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

Can't Work Out Second Name - Difficult Handwriting

Login to Add Reply Watch This
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Al

Al Report 15 Sep 2007 17:32

That would fit as Baptism of child is taking place in Lewisham. Thanks everyone, looks like this mystery is solved hopefully!

MellieMob

MellieMob Report 15 Sep 2007 17:29

and heres the mother

CARTER Elizabeth Catherine Lewisham.1d 1174 4 1894

Al

Al Report 15 Sep 2007 17:26

Sorry to clarify, no twins, Elizabeth Catherine is mother of Phyllis Doreen.

Al

Al Report 15 Sep 2007 17:25

Thanks everyone. Elizabeth Catherine is mother. I'm going to order cert "CARTER Phyllis D Carter Hackney.1b 876 1 1913" and hopefully that will be right one.

MellieMob

MellieMob Report 15 Sep 2007 17:24

yeh found that but elizabeth don't match

Al

Al Report 15 Sep 2007 17:23

No Conti found in right year, but Carter is looking possible...

There is a Phyllis D Carter registered in the right quarter of 1913. Mother's maiden name is Carter too, which fits perfectly. Only thing is birth is in Hackney (wrong part of London) but I guess mother could have moved from Hackney to Lewisham after birth but before Baptism. Thanks everyone.

MrsBucketBouquet

MrsBucketBouquet Report 15 Sep 2007 17:22

child's date of birth is Jan 17 1913

Is that Elizabeth Catherines?

Researching:
Pool/Poole?Overs/Hovers/Hovard?Bucket/Bouquet? Thank goodness i havent got a Smiff!........yet

MellieMob

MellieMob Report 15 Sep 2007 17:21

CARTER Phyllis D Carter Hackney.1b 876 1 1913

cant match elizabeth were they twins???

Al

Al Report 15 Sep 2007 17:14

Sorry, fixed second link. Sorry again, I did mean surname. Checking other suggestions now. Thanks everyone. I've been stuck on this for weeks, it is great to get some new ideas.

MellieMob

MellieMob Report 15 Sep 2007 17:12

ps the second web site page not found

Al

Al Report 15 Sep 2007 17:12

Thanks, child's date of birth is Jan 17 1913

MrsBucketBouquet

MrsBucketBouquet Report 15 Sep 2007 17:12

I had a look and would go with what Reg said...'carter'

BTW...2nd link doesnt work.

Gerri x

Researching:
Pool/Poole?Overs/Hovers/Hovard?Bucket/Bouquet? Thank goodness i havent got a Smiff!........yet

Al

Al Report 15 Sep 2007 17:11

Can't find anything for Conlie or similar like Conley or Connelly unfortunately. I suspected as much as I think I've been through most of the 'Co' second names for 1913.

MellieMob

MellieMob Report 15 Sep 2007 17:11

my husband thinks conti

and thats the only one what has come up have you any dates???

Al

Al Report 15 Sep 2007 17:07

Thanks everyone... I'll look into Conlie now.

Whole document is here:
http://www.lewishamchildren.org.uk/Scan10002.jpg

MellieMob

MellieMob Report 15 Sep 2007 17:04

i make it CONLIE

ErikaH

ErikaH Report 15 Sep 2007 17:04

As you have not scanned the whole document, it is hard to work out the relevance.........

What is the heading of the column?

If, by 'second name', you actually mean 'surname', then I would suggest it is CARTER

Reg

Al

Al Report 15 Sep 2007 16:47

Hi all,

I am trying to work out the child's second name here:
http://www.lewishamchildren.org.uk/Scan10001.JPG

It looks like Conki? to me, but needless to say I can find no trace of any Phyllis Doreen or Elizabeth Catherine with that second name, so I fear it can't be.

If anyone better than be at working out old handwriting has any better ideas I'd be very grateful.

Thanks

Al