Genealogy Chat

Thank you everyone! I will take a look at the IGI and the original census records - might be useful in solving this one! Thanks again, -Kat

I would think they are the same family, but would recomend checking the actual 1881 census. If you have taken the information on line then there could be transcription errors. The original may shed more light on the matter. Bob

Katrina, Have you tried the familysearch site? If not, try them (a link is on the resources board). It may tie some in together or eliminate. Good luck, Jacky

Thanks for that Robert! I keep getting them all confused - richard/robert lucy/louise etc etc! I have also discovered that Edmonton later became Enfield - so that adds further credibility to the whole thing. Trouble is I believe it - but they do not! I will have to be a bit more persuasive when explaining things. Even if they just file away the info as a 'maybe.' Thank you all for your help. Take Care, -Kat

Katrina, if this were not the same family in both instances it would surely be one for the Guiness world book of records!! The only items that don't match are a couple of given names, and it seems most of us have similar situations, due to people using their second name as they got old enough to choose, or taking a completely different one because they hated the one their parents had chosen. Or could be a transcription error, or they were illiterate and couldn't spell, or the census taker was slightly deaf, or a bad writer. Numerous ways for errors to occur. Plus that is not a very common surname, so it would be most unusual to find all those similarities. Di.

It's Richard who is on the 1901 Richard GOULDTHORPE 28 1873 Greenwich Enfield Middlesex Painter & Glazier Annie GOULDTHORPE 24 1877 Middlesex Enfield Enfield Middlesex Richard GOULDTHORPE 4 1897 Middlesex Edmonton Enfield Middlesex Richard GOULDTHORPE 4 1897 Middlesex Edmonton Enfield Middlesex Percival GOULDTHORPE 2 1899 Middlesex Enfield Enfield Middlesex Alfred GOULDTHORPE 0.916 1900 Middlesex Enfield Enfield Middlesex This must be him Bob

Thank you both! No, I couldn't find richard on the 1901 either. Also, the 1891 family aren't on the 1881 census. I have no data where BOTH families are on a census, and that makes me feel that they are likely to be the same. That may just mean that I cannot find them though! :0) But I sent the details to the person in question and she was not convinced (only because of the names) Ah well. Any other opinions? Cheers, -Kat

You would be very unlucky for these not to be the same. The only way to "prove" these things is to gather as much info from other sources. The family has not moved around much and its not a very common name. It's near certain that the 1841 census would show george aged 5 with his parents. I cant find any Robert Gouldthorpe on the 1901 only Richard aged 28 born in Greenwich.

I think there is a very strong likelihood that they are the same. Elizabeth could be "missing" because she died? I found that it was quite common in my families that at least one child died young. I also found name "changes" in my family: James was known as Joseph on one census; Joseph Harry was only known by Har, etc. However, we were very certain of a connection between our family and one in Ireland, only to find out 20 years later that we were wrong. (The "relative" in Ireland still believes we are related -- we just don't know where the connection is.) I would think that your families are the same families -- but after the mistake we made, I just about require my ancestors to tell me they are in fact mine. So far, no one has stepped up to do that. Pity. I would be interested to hear if you ever find "proof"; or what others think, as I also have a situation similar to yours.

----------------------------------- Household in 1881 Head: George R. GOULDTHORPE - 44 - Greenwich, Kent, England Wife: Louisa GOULDTHORPE - 46 - London, Middlesex, England Oldest Kids who had probably left home by 1891: Hannah GOULDTHORPE - 21 - Greenwich, Kent, England William G. GOULDTHORPE - 20 - Greenwich, Kent, England George J. GOULDTHORPE - 15 - Greenwich, Kent, England Youngest who woud still be at home in 1891: Louisa M. GOULDTHORPE - 9 - Greenwich, Kent, England Richard GOULDTHORPE - 8 - Greenwich, Kent, England Ada GOULDTHORPE - 4 - Edmonton, Middlesex, England Scholar Elizabeth GOULDTHORPE - 2 - Edmonton, Middlesex, England Frank GOULDTHORPE - 4 m - Edmonton, Middlesex, England Living in Edmonton, Middlesex ----------------------------------- ----------------------------------- Household in 1891 Head: George R Gouldthorpe - 55 - Kent, Gressenhall Wife: Lucy Gouldthorpe - 56 - London, Bennondsey Lucy Gouldthorpe - 19 - Kent, Greenwich Robert Gouldthorpe - 18 - Kent, Greenwich Alice Gouldthorpe - 14 - Middlesex, Edmonton Frank Gouldthorpe - 11 - Middlesex, Edmonton Granddaughter Ellen Gouldthorpe - 6 - middlesex Living in Enfield, Middlesex ----------------------------------- The fathers name is identical - even his middle initial. The fathers age is correct as is the County he was born in The mothers initial is the same. The mothers age is correct as is county of birth. The eldest children may have left home by 1891 and so that would explain why ther are not in the 1891 household. Daughter Louisa (1881) has same DOB as Lucy (1891) and same town & county of birth. Son Richard (1881) has same DOB as Robert (1891) and same town & county of birth. Daughter Ada (1881) had same DOB as Alice (1891) and same town & county of birth. Daughter Elizabeth is missing. Son Frank (1881) has same DOB as Frank (1891) and same town & county of birth. So...do you think that these could be the same family? I cannot find any other matches on the 1891 census. Please let me know what you think. Thanks, -Kat

Hello. Could you please look at these names and tell me if you think they are the same family? One household is 1881 and the next is 1891. I am searching on behalf of a relative and would appreciate any guideance on the matter! (see next message for the details)