WEBVTT 00:00:06.229 --> 00:00:09.109 Hello everybody and welcome to Family Tree Talk, 00:00:09.330 --> 00:00:11.869 your favourite family history podcast. My name's 00:00:11.869 --> 00:00:13.849 Helen Tovey and I'm editor of Family Tree and 00:00:13.849 --> 00:00:17.190 with me, yes, as usual, is Nathan Ward. Hello 00:00:17.190 --> 00:00:19.989 there. Hi Nathan, it's good to see you. Yeah, 00:00:20.010 --> 00:00:23.910 you too. How's it going? Very well, yes. I can 00:00:23.910 --> 00:00:25.829 hardly dare tell you what I haven't been doing, 00:00:25.890 --> 00:00:29.789 but yes, it's been going well. Are you a bad 00:00:29.789 --> 00:00:33.359 lass? I'm not bad, but I'm definitely off -piste, 00:00:33.539 --> 00:00:37.780 yes. Off -piste. Yeah. Does that mean you're 00:00:37.780 --> 00:00:40.500 doing things that you shouldn't be doing or you 00:00:40.500 --> 00:00:43.039 just haven't been doing things? It doesn't matter 00:00:43.039 --> 00:00:44.659 if I do them, but then I'm not doing what I said 00:00:44.659 --> 00:00:46.259 I would do and I'm not doing what I thought I 00:00:46.259 --> 00:00:48.939 would be doing. Is that whatever? Well, welcome 00:00:48.939 --> 00:00:51.679 to the world of family history. That's exactly 00:00:51.679 --> 00:00:56.359 how it works. How about you? I think I've got 00:00:56.359 --> 00:00:59.140 quite a lot to talk about, to be honest. I don't 00:00:59.140 --> 00:01:01.509 know where I'm going to begin. I've got the two 00:01:01.509 --> 00:01:03.310 angles here. Let's go for the first angle. So 00:01:03.310 --> 00:01:08.189 I got an email from a listener last week, a lady 00:01:08.189 --> 00:01:11.209 called Liz. And she's like, here's a bunch of 00:01:11.209 --> 00:01:14.189 images. Can you please get them to Nathan? And 00:01:14.189 --> 00:01:15.609 I was like, OK, what's this? I wonder what this 00:01:15.609 --> 00:01:21.689 is. I opened it up and it was Alexander McKay's 00:01:21.689 --> 00:01:26.540 divorce document. wow um it honestly it brought 00:01:26.540 --> 00:01:28.700 tears to my eyes i was like what what a community 00:01:28.700 --> 00:01:32.900 we've got here it's i was so touched somebody's 00:01:32.900 --> 00:01:35.099 gone to the is it national archives they must 00:01:35.099 --> 00:01:37.500 have gone to yeah liz has gone to the national 00:01:37.500 --> 00:01:41.000 archives and she's photographed the documents 00:01:41.000 --> 00:01:44.459 for me so i've literally got all of the details 00:01:44.459 --> 00:01:48.079 of his divorce It's just amazing. Literally, 00:01:48.299 --> 00:01:49.920 honestly, I was in tears. Well, not tears, but 00:01:49.920 --> 00:01:53.099 I welled up quite a bit. It was so touching. 00:01:53.200 --> 00:01:54.700 I'm so thrilled. So thank you for that, Liz. 00:01:54.739 --> 00:01:57.420 That's amazing. Liz had to really persist to 00:01:57.420 --> 00:01:59.439 get these records through to us. She had to try 00:01:59.439 --> 00:02:01.560 about three times. It was a bit of a struggle. 00:02:01.719 --> 00:02:05.120 So persistent and amazing on every front. Properly 00:02:05.120 --> 00:02:07.000 amazing. Had no clue what it was going to be. 00:02:07.640 --> 00:02:10.620 It's just fantastic. I must confess I've not 00:02:10.620 --> 00:02:12.400 properly looked through them yet because I got 00:02:12.400 --> 00:02:15.960 sidetracked on my John Hearn stuff, but... It's 00:02:15.960 --> 00:02:17.900 all there for me to look at. How cool is that? 00:02:18.819 --> 00:02:21.280 So maybe we can go through those documents next 00:02:21.280 --> 00:02:24.620 time. I'd love that. That'd be really, really 00:02:24.620 --> 00:02:26.560 fascinating. I've never seen divorce documents 00:02:26.560 --> 00:02:29.340 before. I don't really understand them. And yeah, 00:02:29.400 --> 00:02:31.240 that'd be cool to look through. So thank you 00:02:31.240 --> 00:02:35.020 for that. Thanks for making me cry. It's brilliant. 00:02:35.139 --> 00:02:36.719 What a community though. They're fabulous, aren't 00:02:36.719 --> 00:02:40.840 they? Really outstanding help. That's definitely 00:02:40.840 --> 00:02:43.949 above and beyond. We don't deserve or expect 00:02:43.949 --> 00:02:46.150 any help at all. But to get help like that is 00:02:46.150 --> 00:02:48.169 just next level, isn't it? It really is. Next 00:02:48.169 --> 00:02:50.189 level is the exact phrase I was thinking. Yeah, 00:02:50.210 --> 00:02:54.110 that's brilliant. So, yeah, what do you reckon? 00:02:54.409 --> 00:02:56.889 Maybe next podcast we'll look into those documents. 00:02:57.270 --> 00:02:59.509 Yeah, yeah. And it sounds, I mean, it sounds 00:02:59.509 --> 00:03:03.729 so fortunate. Off the top of my head, the divorce 00:03:03.729 --> 00:03:05.750 records at the National Archives only go until, 00:03:05.870 --> 00:03:10.689 I think it's like sometime in the 1930s. So it's 00:03:10.689 --> 00:03:13.780 very fortunate. that your ancestor's record's 00:03:13.780 --> 00:03:15.419 there. I think it's not something you can go, 00:03:15.520 --> 00:03:17.520 oh, ancestor got divorced, head to National Archives, 00:03:17.659 --> 00:03:19.979 definitely find him. What year did you just say? 00:03:20.460 --> 00:03:24.740 I think 1937. All right, because this says 1932. 00:03:25.520 --> 00:03:29.800 Okay, his record's 1932. Yeah. Yeah, but I don't 00:03:29.800 --> 00:03:31.719 know the year. You just made me say something 00:03:31.719 --> 00:03:33.800 that might be wrong. Anyway, I think basically 00:03:33.800 --> 00:03:36.099 you can't go to the National Archives and just 00:03:36.099 --> 00:03:37.400 assume you're going to get a divorce record. 00:03:37.759 --> 00:03:42.319 It's... Fortunate that your ancestor fell within 00:03:42.319 --> 00:03:45.719 those. It is, it is. Yeah. Very cool. Very, very 00:03:45.719 --> 00:03:50.259 cool. So going back to my research, if you remember 00:03:50.259 --> 00:03:54.219 last time, I was looking at John Hearn, who is 00:03:54.219 --> 00:03:58.639 my fourth time's great grandparent. I always 00:03:58.639 --> 00:04:00.460 have to pause when I say which times they are. 00:04:00.580 --> 00:04:03.580 Anyway, fourth time's great grandparent. And 00:04:03.580 --> 00:04:07.039 I found his marriage to Elizabeth Thing. And 00:04:07.039 --> 00:04:09.569 then there was issues with duplicates. Being 00:04:09.569 --> 00:04:13.169 created. I'll quickly go over that. I literally 00:04:13.169 --> 00:04:15.629 just went away after the last podcast and just 00:04:15.629 --> 00:04:19.069 merged the two from the one that looked like 00:04:19.069 --> 00:04:22.589 the main one. And that worked fine. So now she's 00:04:22.589 --> 00:04:27.149 my direct descendant. Descendant? Ancestor. Ancestor. 00:04:27.149 --> 00:04:30.029 I am the descendant. Yeah, so that's all sorted. 00:04:30.750 --> 00:04:33.790 So within that, there were mysteries of where 00:04:33.790 --> 00:04:37.029 the heck was Elizabeth on the 1851 because she 00:04:37.029 --> 00:04:39.829 wasn't with her husband and her children. Other 00:04:39.829 --> 00:04:44.209 mysteries were finding out details about John 00:04:44.209 --> 00:04:48.750 Hearn's first marriage to Jane Scopes. And then 00:04:48.750 --> 00:04:51.949 there were other things of a potential child, 00:04:52.069 --> 00:04:55.889 James Hearn, who should potentially be from Jane 00:04:55.889 --> 00:05:01.339 Scopes. And then another son. John Hearn, who 00:05:01.339 --> 00:05:03.500 should be from Elizabeth, but wasn't with them 00:05:03.500 --> 00:05:09.920 on the 1951. 1851. 1851, sorry. I can't believe 00:05:09.920 --> 00:05:13.000 I'm so far back in time. How cool is that? 1851. 00:05:14.019 --> 00:05:17.540 So they were my mysteries. Spoiler alert, I've 00:05:17.540 --> 00:05:21.819 only solved maybe one of them. So I've got a 00:05:21.819 --> 00:05:26.459 few questions for you. One, John Hearn's death. 00:05:27.100 --> 00:05:30.160 I found a document for it saying he died in 1874 00:05:30.160 --> 00:05:36.300 at the age of 74. So his name matches, his age 00:05:36.300 --> 00:05:40.040 matches, the location matches. There's nothing 00:05:40.040 --> 00:05:43.839 else on that document that ties him to anyone 00:05:43.839 --> 00:05:49.600 or anything on my tree. Yeah, I have actually 00:05:49.600 --> 00:05:51.519 done a naughty and I've pressed yes, it's correct, 00:05:51.639 --> 00:05:54.779 which I don't normally do. Interesting. So what 00:05:54.779 --> 00:05:57.279 is the document then? Is it just a death register 00:05:57.279 --> 00:06:01.399 entry? Yeah. Okay. Well, so that's easy then. 00:06:01.480 --> 00:06:05.220 So you've got these brief details which look 00:06:05.220 --> 00:06:07.959 as though they match. There's a thing that I 00:06:07.959 --> 00:06:09.600 always like to do to find out how many other 00:06:09.600 --> 00:06:13.420 John Hearns. So if he died in his age 74, he 00:06:13.420 --> 00:06:15.860 died in 1874, he was born in 1800, we're going 00:06:15.860 --> 00:06:18.579 to find out, even just looking from the, obviously 00:06:18.579 --> 00:06:21.579 can't go back to a national collection of birth 00:06:21.579 --> 00:06:24.649 register entries. for 1800 because for England 00:06:24.649 --> 00:06:27.089 and Wales they don't exist yet until 1837 but 00:06:27.089 --> 00:06:30.709 you could go to the 1841 census find out how 00:06:30.709 --> 00:06:33.350 many and the 1851 census find out how many John 00:06:33.350 --> 00:06:36.790 Hearns were born in 1800 search on them for those 00:06:36.790 --> 00:06:38.850 places think okay there's loads to get confused 00:06:38.850 --> 00:06:40.430 with or no there's not very many to get confused 00:06:40.430 --> 00:06:42.930 you've got your rough thing am I going to be 00:06:42.930 --> 00:06:45.029 getting confused then once you've said am I going 00:06:45.029 --> 00:06:46.470 to be getting confused if you think no I'm probably 00:06:46.470 --> 00:06:48.810 not going to be getting confused then you can 00:06:48.810 --> 00:06:51.860 go to the GRO and you can order up that Best 00:06:51.860 --> 00:06:53.639 certificate, only just for a few quid to get 00:06:53.639 --> 00:06:57.240 that JPEG. Yeah. Oh, yeah. So the G8, right, 00:06:57.319 --> 00:06:59.279 okay. This is my problem. I've spent a little 00:06:59.279 --> 00:07:01.959 bit of time away from places and I can't remember 00:07:01.959 --> 00:07:04.040 the date ranges where things work and things 00:07:04.040 --> 00:07:08.300 don't work. Like 3BMD, that only starts to work 00:07:08.300 --> 00:07:12.779 from 1837? Yeah. Where's your mark? So I can 00:07:12.779 --> 00:07:16.540 use, right, I can use GRO for that. Yes. And 00:07:16.540 --> 00:07:18.939 another thing, because the reason why that could 00:07:18.939 --> 00:07:22.250 be good, you... like death records can be a bit 00:07:22.250 --> 00:07:24.629 annoying because they're not you know birth records 00:07:24.629 --> 00:07:26.310 and marriage records they can have those other 00:07:26.310 --> 00:07:29.870 people the parents the fathers of the wedded 00:07:29.870 --> 00:07:32.610 couple all that sort of thing to help you cross 00:07:32.610 --> 00:07:34.910 ref that you've got the white person and the 00:07:34.910 --> 00:07:37.649 death records could be less helpful but hopefully 00:07:37.649 --> 00:07:41.050 with that death certificate you're going to get 00:07:41.050 --> 00:07:44.350 some information Further clues on there, just 00:07:44.350 --> 00:07:46.290 for the sake of a couple of quid, which are going 00:07:46.290 --> 00:07:48.889 to help you confirm. Could be the informant is 00:07:48.889 --> 00:07:51.430 a helpful name. You're going to be hopefully 00:07:51.430 --> 00:07:53.750 getting some helpful information to shore up 00:07:53.750 --> 00:07:55.750 the fact that that is your John Hearn's death. 00:07:56.470 --> 00:07:58.610 Right. And that's the same thing that you know. 00:07:58.709 --> 00:08:01.290 You're really good at this already. Trying to 00:08:01.290 --> 00:08:03.649 find a few pieces of information, a few sources 00:08:03.649 --> 00:08:07.290 to shore up a detail about somebody's life rather 00:08:07.290 --> 00:08:09.850 than just going on one. Because the more we have, 00:08:09.930 --> 00:08:12.420 the more confident we can feel. in ruling something 00:08:12.420 --> 00:08:16.459 in or ruling something out. Yeah. Like I said, 00:08:16.480 --> 00:08:19.660 I have actually accepted this one. It's a burial 00:08:19.660 --> 00:08:23.620 document. And I felt a bit naughty doing that. 00:08:24.439 --> 00:08:27.199 You can also look for a grave and see if there's 00:08:27.199 --> 00:08:30.779 a photo of a gravestone digitised somewhere because 00:08:30.779 --> 00:08:32.879 sometimes family graves are really helpful, aren't 00:08:32.879 --> 00:08:35.440 they? Because they all have family members recorded 00:08:35.440 --> 00:08:38.700 on there. And so if it says, John Hearn, beloved 00:08:38.700 --> 00:08:42.019 husband of, was it Elizabeth? Yeah. Anything 00:08:42.019 --> 00:08:45.419 like that, you're going to be going, that's another 00:08:45.419 --> 00:08:48.460 tick in the tick column, isn't it? Yes, that's 00:08:48.460 --> 00:08:51.519 good. Look for grave. And another thing you could 00:08:51.519 --> 00:08:54.700 do is look in the national probate calendar on 00:08:54.700 --> 00:08:57.240 Ancestry because there's a record. It's like 00:08:57.240 --> 00:08:59.000 just an index. Do you remember the ones that 00:08:59.000 --> 00:09:03.320 start from 1858, 1859? But they're quite detailed, 00:09:03.440 --> 00:09:06.159 aren't they? They have a date of death. They'll 00:09:06.159 --> 00:09:10.100 have, I think, the name of the executor and they'll 00:09:10.100 --> 00:09:12.919 have an address. that have the value of the estate, 00:09:13.039 --> 00:09:16.240 that have some clues, which can be really helpful 00:09:16.240 --> 00:09:19.200 with zero money. Yeah, that sounds good. I'll 00:09:19.200 --> 00:09:20.940 do that. That sounds really good. And that's 00:09:20.940 --> 00:09:23.460 just available within your Ancestry subscription. 00:09:24.059 --> 00:09:26.539 Yeah, that's even more brilliant. Yeah, because 00:09:26.539 --> 00:09:28.860 it's immediate and not free, but you've already 00:09:28.860 --> 00:09:32.460 paid for it. I think I accepted it because, one, 00:09:32.460 --> 00:09:36.600 I'm lazy. You're not lazy. I had my three facts, 00:09:36.700 --> 00:09:40.330 but then... The death dick fit in quite nicely 00:09:40.330 --> 00:09:45.269 with the 1841 and then the... Shush, Nathan. 00:09:45.529 --> 00:09:52.269 The 1871 and then the 1881. He was there, then 00:09:52.269 --> 00:09:54.769 he wasn't there. I know it isn't a hard fact 00:09:54.769 --> 00:09:56.490 and there could still be hundreds of Johns with 00:09:56.490 --> 00:09:58.309 that same name that died in that same time in 00:09:58.309 --> 00:10:02.429 that same vicinity. But it felt good. I just 00:10:02.429 --> 00:10:05.629 wanted a quick win. Don't judge me. I'm not judging 00:10:05.629 --> 00:10:08.610 you. And I think we do try and be really conscientious 00:10:08.610 --> 00:10:10.610 and careful on the whole, don't we? And David 00:10:10.610 --> 00:10:12.870 Annell sent back a reader question recently, 00:10:13.029 --> 00:10:15.330 and he said this is an instance of somebody being 00:10:15.330 --> 00:10:19.129 too cautious. And it's not often that we get 00:10:19.129 --> 00:10:22.169 to that extreme. And I can really relate to this 00:10:22.169 --> 00:10:24.570 person, although sometimes I'm a bit gung -ho 00:10:24.570 --> 00:10:27.049 and just go, that'll be fine, and then it isn't. 00:10:27.250 --> 00:10:30.509 But sometimes I think myself into a corner and 00:10:30.509 --> 00:10:33.399 I... don't be confident enough just to plough 00:10:33.399 --> 00:10:36.820 on and I dither about. So sometimes, you know, 00:10:36.840 --> 00:10:38.399 we're analysing things. We can always go and 00:10:38.399 --> 00:10:42.299 correct it later. Yeah, true. I think as well, 00:10:42.340 --> 00:10:45.279 I'm building a character for myself, like as 00:10:45.279 --> 00:10:48.080 a person, like, oh, as a historian, I'm really 00:10:48.080 --> 00:10:50.500 meticulous. And then it becomes like something 00:10:50.500 --> 00:10:52.480 that's hampering me because then I'm like, well, 00:10:52.519 --> 00:10:54.899 no, Nathan wouldn't do this. He's so inefficient. 00:10:55.340 --> 00:10:58.559 He'll get all the facts right. And then it does 00:10:58.559 --> 00:11:00.120 like, it holds you back a bit, doesn't it? But 00:11:00.120 --> 00:11:02.309 equally. I could just go in and press a load 00:11:02.309 --> 00:11:04.769 of buttons and have a really nonsensical tree. 00:11:04.889 --> 00:11:07.570 And that terrifies the rubbish out of me. So, 00:11:07.629 --> 00:11:09.169 right, cool. That's some good stuff for me to 00:11:09.169 --> 00:11:10.710 look for then to find a bit more about John. 00:11:11.509 --> 00:11:13.769 So that wasn't even the point anyway, but obviously 00:11:13.769 --> 00:11:15.629 these details are coming up and I just need to, 00:11:15.629 --> 00:11:20.149 is fine. So going back to his first wife, Jane 00:11:20.149 --> 00:11:26.970 Scopes, I found her birth in 1811. I then found 00:11:26.970 --> 00:11:31.690 the marriage record. for her and John in 1821. 00:11:32.049 --> 00:11:37.769 Mm -hmm. And then I found her death record in 00:11:37.769 --> 00:11:43.789 1827. Mm -hmm. That's sad, yeah. Yeah. So I need 00:11:43.789 --> 00:11:46.110 to probably look again for her death record because 00:11:46.110 --> 00:11:50.230 that'll give me a bit more context. Just to, 00:11:50.230 --> 00:11:52.210 like, you know this already because you just 00:11:52.210 --> 00:11:54.389 touched on it, you know, that magic 1837 date 00:11:54.389 --> 00:11:58.840 for English and Welsh birth. English and Welsh 00:11:58.840 --> 00:12:01.980 birth, marriage and deaths. So obviously what 00:12:01.980 --> 00:12:04.000 you're researching there is before that date. 00:12:04.159 --> 00:12:05.879 So you're going to be looking at baptism, marriages 00:12:05.879 --> 00:12:08.399 and burials, not births and deaths, which is 00:12:08.399 --> 00:12:10.259 a slightly different, but it means you're going 00:12:10.259 --> 00:12:12.259 to get a slightly different amount of information. 00:12:12.639 --> 00:12:16.259 Yeah. Right. Not the whole deal. Yeah. So does 00:12:16.259 --> 00:12:18.259 that mean I can't look for it on the GRO website? 00:12:18.759 --> 00:12:24.519 Yes. Yes, I can. Yes, I can. No. You can't. Right, 00:12:25.100 --> 00:12:28.090 okay. You can't. So this is where... You were 00:12:28.090 --> 00:12:30.690 worried about the 1841 census and I was like, 00:12:30.710 --> 00:12:33.070 it's not such a drama. There's some differences 00:12:33.070 --> 00:12:34.889 to the later censuses, but it's not a complete 00:12:34.889 --> 00:12:38.190 drama. Once you get back before 1837, again, 00:12:38.269 --> 00:12:39.870 it's not a complete drama, but you're in very 00:12:39.870 --> 00:12:42.490 different territory because you haven't got those 00:12:42.490 --> 00:12:45.230 national, those nationwide collections of birth, 00:12:45.330 --> 00:12:47.590 marriage and death indexes like the GRO that 00:12:47.590 --> 00:12:50.669 you can go and plug in a name and see what you 00:12:50.669 --> 00:12:52.590 get. So you're going to be looking for the... 00:12:52.830 --> 00:12:55.789 parish registers so if your parish registers 00:12:55.789 --> 00:12:59.509 have been digitized on ancestry and on find my 00:12:59.509 --> 00:13:00.809 past as well there's you know there's several 00:13:00.809 --> 00:13:03.029 places and you can look on family search there's 00:13:03.029 --> 00:13:04.990 some really good places to look for parish registers 00:13:04.990 --> 00:13:09.070 but they are not national collections so for 00:13:09.070 --> 00:13:12.389 one county and for one maybe one of one of those 00:13:12.389 --> 00:13:14.090 record types like the baptisms may be really 00:13:14.090 --> 00:13:16.370 comprehensively uploaded somewhere but the marriages 00:13:16.370 --> 00:13:18.490 are still partially uploaded so it's going to 00:13:18.490 --> 00:13:23.179 very much depend on where you're looking to know 00:13:23.179 --> 00:13:26.580 whether your area has been digitized and there's 00:13:26.580 --> 00:13:29.539 a really helpful thing that you can do go to 00:13:29.539 --> 00:13:32.960 family search and you can google it just family 00:13:32.960 --> 00:13:36.740 search 1851 maps and it's just a it just covers 00:13:36.740 --> 00:13:40.559 England and Wales go and put in your place name 00:13:40.559 --> 00:13:43.620 of interest and then it will you can find out 00:13:43.620 --> 00:13:45.240 the different boundaries so the parish boundaries 00:13:45.240 --> 00:13:48.419 100 boundaries the diocesan boundaries all of 00:13:48.419 --> 00:13:50.620 these things but then you're going to get it 00:13:50.620 --> 00:13:53.840 will tell you For those administrative areas, 00:13:54.419 --> 00:13:57.500 what the birth, marriage and death records, what 00:13:57.500 --> 00:14:00.320 they survived to and from. So for some places, 00:14:00.399 --> 00:14:03.220 even though officially the records should have 00:14:03.220 --> 00:14:07.000 been kept from 1538 onwards, when Thomas Cromwell 00:14:07.000 --> 00:14:08.759 said, we've got to keep these parish records. 00:14:09.039 --> 00:14:11.759 Obviously, a lot has happened in that time. You 00:14:11.759 --> 00:14:15.039 know, destruction, fire, mice, all the normal 00:14:15.039 --> 00:14:20.039 things. Lazy or drunkard. record keeping all 00:14:20.039 --> 00:14:22.700 of the there's so many reasons why records might 00:14:22.700 --> 00:14:24.740 not even exist and then you've got the next layer 00:14:24.740 --> 00:14:27.179 how even if they exist have they been digitized 00:14:27.179 --> 00:14:32.100 for your area yeah okay that leads me to kind 00:14:32.100 --> 00:14:35.399 of a similar but different question uh it might 00:14:35.399 --> 00:14:39.059 be nonsense but there are some records i'm finding 00:14:39.059 --> 00:14:42.779 on ancestry that might be like a marriage example 00:14:42.779 --> 00:14:46.799 and it'll say all the details where the marriage 00:14:46.799 --> 00:14:50.620 happened, who was involved, but there's no official 00:14:50.620 --> 00:14:53.720 document. Does that mean the official document 00:14:53.720 --> 00:14:56.139 will be scanned in at some point? How has that 00:14:56.139 --> 00:15:00.159 information got onto Ancestry if there's no actual 00:15:00.159 --> 00:15:05.860 visual? So are you looking at modern -day typed 00:15:05.860 --> 00:15:08.549 -up words when you're talking about this? So 00:15:08.549 --> 00:15:11.850 it's just a transcript. Yes. But there's no documents 00:15:11.850 --> 00:15:14.250 to go with it. Yes. So if you're looking at modern 00:15:14.250 --> 00:15:16.789 day typed up words, so it's a transcription, 00:15:17.029 --> 00:15:19.990 then it means that the record does exist somewhere. 00:15:20.049 --> 00:15:23.210 And Ancestry and lots of the websites, they are 00:15:23.210 --> 00:15:24.509 really good. They'll put a link. So it might 00:15:24.509 --> 00:15:27.929 say Shropshire Archives or it will say where 00:15:27.929 --> 00:15:31.830 the heck that transcription has come from. Yeah. 00:15:33.129 --> 00:15:34.970 So there will be a record which either you can 00:15:34.970 --> 00:15:36.710 go and track down to see whether another website 00:15:36.710 --> 00:15:39.750 has got the digitized images of those old parish 00:15:39.750 --> 00:15:41.529 registers. So they're literally great big chunky 00:15:41.529 --> 00:15:43.370 books or some of them are surprisingly skinny 00:15:43.370 --> 00:15:44.889 little books. They're all different formats because 00:15:44.889 --> 00:15:47.029 they've been kept over many, many years. Yeah. 00:15:47.090 --> 00:15:51.259 So it could be a lovely leather bound book. Scruffy 00:15:51.259 --> 00:15:53.740 and key writing. And as the records move forward 00:15:53.740 --> 00:15:55.940 in time over the centuries, they got more and 00:15:55.940 --> 00:15:57.659 more detailed with the form and stuff like that. 00:15:57.720 --> 00:15:59.980 So by the time you're looking in the early 1800s, 00:15:59.980 --> 00:16:01.980 they're pretty good. They're going to have a 00:16:01.980 --> 00:16:04.899 typed up form with handwriting filling in the 00:16:04.899 --> 00:16:09.200 gaps on the form. So they're quite easy to interpret. 00:16:10.080 --> 00:16:16.700 Right. But at a later date, will the document 00:16:16.700 --> 00:16:20.460 appear on Ancestry? Well, it just depends on, 00:16:20.480 --> 00:16:24.179 so imagine, let's say, I know Find My Past has 00:16:24.179 --> 00:16:26.500 done this a lot. So over the last few decades, 00:16:26.679 --> 00:16:29.320 Find My Past has worked really closely with the 00:16:29.320 --> 00:16:31.700 Family History Society. So Family History Societies 00:16:31.700 --> 00:16:34.620 would historically go into the local record office. 00:16:34.759 --> 00:16:37.120 They would pull down the big old beautiful register 00:16:37.120 --> 00:16:39.580 from the shelves. They would make transcriptions. 00:16:39.580 --> 00:16:42.740 So literally volunteers typing up what was saying 00:16:42.740 --> 00:16:44.679 on these. saying in these lovely old leather 00:16:44.679 --> 00:16:46.879 bound books. So then they would have typed up 00:16:46.879 --> 00:16:48.399 versions. They would have their transcriptions 00:16:48.399 --> 00:16:51.580 of the information. Sometimes the transcriptions 00:16:51.580 --> 00:16:55.139 are really full. They've made a typed version 00:16:55.139 --> 00:16:58.539 of every single word for that record. Sometimes 00:16:58.539 --> 00:17:00.500 they might just be creating an index. So they'll 00:17:00.500 --> 00:17:04.680 be going, whatever, Jane Scopes and John Hearn 00:17:04.680 --> 00:17:10.759 married 1821. And so you have very scant details, 00:17:10.880 --> 00:17:13.940 but other times they may include. any other further 00:17:13.940 --> 00:17:16.799 details included. So the question of whether 00:17:16.799 --> 00:17:19.099 it's going to appear on Ancestry is all down 00:17:19.099 --> 00:17:21.740 to deals, isn't it? So if the Family History 00:17:21.740 --> 00:17:24.420 Society, or any of these websites, if the Family 00:17:24.420 --> 00:17:26.599 History Society says to Find My Past, hey, we've 00:17:26.599 --> 00:17:28.920 got these transcripts, you can use them and we 00:17:28.920 --> 00:17:30.759 get a little cut, then that could potentially 00:17:30.759 --> 00:17:34.980 happen. Or it could be that Ancestry has gone 00:17:34.980 --> 00:17:38.640 to an archive and it's made a copy of the record 00:17:38.640 --> 00:17:41.720 office or archives. transcript and digitised 00:17:41.720 --> 00:17:44.039 it. It could be up to the archive or the Family 00:17:44.039 --> 00:17:46.039 History Society or whoever to say, yes, you can 00:17:46.039 --> 00:17:48.500 or can't use our transcription. Yes, you can 00:17:48.500 --> 00:17:51.980 or can't use our digitised copy of the records. 00:17:52.079 --> 00:17:54.119 Yes, you can or can't digitise these records. 00:17:54.240 --> 00:17:56.259 It's all deals. It's the same with the census. 00:17:56.380 --> 00:17:59.720 It's all agreements. So there isn't a definite 00:17:59.720 --> 00:18:02.099 answer that anything is definitely going to happen 00:18:02.099 --> 00:18:05.359 or not happen at any point. Sorry to be so unhelpful. 00:18:05.740 --> 00:18:08.099 Yeah, fantastic. That's great news. It is. The 00:18:08.099 --> 00:18:10.279 parish registers over the last 10 years, they've 00:18:10.279 --> 00:18:12.400 got more and more available online. It is really 00:18:12.400 --> 00:18:14.019 exciting. It is something that continues to be 00:18:14.019 --> 00:18:17.980 added to. Yeah. So the one that I'm looking at, 00:18:18.019 --> 00:18:20.839 it's the marriage record. Just check the citation 00:18:20.839 --> 00:18:24.759 and it says it's on FamilySearch. I'm not sure. 00:18:24.819 --> 00:18:26.500 I can't remember if I've even created an account 00:18:26.500 --> 00:18:29.680 on FamilySearch yet. So I can go look at that. 00:18:29.920 --> 00:18:33.819 But I am playing. I don't know what I'm playing. 00:18:34.650 --> 00:18:37.589 speculation whatever let let's say yes i've agreed 00:18:37.589 --> 00:18:39.630 that this is my right document it's all the right 00:18:39.630 --> 00:18:41.529 names it's the right location it's the right 00:18:41.529 --> 00:18:45.509 date blah blah blah i've agreed on it but it 00:18:45.509 --> 00:18:48.769 doesn't have all the information so i've agreed 00:18:48.769 --> 00:18:51.549 this and i go off carry on with my family tree 00:18:51.549 --> 00:18:54.329 and i look at loads of different lines in the 00:18:54.329 --> 00:18:56.890 meantime ancestry do have this original document 00:18:56.890 --> 00:19:01.890 how do i know it's there without knowing because 00:19:01.890 --> 00:19:05.059 obviously maybe there is like um a reference 00:19:05.059 --> 00:19:07.420 to the parents or there are some witnesses in 00:19:07.420 --> 00:19:09.259 attendance, that might actually be really useful 00:19:09.259 --> 00:19:11.880 information for me. But I've already moved on 00:19:11.880 --> 00:19:16.579 from this document now. So the fact that it's 00:19:16.579 --> 00:19:18.799 saying that it's on FamilySearch, it could be 00:19:18.799 --> 00:19:21.680 anything. It could be just a copy of that transcription, 00:19:21.859 --> 00:19:24.200 so just those typed up words. Or it could be, 00:19:24.200 --> 00:19:26.380 in some instances, that another website does 00:19:26.380 --> 00:19:28.799 have the digitised copy of the record. So it'd 00:19:28.799 --> 00:19:31.160 be worth following up any sources that are given 00:19:31.160 --> 00:19:33.640 to see whether they do have... a copy of the 00:19:33.640 --> 00:19:36.599 digitized record this is where it's really well 00:19:36.599 --> 00:19:38.900 worth logging what you're doing because you're 00:19:38.900 --> 00:19:41.000 not just in one website and you're not following 00:19:41.000 --> 00:19:43.859 your trail of hints you're you're want to do 00:19:43.859 --> 00:19:45.859 an organized checklist so that you can be comprehensive 00:19:45.859 --> 00:19:48.220 not tread the same ground so you go well i'm 00:19:48.220 --> 00:19:49.519 going to follow up that lead on family search 00:19:49.519 --> 00:19:52.059 and see exactly what it has let's say for instance 00:19:52.059 --> 00:19:53.640 it did only have the transcription you're like 00:19:53.640 --> 00:19:55.400 okay well i know that it only has that check 00:19:55.400 --> 00:19:57.880 i've checked that out next i'm going to go and 00:19:57.880 --> 00:20:02.440 search on Find My Past and see what digitised 00:20:02.440 --> 00:20:04.960 parish registers they have and do they have the 00:20:04.960 --> 00:20:08.319 digitised images for my county of interest. Maybe 00:20:08.319 --> 00:20:10.960 they do, maybe they don't. You could even go 00:20:10.960 --> 00:20:13.960 and have a look on the archive for your area 00:20:13.960 --> 00:20:16.000 and see if they have their own because each of 00:20:16.000 --> 00:20:17.779 us is different. We're all dealing with a different 00:20:17.779 --> 00:20:19.519 combination of counties and places, aren't we? 00:20:19.640 --> 00:20:24.440 Find out whether your place has digitised images 00:20:24.440 --> 00:20:27.119 even on their archive because even some archives. 00:20:27.829 --> 00:20:29.869 It's not something that I think happens so much, 00:20:29.910 --> 00:20:33.089 but sometimes they do have records that you could 00:20:33.089 --> 00:20:36.230 pay to download the digitized images. It's a 00:20:36.230 --> 00:20:38.789 rarity. Or you're going to make a trip to the 00:20:38.789 --> 00:20:41.609 archive yourself. So that's all things you can 00:20:41.609 --> 00:20:43.569 do to find out what is available so far online. 00:20:43.809 --> 00:20:46.049 The other thing you could do is on Ancestry, 00:20:46.250 --> 00:20:50.210 okay, if it did subsequently upload a digitized 00:20:50.210 --> 00:20:53.329 image of that record, one is going to probably... 00:20:53.690 --> 00:20:55.869 for it up as a hint for you isn't it and the 00:20:55.869 --> 00:20:58.109 other thing you can do is go to the card catalog 00:20:58.109 --> 00:21:00.750 and do this on a periodic basis and just do a 00:21:00.750 --> 00:21:03.329 search either have a look you could do this fairly 00:21:03.329 --> 00:21:05.670 frequently and see hey what's been new and updated 00:21:05.670 --> 00:21:09.670 in the card catalog yeah these collections of 00:21:09.670 --> 00:21:12.890 relevance to my research or you could set yourself 00:21:12.890 --> 00:21:16.259 twice a year Who is it? It's Lisa Leeson, who's 00:21:16.259 --> 00:21:18.819 an American genius. She recommends doing this 00:21:18.819 --> 00:21:21.220 every six months. Just go to the Ancestry card 00:21:21.220 --> 00:21:23.079 catalogue, make yourself a cup of coffee, just 00:21:23.079 --> 00:21:25.160 search through, just places of interest to you. 00:21:25.259 --> 00:21:27.559 And obviously it's going to depend. You have 00:21:27.559 --> 00:21:29.700 to search in a few different ways to make sure 00:21:29.700 --> 00:21:31.859 you don't miss things and also that you don't 00:21:31.859 --> 00:21:34.059 assume things are relevant to you when they're 00:21:34.059 --> 00:21:37.099 not so relevant, yeah? Right. So it's a case 00:21:37.099 --> 00:21:39.380 of you keeping in charge of yourself a bit. Yeah, 00:21:39.420 --> 00:21:42.000 it's my own due diligence then. It's like a reason 00:21:42.000 --> 00:21:47.259 to have a research log, etc. Groovy. Okay, cool. 00:21:48.599 --> 00:21:50.700 I mean, it's all pie in the sky. I was just asking 00:21:50.700 --> 00:21:53.519 the question because, like, obviously, in the 00:21:53.519 --> 00:21:55.240 proper documents, you can get a little bit more 00:21:55.240 --> 00:21:58.200 information, can't you? But maybe this is all 00:21:58.200 --> 00:22:06.960 the information. Who knows? Going back to Jane, 00:22:07.000 --> 00:22:11.839 then. So she allegedly died in 1827. I'm not 00:22:11.839 --> 00:22:14.039 going to be able to find out stuff like... Oh, 00:22:14.039 --> 00:22:15.819 she died in childbirth. And like I have done 00:22:15.819 --> 00:22:19.140 in the past for nearer generations than Emma. 00:22:20.180 --> 00:22:24.480 James was born in 1824. That's it. That's my 00:22:24.480 --> 00:22:26.940 story there. What you are going to potentially 00:22:26.940 --> 00:22:29.660 be able to find is even if you're not going to 00:22:29.660 --> 00:22:32.859 find a record which says Jane died in 1827 in 00:22:32.859 --> 00:22:35.720 childbirth. But what you are able to do is you're 00:22:35.720 --> 00:22:37.519 going to be able to find the baptism registers 00:22:37.519 --> 00:22:40.630 for that period. And if there's a baby. Let's 00:22:40.630 --> 00:22:42.509 say you've got the precise date that Jane died 00:22:42.509 --> 00:22:47.170 in 1827. If Jane dies in 1827, making this up, 00:22:47.269 --> 00:22:51.049 on the 18th of August, yeah, 1827, and you look 00:22:51.049 --> 00:22:53.190 into the parish registers for that place, and 00:22:53.190 --> 00:22:56.490 there's a baby born to Jane and John in early 00:22:56.490 --> 00:22:59.930 August, then 1827, you're like, oh, she's died 00:22:59.930 --> 00:23:03.289 potentially of puerperal fever or a combination 00:23:03.289 --> 00:23:05.869 of childbirth, or she could even die very close 00:23:05.869 --> 00:23:07.869 at hand, couldn't she, within a day or so of 00:23:07.869 --> 00:23:10.670 the war. It's going to be the baby's baptism, 00:23:10.890 --> 00:23:13.869 but sometimes the baptisms do include birth dates, 00:23:13.910 --> 00:23:15.750 but you're going to have to be judicious about 00:23:15.750 --> 00:23:18.470 that because the baby potentially isn't. So if 00:23:18.470 --> 00:23:20.309 the mum, there's so many variables, if the mum 00:23:20.309 --> 00:23:22.009 died in childbirth, it could be that the baby 00:23:22.009 --> 00:23:24.769 is not in a good state either by the time they've 00:23:24.769 --> 00:23:28.369 both been through that ordeal. This is all so 00:23:28.369 --> 00:23:31.029 much supposition, but the baby potentially is 00:23:31.029 --> 00:23:32.670 going to get baptised sooner rather than later 00:23:32.670 --> 00:23:33.869 because they're worried about its health and 00:23:33.869 --> 00:23:36.549 its soul. Or the baby could, the mother could 00:23:36.549 --> 00:23:38.490 have died in childbirth and the baby survives. 00:23:39.119 --> 00:23:41.140 It's a thriving little baby and they wait a month 00:23:41.140 --> 00:23:43.660 or so before they baptise it. But you're still 00:23:43.660 --> 00:23:46.759 going to know there was potentially a baby born 00:23:46.759 --> 00:23:49.660 around this time. If the mother died in childbirth 00:23:49.660 --> 00:23:51.980 and the baby died and the baby is born dead, 00:23:52.200 --> 00:23:55.920 then unfortunately it's a tragedy in and of itself. 00:23:56.039 --> 00:23:58.799 And from the record -keeping perspective, then 00:23:58.799 --> 00:24:01.619 stillbirths weren't recorded until the early 00:24:01.619 --> 00:24:04.319 20th century. So not for another century yet. 00:24:04.680 --> 00:24:07.079 So you're not going to find an official register 00:24:07.079 --> 00:24:10.480 of that baby. it's not going to have a capacity 00:24:10.480 --> 00:24:12.440 to have been baptised in that period and it's 00:24:12.440 --> 00:24:15.079 not going to be recorded. Yeah, as far as I know. 00:24:15.740 --> 00:24:19.259 Yeah. Okay. There will be exceptions, I'm sure, 00:24:19.359 --> 00:24:21.059 but the general thing is you're not going to 00:24:21.059 --> 00:24:22.819 be able to find it. But if it didn't become alive, 00:24:22.880 --> 00:24:24.200 it could potentially give you some clues about 00:24:24.200 --> 00:24:28.900 why Jane died. Right, okay, cool. Going on from 00:24:28.900 --> 00:24:33.579 that, on the 1841 census, when I've got Elizabeth 00:24:33.579 --> 00:24:37.660 and John married together, I've got James, which 00:24:37.660 --> 00:24:41.079 is this. He's a 17 -year -old, so he was born 00:24:41.079 --> 00:24:46.119 in 1824, so that would be, you think, Jane's 00:24:46.119 --> 00:24:51.720 child. The next child is John Jr., who is nine, 00:24:51.880 --> 00:24:55.140 so he was born after she died. So if there was 00:24:55.140 --> 00:24:57.599 another child, it must have died. But obviously 00:24:57.599 --> 00:25:03.559 that is an if. Cool. There's just a lot to sort 00:25:03.559 --> 00:25:07.319 of dig around here, and it's... It is getting 00:25:07.319 --> 00:25:09.180 tougher. I am feeling a bit more happy with the 00:25:09.180 --> 00:25:12.079 1841. I've put a couple of people on the 1841 00:25:12.079 --> 00:25:18.319 now. Willy nilly. But yes. I mean, with the Jane 00:25:18.319 --> 00:25:21.299 thing, so Jane isn't your direct ancestor. So 00:25:21.299 --> 00:25:23.680 to be really brutal, you could never research 00:25:23.680 --> 00:25:27.119 Jane and not worry about it. But obviously that's 00:25:27.119 --> 00:25:29.480 not how you tick. And so you do want to research 00:25:29.480 --> 00:25:31.579 Jane because that's just your character. All 00:25:31.579 --> 00:25:34.140 these side branches get thoroughly dealt with. 00:25:35.799 --> 00:25:37.559 It could be that she had a baby and the baby 00:25:37.559 --> 00:25:39.940 hasn't survived to the 1841. The baby died as 00:25:39.940 --> 00:25:42.420 a young child. So I think it really would be 00:25:42.420 --> 00:25:44.319 worth, if you can, even if you're just getting 00:25:44.319 --> 00:25:46.799 a transcript, have a look at those baptism. Try 00:25:46.799 --> 00:25:50.279 and find some baptism registers for that 1827 00:25:50.279 --> 00:25:53.299 period. And then if you do find some potential 00:25:53.299 --> 00:25:56.819 babies born to her between 1824 when she had 00:25:56.819 --> 00:26:00.519 the one who, James, who did survive in 1827 when 00:26:00.519 --> 00:26:02.900 she died. And if there are any babies born around 00:26:02.900 --> 00:26:05.299 then. See who they are and if they are, follow 00:26:05.299 --> 00:26:07.940 them up in the baptism and look in short order 00:26:07.940 --> 00:26:10.299 because it was hazardous being a small child, 00:26:10.380 --> 00:26:14.700 particularly then, and see whether you can track 00:26:14.700 --> 00:26:18.619 them down the burial wedges as well. Right. And 00:26:18.619 --> 00:26:20.000 then just for your satisfaction, because that's 00:26:20.000 --> 00:26:24.079 how you are, Nathan. Yes. I mean, I don't think 00:26:24.079 --> 00:26:26.119 I do research every single side branch particularly, 00:26:26.200 --> 00:26:30.210 but I do get absorbed in them, yes. Yeah. So 00:26:30.210 --> 00:26:32.250 I guess it's going to be the same thing for James 00:26:32.250 --> 00:26:34.609 then, isn't it? Because, like, I have done searches 00:26:34.609 --> 00:26:38.450 for James Hearn, like, because I've got his location, 00:26:38.569 --> 00:26:43.549 his Suffolk. He was born in 1824, if the census 00:26:43.549 --> 00:26:47.829 is correct. So give or take a year. He's not 00:26:47.829 --> 00:26:52.069 coming up on as a birth record. So I'll have 00:26:52.069 --> 00:26:54.450 to look at the baptisms for that as well, parish 00:26:54.450 --> 00:26:59.269 registers. Mm -hmm. Yeah. All right, OK. Did 00:26:59.269 --> 00:27:05.430 you say the 1841 said that he was 17? In 1841? 00:27:05.970 --> 00:27:10.670 Yes, he was 17. Am I doing some bad math now? 00:27:10.910 --> 00:27:13.369 No, I think that's really good because I could 00:27:13.369 --> 00:27:14.730 be getting something wrong. My understanding 00:27:14.730 --> 00:27:17.109 was that for everyone who's 15 years and older, 00:27:17.250 --> 00:27:20.670 then their age was rounded down to the nearest 00:27:20.670 --> 00:27:22.809 five years. I was going to ask you about this 00:27:22.809 --> 00:27:25.789 because I haven't found a census document. Oh, 00:27:25.829 --> 00:27:28.230 rounded down to the nearest five years. You said 00:27:28.230 --> 00:27:30.769 this to me before, and in my head, I was just 00:27:30.769 --> 00:27:33.390 thinking of zeros and fives. So if you were 41, 00:27:33.710 --> 00:27:37.970 you'd be 40. Yes. Oh. That is correct. So, all 00:27:37.970 --> 00:27:39.529 right. So it'd be rounded down to the nearest 00:27:39.529 --> 00:27:43.250 five. Not like... I'll show up, actually. I know 00:27:43.250 --> 00:27:45.569 what you mean. That he was... And just knocked 00:27:45.569 --> 00:27:49.589 five years off. Yeah. No, no, no. So it's just... 00:27:49.589 --> 00:27:52.490 So, yes. But that's why it's interesting and 00:27:52.490 --> 00:27:54.349 cool that he's done... I mean, I've forgotten. 00:27:54.630 --> 00:27:56.609 I don't know. Anyway, it's good that you've got 00:27:56.609 --> 00:28:01.119 a precise... H for him. Yeah, but I haven't seen 00:28:01.119 --> 00:28:03.259 an... Well, I know I've only really looked at 00:28:03.259 --> 00:28:06.700 one particular family on the 1841, but none of 00:28:06.700 --> 00:28:09.960 them have got rounded down ages or rounded up 00:28:09.960 --> 00:28:12.119 ages. Oh, it's just probably that enumerator 00:28:12.119 --> 00:28:13.940 hadn't read that bit of the notebook. It's fine, 00:28:14.019 --> 00:28:15.579 they're instructions. They just overlooked that 00:28:15.579 --> 00:28:18.980 bit and kept to the detail. Good for me. Yeah, 00:28:19.000 --> 00:28:24.079 good for you. Okay, that's cool. What else do 00:28:24.079 --> 00:28:26.259 I have for you on this thing? So, yeah, I'm stuck. 00:28:28.009 --> 00:28:30.009 I'm stuck with James. I need to find out his 00:28:30.009 --> 00:28:33.910 birth or details of his baptism. Yeah, I found 00:28:33.910 --> 00:28:38.349 a potential death for him, but obviously, because 00:28:38.349 --> 00:28:40.710 we said that there was a younger son called James 00:28:40.710 --> 00:28:43.309 as well, so we wondered if maybe this James had 00:28:43.309 --> 00:28:45.549 died and then the other one was named in honour 00:28:45.549 --> 00:28:51.789 of that James. But if the death date is correct 00:28:51.789 --> 00:28:56.069 for the James I've found, then that's not true. 00:28:57.319 --> 00:29:00.960 Because in the 1851, I've got James Joseph, which 00:29:00.960 --> 00:29:03.819 is a younger child. And I'm suggesting James 00:29:03.819 --> 00:29:06.960 Hearn died in 1853. It's so confusing, isn't 00:29:06.960 --> 00:29:09.279 it? And all the names are the same. Anyway, so 00:29:09.279 --> 00:29:11.940 there's him. And then I've got James... Shush, 00:29:11.940 --> 00:29:14.559 Nathan. I've got John Hearn Jr., who was born 00:29:14.559 --> 00:29:19.019 in 1832, to find... Again, I'm basing that information 00:29:19.019 --> 00:29:22.819 off the 1841. It says he's nine years old on 00:29:22.819 --> 00:29:25.930 that, so I've gone back from that. He isn't on 00:29:25.930 --> 00:29:31.150 the 1851. But he'd have been 19 then, so he might 00:29:31.150 --> 00:29:34.809 have skedaddled. I haven't found him. I've not 00:29:34.809 --> 00:29:35.890 been able to find him. I've not been able to 00:29:35.890 --> 00:29:39.190 find James. And the bigger mystery is where was 00:29:39.190 --> 00:29:43.430 Elizabeth on the 1851 census? Cannot find her 00:29:43.430 --> 00:29:47.109 at all. So I could do with some help on that 00:29:47.109 --> 00:29:50.170 one. I don't... I've done, like, I've searched 00:29:50.170 --> 00:29:52.529 for the locale. I know maybe I'm limiting myself 00:29:52.529 --> 00:29:54.859 by doing that. But I've searched the location 00:29:54.859 --> 00:29:57.240 because everybody seems to be in Suffolk around 00:29:57.240 --> 00:30:02.279 a certain area, like store market -ish. And then 00:30:02.279 --> 00:30:04.119 I started removing people. You know, like when 00:30:04.119 --> 00:30:05.460 you get your search options, I was like, right, 00:30:05.480 --> 00:30:07.359 I'll remove the husband, I'll remove the children, 00:30:07.519 --> 00:30:11.539 leave the parents in. And she still hasn't come 00:30:11.539 --> 00:30:14.640 up yet. I think I've got more digging to do on 00:30:14.640 --> 00:30:17.640 that before I actually think I'm stuck. But she 00:30:17.640 --> 00:30:19.700 hasn't come up readily, so I don't know where 00:30:19.700 --> 00:30:21.559 she is. I was expecting some sort of hospital 00:30:21.559 --> 00:30:24.000 report or something. So what are you going to 00:30:24.000 --> 00:30:28.140 do then to progress on that bit? I'm going to 00:30:28.140 --> 00:30:30.359 look how many people called Elizabeth Hearn existed 00:30:30.359 --> 00:30:37.400 in 1850. You can do that. And then you could 00:30:37.400 --> 00:30:40.059 potentially just not forget about it, but just 00:30:40.059 --> 00:30:42.799 park it for the moment and think, I can't remember 00:30:42.799 --> 00:30:44.119 if I've said this in a previous episode, but 00:30:44.119 --> 00:30:48.319 learn about Elizabeth's thing. She was an A thing, 00:30:48.400 --> 00:30:51.440 wasn't she? Elizabeth's thing's parents and Elizabeth's 00:30:51.440 --> 00:30:54.440 thing's... Elizabeth. I can't speak today. Elizabeth. 00:30:54.819 --> 00:31:01.740 Elizabeth. Things. Siblings. And get lots of 00:31:01.740 --> 00:31:03.299 information about them because then you'll be 00:31:03.299 --> 00:31:07.839 rebuilding. And I really can't speak. Rebuilding. 00:31:08.099 --> 00:31:11.119 She'll be rebuilding. What was her name again? 00:31:11.660 --> 00:31:16.160 Elizabeth. Stop being silly. You're going to 00:31:16.160 --> 00:31:20.190 be finding out about Elizabeth. Elizabeth, things, 00:31:20.470 --> 00:31:24.849 parents and siblings, because this will give 00:31:24.849 --> 00:31:29.089 you a network of people with whom you can track 00:31:29.089 --> 00:31:33.710 them in the 1851 census and potentially see whether 00:31:33.710 --> 00:31:37.670 Elizabeth was living with any of these other 00:31:37.670 --> 00:31:40.490 things or if they are thing sisters, they might 00:31:40.490 --> 00:31:46.250 be called something else. Yeah. Yeah. Mum, that's 00:31:46.250 --> 00:31:48.799 confusing. Yes. That's good, because I haven't 00:31:48.799 --> 00:31:50.839 fleshed out anything about her details. I've 00:31:50.839 --> 00:31:54.799 got her parents, but I haven't actually honestly 00:31:54.799 --> 00:31:59.480 looked for any siblings or anything yet. But 00:31:59.480 --> 00:32:04.259 then, oh my gosh, I've got the challenge of finding 00:32:04.259 --> 00:32:06.599 her parents on various censuses, don't I? Yeah, 00:32:06.619 --> 00:32:08.539 okay, I can do that, I can do that. You can, 00:32:08.660 --> 00:32:11.759 and none of that's a waste of time, is it? It's 00:32:11.759 --> 00:32:15.359 all, she's your bloodline ancestor. Yep. Her 00:32:15.359 --> 00:32:19.799 parents are. those siblings are you like doing 00:32:19.799 --> 00:32:21.920 the side branches I think it's great to do the 00:32:21.920 --> 00:32:23.680 side branches and it's useful to do the side 00:32:23.680 --> 00:32:26.579 branches so that's even if they don't shed light 00:32:26.579 --> 00:32:29.819 on where Elizabeth was in 1851 none of that is 00:32:29.819 --> 00:32:31.460 going to be a waste of time all of that's going 00:32:31.460 --> 00:32:35.740 to be a fantastic good use of time yeah yeah 00:32:35.740 --> 00:32:39.519 there's just so much to unravel isn't there it's 00:32:39.519 --> 00:32:43.079 cool bye I obviously mentioned it the other week. 00:32:43.160 --> 00:32:46.000 I've got my Elijah to look at, who's a sailor 00:32:46.000 --> 00:32:48.640 in the Royal Navy. I'm excited about that one. 00:32:48.740 --> 00:32:51.799 Born on Christmas Day. I've not touched that 00:32:51.799 --> 00:32:54.980 yet. That is just a random side quest for a different 00:32:54.980 --> 00:32:58.779 day. But I've also got Elizabeth in the 1871. 00:32:58.779 --> 00:33:00.960 I did mention this last week. She's in the 1871 00:33:00.960 --> 00:33:08.180 living with her son -in -law. But the daughter... 00:33:08.180 --> 00:33:12.099 Sorry, the wife. isn't a name of one of their 00:33:12.099 --> 00:33:15.220 children. So again, I'm going to have to dive 00:33:15.220 --> 00:33:17.960 into this guy's tree to find out if he married 00:33:17.960 --> 00:33:20.240 twice and if one of those marriages was to Emma, 00:33:20.420 --> 00:33:22.839 who was one of the, well, the only daughter that 00:33:22.839 --> 00:33:27.119 I currently know of. It's an adventure, isn't 00:33:27.119 --> 00:33:29.579 it? There's just people brimming about everywhere 00:33:29.579 --> 00:33:31.279 and it's just getting bigger and bigger, but 00:33:31.279 --> 00:33:34.579 I like it. It's like you can't get one answer 00:33:34.579 --> 00:33:36.940 without finding out 26 other answers you didn't 00:33:36.940 --> 00:33:41.690 know you were looking for yet. Yes. Bonkers. 00:33:43.670 --> 00:33:45.690 And this is just based on two people that I'm 00:33:45.690 --> 00:33:50.029 researching. It's nonsense. It's fun, though, 00:33:50.089 --> 00:33:51.650 isn't it? I think this is one of the best things. 00:33:52.470 --> 00:33:57.069 Because it's so absorbing. I love it. Every little 00:33:57.069 --> 00:34:00.269 name or date that you stumble on is like a little 00:34:00.269 --> 00:34:02.029 win, isn't it? It's a little piece of the jigsaw 00:34:02.029 --> 00:34:06.009 and you feel like you are solving a puzzle. And... 00:34:06.519 --> 00:34:09.000 I play lots of computer games, but I like playing 00:34:09.000 --> 00:34:10.960 computer games where there's a puzzle, you solve 00:34:10.960 --> 00:34:13.059 it and it gets you through to the next puzzle 00:34:13.059 --> 00:34:15.300 or it'll give you a part of the answer to a different 00:34:15.300 --> 00:34:17.280 puzzle. It's then got to backtrack all the way 00:34:17.280 --> 00:34:19.199 around the map to find the other section to actually 00:34:19.199 --> 00:34:22.320 input that puzzle. That's what it feels like 00:34:22.320 --> 00:34:25.320 to me and I love that. I'm just wondering, you 00:34:25.320 --> 00:34:28.340 know when you said, so Elizabeth in 1871 is living 00:34:28.340 --> 00:34:32.179 with her son -in -law, a woman called Emma who... 00:34:32.179 --> 00:34:36.099 No. Oh. Living with a woman called Sarah. Okay, 00:34:36.159 --> 00:34:38.500 Sarah. Her daughter was called Emma. I don't 00:34:38.500 --> 00:34:40.360 have any details of a daughter called Sarah. 00:34:40.559 --> 00:34:43.820 Okay, and so when was Sarah? What year does the 00:34:43.820 --> 00:34:48.619 census infer that Sarah was born? I don't know 00:34:48.619 --> 00:34:51.440 because I haven't researched this enough. Bear 00:34:51.440 --> 00:34:53.519 with me one second and I'll just have a look 00:34:53.519 --> 00:34:57.960 at the 1871 census. I might be lying to you, 00:34:57.960 --> 00:35:02.360 actually. Hopefully not. We don't like lying 00:35:02.360 --> 00:35:07.179 on the podcast. Wait. It might be in the 1881. 00:35:07.880 --> 00:35:11.760 Doesn't matter what census it is. Just want her 00:35:11.760 --> 00:35:14.920 age. That's what I'm trying to get at. What if 00:35:14.920 --> 00:35:18.760 I can't find it? What I'm trying to get at is, 00:35:18.880 --> 00:35:23.000 so let's say we've got this Sarah. She is the, 00:35:23.119 --> 00:35:29.000 you think if her husband is Elizabeth's son -in 00:35:29.000 --> 00:35:31.679 -law, then that would make Sarah Elizabeth's 00:35:31.679 --> 00:35:35.500 daughter. But it could be, in fact, that... Sarah 00:35:35.500 --> 00:35:39.019 is Elizabeth's stepdaughter and that really Sarah's 00:35:39.019 --> 00:35:44.000 mother was Jane Scopes. So let's say Sarah's 00:35:44.000 --> 00:35:48.119 inferred birth year comes between 1824 and 1827 00:35:48.119 --> 00:35:51.500 or even between 1821 when Jane Scopes married 00:35:51.500 --> 00:35:54.380 John Hearn in 1837. That would be really interesting 00:35:54.380 --> 00:35:56.929 to learn. That's what I'm trying to get at. Okay, 00:35:57.030 --> 00:35:58.769 right. Well, I'll put my hand up now. I've been 00:35:58.769 --> 00:36:00.710 a good boy. This isn't me not knowing things. 00:36:00.809 --> 00:36:03.789 This is my typical Nathaness. I haven't actually 00:36:03.789 --> 00:36:09.409 added the 1881 to Elizabeth because of this Sarah 00:36:09.409 --> 00:36:12.650 thing. I wasn't 100 % sure that it was my Elizabeth, 00:36:12.809 --> 00:36:15.210 despite the thing else matching up. I do believe 00:36:15.210 --> 00:36:18.510 it is her. So anyway, in my notes, which I actually 00:36:18.510 --> 00:36:22.250 have kept and not drawn hedgehogs on, it says 00:36:22.250 --> 00:36:30.500 Sarah was 45 in 1881. So she was born in 1936? 00:36:30.940 --> 00:36:33.820 Question mark? Oh, you're talking to the wrong 00:36:33.820 --> 00:36:38.420 person. 1836, sorry, not 19. 1836. Which would 00:36:38.420 --> 00:36:43.340 be after, obviously well after Jane's died. Yeah, 00:36:43.360 --> 00:36:44.980 so that's not a possibility there. I thought 00:36:44.980 --> 00:36:47.179 that was just a fun possibility. Yeah, I mean, 00:36:47.179 --> 00:36:50.019 it was a possibility. But it's, rule it out, 00:36:50.019 --> 00:36:53.960 move on. Yeah, so I need to discover, I just 00:36:53.960 --> 00:36:57.340 need to... research the son -in -law. It's just 00:36:57.340 --> 00:36:59.559 fun, isn't it? It's like, why is such a random 00:36:59.559 --> 00:37:03.000 thing to research? But that document brings up 00:37:03.000 --> 00:37:04.619 all these questions. It's like, well, who are 00:37:04.619 --> 00:37:08.559 these people? I do know that relationships in 00:37:08.559 --> 00:37:11.039 the past, they wouldn't use the terms necessarily 00:37:11.039 --> 00:37:15.300 the way in which we would. We use them very specifically 00:37:15.300 --> 00:37:18.739 nowadays, don't we? Like, in what way do you 00:37:18.739 --> 00:37:23.219 mean? Like, son, stepson, cousin, son -in -law, 00:37:23.320 --> 00:37:25.739 all of these things, we use them. really precisely, 00:37:26.099 --> 00:37:31.519 yeah? I'm just going to ask the internet. So 00:37:31.519 --> 00:37:33.940 in the past, son -in -law could mean stepson, 00:37:34.119 --> 00:37:36.320 the son of a husband or wife from an earlier 00:37:36.320 --> 00:37:40.760 marriage. Yeah? Right. So what's this son -in 00:37:40.760 --> 00:37:44.639 -law's name then? I need to get to the 18th. 00:37:44.659 --> 00:37:47.679 We need to get this document out, don't we? Found 00:37:47.679 --> 00:37:50.380 it. Interestingly, it's not on the same page 00:37:50.380 --> 00:37:52.059 that it says it's on. I've had to go to the next 00:37:52.059 --> 00:37:56.860 page in the census. So I've got Elizabeth Hearn, 00:37:56.980 --> 00:38:01.960 mother -in -law, widow. She's 68 years of age, 00:38:02.159 --> 00:38:10.480 which kind of ties in. It's about, well, maybe 00:38:10.480 --> 00:38:14.300 it's wrong. It's two or three years off what 00:38:14.300 --> 00:38:17.880 I think her age is, but these are never hard 00:38:17.880 --> 00:38:20.820 facts, are they? No, and what about her birthplace? 00:38:20.880 --> 00:38:23.039 Does that tie in well? I think you said it did 00:38:23.039 --> 00:38:26.920 tie in, didn't you? Suffolk, yeah. Stream market. 00:38:27.500 --> 00:38:32.900 Stream market, okay. Yeah, so the location seems 00:38:32.900 --> 00:38:36.880 very strong. But yeah, we've got this Joseph 00:38:36.880 --> 00:38:42.000 Stammer, Stammer, Stammer. And then Sarah A, 00:38:42.219 --> 00:38:47.500 who's the wife. And have you looked in the TRO 00:38:47.500 --> 00:38:51.900 for Joseph Stammer and Sarah A Blank's marriage? 00:38:52.639 --> 00:38:55.460 I'll be honest, this was a side quest that I 00:38:55.460 --> 00:38:57.579 haven't gone down yet. Because that would be 00:38:57.579 --> 00:39:00.960 fun as well, because that would just be good 00:39:00.960 --> 00:39:04.679 to... If it did say Hearn, for Sarah A. Hearn, 00:39:04.780 --> 00:39:08.500 you'd be like, OK, she has... Yeah, it would 00:39:08.500 --> 00:39:11.880 help, wouldn't it? Yes. Yes. Apparently Joseph 00:39:11.880 --> 00:39:16.719 was a scavenger. Yes. A roadman scavenger. Yeah. 00:39:18.079 --> 00:39:22.550 Interesting. Yeah. Cool. But yeah, that's one 00:39:22.550 --> 00:39:27.929 little mini quest for me to do. It doesn't help 00:39:27.929 --> 00:39:30.010 me, does it? But it's nice to fill in the blanks. 00:39:31.230 --> 00:39:33.409 I think it is, and particularly because you're 00:39:33.409 --> 00:39:36.730 feeling shaky about you've got a blank for Elizabeth 00:39:36.730 --> 00:39:39.349 in 1851, the more things you can show her at 00:39:39.349 --> 00:39:41.369 other points in her life, it all just helps to 00:39:41.369 --> 00:39:43.710 not feel like you're not making any progress 00:39:43.710 --> 00:39:45.849 on the person. I think you definitely need to 00:39:45.849 --> 00:39:49.070 find her because, you know, if that is her... 00:39:49.309 --> 00:39:51.250 Living with her daughter and all those grandchildren 00:39:51.250 --> 00:39:53.590 just gives a sense of how her life pans out. 00:39:53.849 --> 00:39:56.630 You can keep on tracing her forward in time until 00:39:56.630 --> 00:39:58.630 you get to her death record if you haven't already 00:39:58.630 --> 00:40:02.170 got it. Yeah, that would help, wouldn't it? Yeah. 00:40:02.750 --> 00:40:08.889 Cool. Nathan, do you mind if I read out a podcast 00:40:08.889 --> 00:40:14.210 listener email? I hate when we get mail. Of course, 00:40:14.250 --> 00:40:18.150 yes, please do read. Well, so... This is a very 00:40:18.150 --> 00:40:20.530 cool one. It's to do with the dreaded Thing surname, 00:40:20.750 --> 00:40:22.570 which I can say as long as it's not prefixed 00:40:22.570 --> 00:40:24.210 by Elizabeth. I'm just trying to say them next 00:40:24.210 --> 00:40:25.809 week because that other is really, really hard. 00:40:26.030 --> 00:40:30.769 So Kevin, who is an associate professor from 00:40:30.769 --> 00:40:34.329 Queensland, and he says, I was listening to the 00:40:34.329 --> 00:40:36.329 podcast today and was fascinated that Nathan 00:40:36.329 --> 00:40:38.949 found someone with the surname Thing. It's a 00:40:38.949 --> 00:40:40.889 fascinating surname and it got him thinking. 00:40:42.010 --> 00:40:44.329 He believes that he has an ancestor with a great 00:40:44.329 --> 00:40:47.710 hobbit name. And his four times great grandfather 00:40:47.710 --> 00:40:51.449 lived on the Isle of Wight and his name was Barnabas 00:40:51.449 --> 00:40:55.769 Bramble. And he wonders whether me, you or any 00:40:55.769 --> 00:40:58.329 of the listeners have another great hobbit name. 00:40:58.590 --> 00:41:00.650 Then he goes on to say, keep up the great work. 00:41:00.730 --> 00:41:03.369 He's still loving the podcast. So thank you very 00:41:03.369 --> 00:41:05.230 much, Kevin, for listening in. And what a great 00:41:05.230 --> 00:41:07.630 question, whether we have any good hobbit names 00:41:07.630 --> 00:41:11.969 in our family history. Barnabas Bramble. I mean, 00:41:11.989 --> 00:41:14.730 beat that. Can anyone beat that? That is awesome. 00:41:14.769 --> 00:41:17.449 I like that a lot. Yeah. We might be putting 00:41:17.449 --> 00:41:19.869 this one out on socials as a question. Yeah, 00:41:19.869 --> 00:41:23.789 yeah. It's just so adorable, isn't it? And I 00:41:23.789 --> 00:41:25.650 think it's hot to have had an adventurous life. 00:41:26.789 --> 00:41:29.710 You'd hope so, wouldn't you? Yes. Kevin, if you're 00:41:29.710 --> 00:41:31.690 listening to this, send us in a little synopsis 00:41:31.690 --> 00:41:33.929 of what on earth happened to Barnabas Bramble, 00:41:34.010 --> 00:41:35.730 the adventures of Barnabas Bramble. We need to 00:41:35.730 --> 00:41:40.389 know. That is brilliant. Yeah. Oh, I can't think 00:41:40.389 --> 00:41:42.840 of anybody on my tree I've found. With an interesting 00:41:42.840 --> 00:41:45.760 name like that. No, I haven't. I haven't got 00:41:45.760 --> 00:41:47.760 anything to even touch that. It's a fantastic 00:41:47.760 --> 00:41:50.880 name. Yeah. Yeah. Lord of the Rings style anyway. 00:41:51.019 --> 00:41:53.460 I can't think of anything. I've got someone called 00:41:53.460 --> 00:41:56.260 Titus, but I can't remember his surname. He's 00:41:56.260 --> 00:41:59.280 my greatest hope now for that. That's going to 00:41:59.280 --> 00:42:00.800 be a great question. Yeah, so look out for that 00:42:00.800 --> 00:42:02.440 on socials. I'll be doing that next week probably. 00:42:04.400 --> 00:42:07.820 Ancestors channelling Hobbit things. The best 00:42:07.820 --> 00:42:13.869 Hobbit name. Yeah, yeah. I guess Thing is my 00:42:13.869 --> 00:42:17.210 closest, really. Thing is good. Thing is very, 00:42:17.269 --> 00:42:21.769 very good. Yeah. Curious. So, shall we wrap up 00:42:21.769 --> 00:42:24.429 now for this week? Yes, I think I've prattled 00:42:24.429 --> 00:42:26.909 on about Johns and Elizabeth far too much already, 00:42:27.070 --> 00:42:29.230 so yes. Also, I just know you've got masses and 00:42:29.230 --> 00:42:31.449 masses of work you need to do. Oh yeah, I'm a 00:42:31.449 --> 00:42:35.809 busy boy. Yeah. Not that you, of course. I'm 00:42:35.809 --> 00:42:37.869 busy, but not as busy as you this week. You get 00:42:37.869 --> 00:42:43.309 the Mr Busy prize, definitely. Yeah. Well, thank 00:42:43.309 --> 00:42:46.349 you everybody for listening. And Nathan, thanks 00:42:46.349 --> 00:42:49.809 for sharing your wonderful unpacking of what 00:42:49.809 --> 00:42:53.289 you're doing. You're welcome. And parents. It's 00:42:53.289 --> 00:42:55.289 good. Maybe you could unpack something next week. 00:42:55.769 --> 00:42:59.769 I can briefly say what I've been doing. I have 00:42:59.769 --> 00:43:02.489 put, very briefly, I put my Ancestry subscription 00:43:02.489 --> 00:43:06.389 on pause and I have made myself. So it means 00:43:06.389 --> 00:43:08.949 I can't look at anything new on Ancestry and 00:43:08.949 --> 00:43:11.690 it's making me go through. I thought I had one 00:43:11.690 --> 00:43:13.650 folder of records that I needed to file up. I've 00:43:13.650 --> 00:43:16.090 now found I have four ones and that's just in 00:43:16.090 --> 00:43:20.389 one, just in my OneCloud, not my OneDrive, just 00:43:20.389 --> 00:43:22.369 in OneCloud thing. And then on OneDrive, I know 00:43:22.369 --> 00:43:23.969 I've got more folders. So I'm like, Helen, you 00:43:23.969 --> 00:43:26.429 need to file these things up and add them to 00:43:26.429 --> 00:43:31.070 Family Tree Maker and just stop hoarding and 00:43:31.070 --> 00:43:34.010 actually be a bit more meticulous. So I've literally 00:43:34.010 --> 00:43:38.349 just banished myself to the wilderness. That's 00:43:38.349 --> 00:43:39.650 interesting. That's a very interesting way to 00:43:39.650 --> 00:43:41.940 do it as well. Cut yourself off at the sauce 00:43:41.940 --> 00:43:44.980 and then... I had to go cold turkey like an addict. 00:43:45.920 --> 00:43:48.679 And then the sighting bit, I still managed to 00:43:48.679 --> 00:43:51.079 take myself to a different rabbit hole. So we 00:43:51.079 --> 00:43:52.900 do this course with Carol McCulloch that we do 00:43:52.900 --> 00:43:55.079 with Abby Tree about using AI to help solve brick 00:43:55.079 --> 00:43:58.099 walls. And she's very keen on making us get Gemini 00:43:58.099 --> 00:44:01.179 transcriptions of things. So for each of the 00:44:01.179 --> 00:44:03.300 records that I'm finding in my naughty files 00:44:03.300 --> 00:44:07.300 of documents I haven't filed up. pop the image 00:44:07.300 --> 00:44:10.400 into Gemini ask it for a transcription ask it 00:44:10.400 --> 00:44:12.380 to be very careful not to guess and to highlight 00:44:12.380 --> 00:44:14.739 anything it doesn't know and then I ask it for 00:44:14.739 --> 00:44:17.019 an analysis of it and it's showing me all sorts 00:44:17.019 --> 00:44:19.039 of cool things like things I would have potentially 00:44:19.039 --> 00:44:23.340 missed or taken me a long time to find out so 00:44:24.419 --> 00:44:27.340 One of the people had two roods and 17 perches, 00:44:27.460 --> 00:44:29.099 and I now know that that's about two -thirds 00:44:29.099 --> 00:44:30.739 of an acre, which makes a lot. Two -thirds of 00:44:30.739 --> 00:44:33.420 an acre, I can understand. Two roods and 17 perches, 00:44:33.460 --> 00:44:35.500 I'm like, what is that? Anyway, so I'm learning 00:44:35.500 --> 00:44:37.400 masses. So I'm not saying it's a quick process, 00:44:37.579 --> 00:44:40.579 but it's good. Nice. Well, you'll have to let 00:44:40.579 --> 00:44:42.659 us know more about your learn next week. I will 00:44:42.659 --> 00:44:45.360 do. I will. I'm definitely having fun. It's very 00:44:45.360 --> 00:44:47.940 piecemeal, but fun. All valid, isn't it? It's 00:44:47.940 --> 00:44:51.360 all worthwhile. Yes. Okay. Cheers then. Bye -bye. 00:44:51.659 --> 00:44:54.960 Happy researching, everyone. Bye. Thank you.