Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Boards

Quick Search

Single word search

Tools

Findmypast DNA Banner

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Cambridge in Norfolk!!!!!

Login to Add Reply Watch This
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Chris from Kent

Chris from Kent Report 12 Oct 2003 16:09

In the 1881 census Matilda Holland says her birthplace was Cambridge, England and aged 33 Ten years later in 1891 she says her birthplace was Norfolk, Gorleston and aged 42 My geography not that good but I didn't think Norfolk and Cambridge were same.

Carol

Carol Report 12 Oct 2003 16:30

I think they are next door to each other, so the boundaries may have changed.

Chris from Kent

Chris from Kent Report 12 Oct 2003 16:32

Thanks Carol

Helen

Helen Report 12 Oct 2003 16:37

Gorleston is now a suburb of Great Yarmouth, the Suffolk border is about 5 miles away (according to my UK Road Atlas!) Don't think Gt Yarmouth has ever been classed as Suffolk though, although I'm sure somebody may put me right.

Chris from Kent

Chris from Kent Report 12 Oct 2003 17:07

Thanks Helen, and Thanks Roger, Ive just had a look at the 1881 census - at the moment I don't know what to think. Chris

Janet

Janet Report 12 Oct 2003 17:42

You said in your first message that you had found these people in 1881, but the date on the marriage certificate didn't tally. Does it tally with the ones I found for you in the 1891? If they do then the latter ones are correct. If not, then goodness knows, perhaps there's a third set out there somewhere. Jan.

Chris from Kent

Chris from Kent Report 12 Oct 2003 19:23

Jan The dates agree in the 1881 & 1891 you sent me. The marriage said he was 20 but I think he might have been telling porkies he was only 18. Will find out more when I get his birth certificate. Thanks again Chris