Genealogy Chat

There are many trees around the world that have managed to lose my father, put my older brother in his place, and thus made me the daughter of my brother and my mother :-S

All due to a mistake made by a second cousin who (I think) beleived his forgetful father, put it into a One Name Study Tree, and then made a CD of the tree.

No-one seems to have noticed that both brother's and mother's birth years were clearly shown, indicating that brother was only 11 years old

The new GRO search facility is brilliant. I have been able to identify which of about a dozen possibles are the children who were born and died between censuses, without spending a fortune on certificates.

As for copying.......I told one contact that she had got my sons' wives the wrong way round, and was informed that she was right and I was wrong!! :-(

This was a straightforward case of mis-copying, as the tree on Genes was correct.

ArgyllGran

I had a child like that in my tree.
Knowing she was born before the parents on the 1891 census were married, I wrongly assumed that Florence was the illegitimate daughter of the wife before she married.
She was nowhere to be found in the birth index under the wife's maiden name or married name.
It turned out that Florence was the illegitimate child of her father.
He registered her birth, but wasn't named in the 'father' column, but in the informant column he signed and is shown as father....... what a bonus that was.

Background here...................

http://www.genesreunited.co.uk/boards/board/ancestors/thread/1203914

I've been doing the same. The GRO giving mms for births has been a mine of new information.
For instance, one person was always listed as "son" on censuses, although born the year before the parents married, and I'd assumed that to be the case.
However, now I find that his mms is not that of his father's wife.

I can't see any previous marriage for his father. I assume his parents didn't marry, but his father took responsibility for him - and indeed brought him up from babyhood.

I await the birth cert with bated breath!

I agree.
In these days of fast and easy communication with nearly all parts of the world ,information can easily be transmitted from many directions leaving the unwary to think "Oh, that must be correct then.".... but they all have the one incorrect source.
Some just copy regardless and can't even read through information, judging by glaring mistakes I've seen.

It's good to review old parts of one's tree.
Sometimes this leads to break-throughs, as you found.
Well done on deciphering the surname.

I've been going over some parts of my tree recently and came across an early 1840's marriage cert that I ordered years ago and put on my Ancestry tree. The bride was a widow and her fathers name was on the cert. It had always bugged me that I couldn't find any trace of her pre this marriage. I now realised that I read the fathers surname incorrectly! With the new surname everything has fallen neatly into place and I now have her previous marriage, baptism, parents names and siblings.

The point is, all the incorrect info has been copied into I don't know how many other trees, all of which are wrong. Most of them have copied the marriage cert as well, but can't have checked the detail.

So the moral I suppose, copying from others trees, DON'T without making sure its right.

Andy