Genealogy Chat

Mistranscribing still goes on. When on a visit to the family records office, I checked for my marriage details - to get the GRO number - incase i ever needed to order replacement. I found my name correct - but my husband's surname (and now of course mine) has been noted as CORMISH and not CORNISH. I have contacted the GRO as to how this can be corredted. Liz

My mums maiden name (she thought) was GALLAGHER. When we first started our tree, she gave me her fathers full name and date of birth. I went along to our local Register Office and order the certificate for Christopher Gallagher, with his correct date of birth. I duly got the certificate, confirming what my mum had told me about her grandparents. A while after, when I was at the Records Office, I had a quick look for my grandfather, Christopher, on their listings; nowhere to be found! This is odd, I though, but carried on looking all around, in a few different quarter to be sure; still no sign of him. Very puzzled by now, I looked all the way through the 'G's'. Eventually, I found a Christopher GOLLAKER in the right quarter and area. When I got home, I phoned the GRO and asked them to check for me. They replied quickly, confirming that there was not a Christopher GALLAGHER, but there was a Christopher GOLLAKER, with the right parent details etc. I went back to the local Register Office and they told me that it was just a mistake, and that the person had written the name in which my request had been made!! This didn't matter so much, as Christophers father had been registered as GALLAGHER and then my mum had been registered as a GALLAGHER, but imagine the confusion if my mum was the first GALLAGHER in her line, and the rest before her had been GOLLAKER! I would never have got anywhere!! The only thing I can think of for a reason is that my great grandmother was from Garston, Liverpool and must have had a strong scouse accent. Added to the fact that she could not read and write, I suppose GOLLAKER from GALLAGHER is not a million miles away - but it could have been!!

You have the church on the Certificate, so if you phone or write to the history centre that holds them they could send you a copy from the fiche. As you have the date and place then they should not take to long searching, not sure what they will charge but could be £25 an hour so best to ask. The copy will be of the Church records and would be more accurate then the one's kept for the indexing as that was a copy. I have found that the ages vary from the church records to the ones you get from the indexing. Anything from 1 to 5 years. And in the case of my ggg grandfathers death 11 years. So I think they copied someone else's age. Irene

Most historical church registers are in county archives by now - in order to keep them in a safer environment (risk of damp, etc, in church). You can sometimes work out what's where if you use A2A. Christine

Sarah - sorry for delay in replying. Thanks for tracing the vicar. I don't think I'll need the snippet from the Times, but at least it proves I was right about Burstow. (I did try googling him but had no luck.) Kate.

Ted, You've made a good point there! I've always thought how easy it will be for future generations to research their tree's with all the census's (or is the plural censi?!) being online. It will be a nightmare. I've also bought a copied cert and for ages was looking for a relative N. Sandals . It took me a long time to realise it was a relative I already knew about W. Sandals! Oh well... it keeps us on our toes!

And only this week I find my Gt Gt Gt Aunt giving birth to a fatherless child at the age of just 13 in 1862.. Nothing new under the sun. Marjorie.

My husbands g grandfather Arthur Hinton born abt 1848 Ingatestone. That's all I had from the 1881 census. Won't go into details of how difficult it was getting just there but I look for ages for this Arthur Hinton, but no luck. Did find a Marriage for Miriam Harwood to Arthur Wells 7 years before she had her 1st child (that was living). 1901 census said London City. After many years hunting I did find Miriam with her children and sister in law, Hooray got a lead at last, found his spinster sisters birth and got the parents from that. Then started to check the other ealier censuses. After 3 years I found him Born Ebenezer Arthur Hinton, Finsbury, 1847, father Henry Hinton Iron Monger. So now I have his parents and where born his family from 1841-1901 in the censuses (still missing 1891). But one thing still puzzles me. The marriage to Arthur Wells, father Henry Wells Iron Monger. They are the same age as well. Could this be a mistake on the part of copying from the orignal to the registers book and then to London, as I have both copies from Winchester and London, I have never found the marriage to Ebenezer Arthur Hinton. One day I will get to the PRO and check the army records for, Ebenezer, Arthur Hinton or Wells. I still think they are all sitting up there at a big table laughing at us all, then saying lets give them a clue and see if they see it. Time will tell. Irene

Ted I don't know about your tree but I already have plenty of illegitimacy/multiple mariages/ inter-marrying/people claiming to be married on censuses when they're not/lies about name/ages etc!

Heres a thought. Just think how difficult its goona be for family historians in 100 years time. Ayong girl age 14, still at school today, has a baby, she doesnt know the father. she gets a council house, leaves school without a proper education, lives off income support, the father doesnt support the child, or probably doesnt know the child is his. the girl reaches 15, met another guy for one week, has another baby, gets more income support, the boy or man doesnt support the child, the childs registration doesnt show the father, as was the first child. the girl reaches 16, meets anothe guy for 2 days this time, result another child, gets more income support, more family allowance, again the father doesnt support the child, probably doesnt know if its his son not as shes beeen going out with someone else. On and on till she got 6 kids to 6 different fathers none of whos names are on the birth certificate. Then one day in 2130 a boy decides to look for his dad, or his mom? certs from the GRO dont have any info about his dad, but suddenly finds him g/g/grandmother had a load of kids, all without dads. And you think we have a hard time with certs. Does that make you think?

I realise I may be lowering the tone slightly. But there was this young monk, who had been sent to the archives to help copy the testaments etc, and one day he said to the chief scribe, ''I see that we are all copying from copies''..... ''supposing there was an error, it would get passed on for ever'' 'Ah my son, said the Chief Scribe, I will go check!! '' three days later he had still not returned, so the young scribe went looking, and found him, on his knees Banging his head on the wall saying ....'' IT says CELIBRATE!!!!' forgive me, Bob

Thanks everybody for your input. I forgot to say earlier on, that the vicar's name had been copied out very neatly as 'Octavius Freid Oven'. That can't be right, though I must admit the original is hard to read so I'll let them off on that one. In the same bundle of certificates was a handwritten copy of my great-grandfather's birth certificate, of which I have a typed copy stating that a clerical error in the name of his birthplace had been corrected in 1918 - a year after he died. As his wife and both his parents were dead by then and his children were very young at the time, and probate had already been granted on his small estate, I had puzzled for a long time over why on earth somebody would have had his birth certificate corrected then, but the handwritten copy gives the correction date as 1912, which is much easier to understand. I had visions of the 'Cold Certificates Squad' looking through old certificates that nobody needed and correcting any errors they found! Kate.

I have had a problem to as gt.gdm maiden name wrongly spelt. When I pointed it out and I asked for a corrected copy of the certificate the registrar said they could not do that as they had to copy it as shown in their records. Somewhere along the line it had been spelt wrong. Also on a marriage certificate father's occupation a furrier, sister's marriage certifcate around the same time and in the census return father was a refiner. After searching throught the census for a furrier I thought I had the wrong chap when I found a sugar refiner.Nice when you get the original marriage certificate from LMA. Good Luck Irene

I got a copy of my 4xgrandparents marriage certificate about 4 years ago and filed it. It was only when I obtained the 41 and 61 Derbyshire census on disc that I started looking into them with an real effort and found a lot of children with them in 41 that couldn't possibly be all theirs. When I queried the Batchelor/Spinster status on their marriage certificate, I was told 'So sorry, it should say Widower for Joseph' so I then had to hunt for a 1st marriage for him and a mother for these children. Lou

There are errors or white lies on the originals of my brother's, parents' and grandparents' marriage certificates. I have seen marriage registers where the vicar muddled the surnames of the fathers. Many of my early marriage certificates were handwritten and so far as possible I have supplemented them with copies from the registers. A paper maker (feasible, as there were papermakers in the area) turns out to be a rope maker, a gasman (born probably in the 1770s) was a yeoman. All I can do is be grateful once I've spotted the error for recognising a new way in which something may be mistranscribed.

I started off with a 1926 typed copy from Somerset House for an 1872 wedding which gave the bride's maiden name as Goddard and only several months later found it should have been Gorrod.

Kate, Same thing has happened to me ... when getting certs from the local Registrar. Fortunately, I didn't start working from copies in the 'family archive' .... Interesting you also started research when the 1901 Census came online, wasn't the problem annoying ... I had access early on before it all went pear-shaped - long enought to get the bug - so just carried on 'manually' whilst they sorted the technology out! Regs Jane

I started out with family history when the 1901 census first went online, (and then took it up again when they actually got it working!) initially to try to solve a sensitive and potentially shocking family mystery. Because I was only trying to find out about a few specific people and wasn't sure what I might find out, I didn't ask all my relatives for their information, documents, etc. at the beginning, as we are always advised to do. It actually took about a year to solve the mystery, but in the meantime I had been well and truly bitten by the family tree bug! And had amassed a folder full of certificates, another full of wills, and lots of notes from censuses, etc. So, to cut to the chase, this morning I received a bumper bundle of certificates which my mother had found. My grandmother had collected them during the course of her family tree research a few decades ago. Among them is a handwritten 'certified copy of an entry of marriage' from the GRO, dated 9th August 1978. The actual marriage took place in 1852 (John Bristow and Elizabeth Mary Ferrier). Registration district was Reigate, Surrey. My copy of this certificate was one of the first I sent off for from the GRO, almost exactly a year ago. It looks like a photocopy of the GRO's original entry, and I had always read the place of marriage as 'Burstow in the County of Surrey', but the copied-out version has 'Plaistow in the County of Surrey'. Try as I might, I can't make it look like Plaistow. And as far as I can find out, there is Plaistow in East London and a village called Plaistow in Sussex, but none in Surrey near Reigate anyway. Also, the copied-out version gives the groom's father's name as 'Andrew James Bristow' and one of the witnesses as 'R. M. Salter', but even in those novice days a year ago I could see it said 'Robert James Bristow' and 'Robt. Salter'. And we thought the ancestry census transcriptions were bad! Surely if somebody worked at the GRO copying out certificates they should be better at deciphering old handwriting than that? I am just so glad I didn't start off with my grandmother's collection of certificates, because I can't imagine how long it would have taken me to realise that this certificate was mistranscribed. It certainly seems to have sent her off in totally the wrong direction, because with the certificates I have two pages of her notes summarizing what must have been a lot of work researching a bunch of very illustrious people who as far as I can see had no connection with our family at all! At least she didn't get far enough to find out about the family mystery, which my grandfather never even mentioned until after her death, because he didn't want her to know about it. I suppose that we can thank the GRO for that! Got to go out for a while but will be interested to see people's thoughts. Kate.

See below