enormous task which faced those
transcribing early paper registers. In those parishes where the original paper
records/registers survive, additional information can often be found.
- from 1563 'Bishop's Transcripts' were introduced. Parliament passed an Act which required records were to be kept in 'great decent books of
parchment' and copies of new entries were to be
sent each month to the Diocesan Centre; administered by a Bishop, who entered them in his record. Previous entries in paper registers dating back to 1538 (less lasting)
were to be copied into the new books. This was strongly opposed by the clergy, and the Act was not enforced. Whilst some parish registers have omissions, you may find a record in the Bishop's transcripts held by the Diocese; a circumstance still standing in the 1800s, even in Western Australia (for an understanding of Church of England jurisdictions, see side panel links).
- from 1547 a fine [previously introduced] was 'toughened up'; this time the money going to 'Poor Relief'.
- from 1538 parish Registers were first ordered to be kept by a mandate of Thomas Cromwell, Vicar General of
King Henry VIII. Cromwell
ordered that every parish must keep a register and that every Sunday, the incumbent,
in the presence of the wardens, must enter all the baptisms, marriages and
burials of the previous week; or a fine would be imposed. Many parishes simply ignored it. I thought that was an Australian tradition.
Finding Relevant Parishes
In Britain, because parishes were usually large areas, except in London, it is more efficient to know the name and boundaries of the Parish in which the ancestral 'home town' of your ancestor was located. Then you can search mainly in one parish but also in adjoining parishes.
- FamilySearch
has the most easily accessed info, including maps of parishes at the relevant date.
You can even overlay boundaries for different time periods online and see what
changed! But not all parishes are documented as yet. A user-wiki operates.
- The Phillimore Atlas and Index of
Parish Registers (2003), which is available in most large libraries, shows
the pre-1832 parish boundaries in the UK.
- You can determine which parish records in the UK are relevant through the free website GENUKI (an acronym for Genealogy in UK and Ireland).
Third Informational Gap
Yes, there are more. This gap is due to the destruction of records by disaster and by vandalism.
In Ireland birth death and marriage records were destroyed by a fire
instigated by rebels in 1922 (during the Irish Civil War); and census records were destroyed by the
government, in its wisdom, to protect privacy during World War 1. In
Ireland there are ways, however, to circumvent this gap (see separate
post, this Blog, under "Family History and Genealogy Inform Each Other"
The Fourth Informational Gap
Returning to civil-registrations, few governments internationally, namely provincial and state authorities, have provided free searchable digitised images of their birth, death and marriage certificates (the ones not covered by privacy laws), online.They mostly only supply indexes.
"I thought all the records were online!" Mmmm. Common misconception.
For now, most governments see the withholding of images as a source of revenue. So the online information that enthusiasts are often excited about is largely "indexes", similar to the list of names at the beginning of the Death Notices section, in the local newspaper. But with a bit more info. Another post explains what indexes are, and the difficulties of relying on their data alone (see Post about record "indexes"). The benefit of obtaining full certificates or images is that incidental information can not only confirm you have the right person, but also provide extra data which allows you to prove the previous generation (names of parents) and find the next generation (occupation of father; place of birth -- not just district).
There is another source of civil-registration information: "transcripts". Some online providers like FamilySearch provide these intermediate "records"; situated between index and certificate. The history of transcripts, however, is that there can be mistakes in these, due to human error. So they are best used with care.
The Fifth Informational Gap
There are still microfiche parish records 'out there' (subject to the caveats below), in some dusty, county archives; OR, in the case of FamilySearch International, in high-tech microfiche storage vaults, awaiting digitisation.
There ARE transcripts of a number of county parish records online (called "Parish Clerks"), and these are increasing as we speak,
but you would do well to obtain confirmation of transcript details from the original; off-line. Sometimes the transcripts do not include small pieces of helpful information, like the "Occupation of Father", which are well worth getting.
"Bricks and Mortar" Source
This means that to see the full content of a government or parish record, that is the information contained in an image of a birth, death or marriage certificate, you may well need to resort to a "bricks and mortar" source, offline. You may, however, be able to purchase the image online, and have it sent to you electronically.
Still sceptical of there being more records offline? Otherwise, why would FamilySearch and Ancestry.com be cooperating to digitise billions of images, or at least transcripts; and upload them? Consider this press release in 2013:
(Quote) "PROVO, Utah, Sept. 5, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Ancestry.com and FamilySearch International (online at FamilySearch.org),
the two largest providers of family history resources, announced today
an agreement that is expected to make approximately 1 billion global
historical records available online and more easily accessible to the
public for the first time. With this long-term strategic agreement, the
two services will work together with the archive community over the next
five years to digitise, index and publish these records from the
FamilySearch vault."
"The access to the global collection of records marks a major investment
in international content as Ancestry.com continues to invest in
expanding family history interest in its current markets and worldwide.
Ancestry.com expects to invest more than $60 million over the next five
years in the project alongside thousands of hours of volunteer efforts
facilitated by FamilySearch."
(Unquote)
The Sixth Informational Gap
This gap is a lack of corresponding records to ensure your single-record online is in fact the correct one. The standard for researchers (refer Nick Barrett) is that you should have at least one primary or secondary record which corroborates your allegation.
It is common to find persons with the same full name. Nick Barrett ("Who Do You Think You Are, Encyclopedia of Genealogy"; HarperCollinsPublishers" (sic); 2008; p53) makes the point:
"Just because the name and date appear to be right doesn't mean you have found the right person.
Good researchers do make mistakes. Excellent researchers only put data into a tree when they have two corroborating sources (WDYTYA; Barrett; p53); at least one of them a 'direct source' (historical or official record), and they provide citations for those sources.
Otherwise
they write up the
evidence collected thus far, and note that 'the jury is still out'.
"Better
information may come along in the future".
Sceptical? First, consider the status of Ancestry.com:
"Ancestry.com is the world's largest online family history resource with
approximately 2.7 million paying subscribers across all its websites.
More than 11 billion records have been added to the Ancestry.com sites
and users have created more than 50 million family trees containing more
than 5 billion profiles. In addition to its flagship site www.ancestry.com,
the company operates several Ancestry international websites along with
a suite of online family history brands, including Archives.com,
Fold3.com and Newspapers.com, all designed to empower people to
discover, preserve and share their family history."
So, when Ancestry.com acknowledges the challenges of resolving competing candidates, it is good advice:
Quote:
"If your ancestor has a common surname [for example], it is important to keep patience and perseverance in spades [idiom]. In effect, you will need to become acquainted with each family so well that you know which individuals come from which lines when you spot them during research. This is likely to be an arduous sorting project, so researching this line at the same time as another [easier one] may help you avoid possible discouragement.
For example, let us suppose you have two different lines, Smith (where you struggle to make progress) and Wahlquist (where you find success more easily). After you get to a point in your Smith line research that you no longer feel like continuing, you might consider switching your research to focus on the Wahlquist line for the next day or two. After you make more progress on the Wahlquist line, the success you have found might help you be willing to continue your Smith family research again."
"Technique"
"Often it is possible that a brother or sister has their name on record somewhere, even if your specific ancestor does not. If
you find someone you know for certain is a sibling of your ancestor,
you may be able to use their information to help fill in gaps.
For
instance, let us say you know that Sara is 3 years younger than Ezra.
You find a marriage certificate for Sara in 1807, showing that she was
married in Chatham County, North Carolina. Since most individuals did
not move often in this area at this point in history, it stands to reason that a high probability exists for her siblings to also be located in Chatham county."
"...we recommend proceeding by first gathering all you can about this ancestor and all
of his relatives in the 1850 and later records. This includes
information for siblings, their spouses, and families and children of
this generation. Build a wide foundation from what you know before going
into this difficult time period [1850s, USA, but a principle applicable elsewhere]. The wider the foundation, the easier
it will be to go further back and know you have the right individuals."
"Continue
following the census records for this person until they disappear. When
you come to the generation when that person is a child and you are unsure about his father’s name, gather all of the records on individuals with that surname in that county.
(In our example, then, when we come to the generation where John Smith
is a child but we cannot find his father's name, we would gather all
records for individuals with the Smith surname in Chatham county, North
Carolina.)
(http://help.ancestry.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/637/kw/exact%20search)
(Unquote)
This technique (above) informs any research situation where there are multiple, indistinguishable candidates. You can read the full article here.
What is Effective Genealogy?
So, under these conditions, how do you do effective genealogy?
It
can be exhilarating to identify a record, albeit rather brief, for
someone you are absolutely sure, for some reason, is your ancestor!
Let's call this "generation No 1". Perhaps he has a rare middle-name or
even several, middle names. So you skimp on the rest of the information; the marriage place in the marriage details; the town born, the day and month; and just settle for the "District", taken off the civil, birth registry index (what's an index? - Refer to another post in this blog). You don't find out the month he died, so you resist looking up the Death and Funeral Notices in the newspapers, which could have given you exact date of death; where he was currently living; where he was originally from; the names of family and relatives, by groups; when and where he was buried; and corroborative data from the cemetery, including name of wife, age, place of birth; where living; and relatives in same grave.
Then, when you look for the next generation, generation No minus-1, you realise there are no civil registration records. Your spirits rise, however, when you find an early census record containing generation No minus-1, and the preceding generation, generation No minus-2; still showing in the census, even though there was no census in their youth; which to a degree bridges the pre-civil-registration void. This is fantastic! In the census you glean the names of the generation No minus-1
and generation No minus-2; where they lived; where they were born; and
their occupations. From this information you also see some possible
siblings living nearby; and their details.
So
you go looking in the parish records which are even briefer than the
civil records, and you are delighted to find in parish records the exact
name of the generation No minus-1 and minus-2 ancestors, found in the census; in the right birth county or district, at the right time! This gives you the christening record, with the names of parents, where christened (which you assume is where they lived), and you say: "This is so great!
Unfortunately, in
generation No minus-3, there was a great ancestor who had a number of
children, and in deference to his 'greatness', a number of grandchildren
(generation No minus-2) were named after him. As generation No minus-2
did not move very far from their ancestral district, the villages in
that county became littered with a number of generation No minus-2 persons who had the same name; and the same names still survived in generations following.
And alas, because you did not know the exact village (merely the District), the exact birth date (merely the year); and the exact siblings
(could have got from newspaper; whereas census is only a 'snap-shot' in
time, and therefore incomplete), you picked the wrong person in the
census. Undeterred you found a matching wife (also the wrong person;
because the census record did not supply a middle name; which could have been found in a newspaper notice or a will); and in your continuing haste constructed a generation without a marriage certificate ("the census said they were man and wife"), and therefore did not learn where the couple lived at
the time of their marriage and therefore, most likely the birthplace of their eldest child; all because you allege you 'have the evidence in the
census'. On you go, constructing the wrong family tree; in the wrong
village; passing on the wrong information to all your relatives; who
continue the mistake for generations to come; visiting the wrong graves;
searching out the wrong cousins; and generating cross-ocean-visits to
the the wrong ancestral home.
You wouldn't be the first person to say: "If only I had known!" (see video)
Perhaps
you would like to learn more techniques of well-grounded genealogy?
Well, that cannot all be taught here, but there are other posts in this blog. Where
do we begin? Scroll down until a topic appeals to you. Perhaps: "Beware the Pitfalls". This post is intended to be read in sequence after "The 'Big Picture' on Family Research".
Footnote:
Other Posts in this series are:
