Anyone else into seeking their ancestors?

[darksideofthemoon]

I have become adicted to Ancestry.com and am lucky enough that one side of my family can be researched way back into the dim times.

The other side has hit a brick wall and I have to wait until someone else in the world may have more information.

How is everyone else going?

[flashie*]

Punch..............I think your understanding of all the records is correct...................back in the early 1800's it would be unusual for all the children to have had the same parents.

Clair............what a shame that you did not get to meet her.............she might have known all the family secrets.

[clair.de.lune]

Who's that flashie the lady in Nazareth House? She died in 1930. However there was an ancestor still alive in Maryborough that my cousin in Perth is spewing she didn't meet in the 70's when she went there. The lady has since passed now how fantastic it would have been to learn about her grandmother (my 2nd grt grandmother) and some others.

punch I'm glad you're solving mysteries, so am I there's always so much more to find! I love it when I find a photo like on a war memorial site or something, it's so special.

[clair.de.lune]

Got a photo printed out that I ordered from Australian War Memorials, he looks so innocent in the photo

[punch*drunk]

---

@flashie* wrote:

I would say they are the orignals........especially being 1805.

Civil registration was not law until 1836/7.

Sometimes there can be bishops transcripts.

I have a similar problem with a Henry Marshall born 1786 in Hemingby..................his christening record says his parents are Mark and Mary...........and the bishops transcript says his parents are Mark and Sarah.

---

You'd have to assume the original is closer to being correct wouldnt you?

In my case I think the original would be the one that says Roberts parents are Sarah and Elizabeth, thats the only one that has dads occupation on it. I'm guessing when they were transcribed, they realised that Robert doesnt have 2 mums and just took a stab in the dark at dads name and then flipped a coin between Sarah & Elizabeth for mums name.

I want Roberts parents to be James & Elizabeth, then everything makes sense.

I think I might email Ancestry and make sure I have them the right way around though. If the other one was first then maybe I'm wrong.

[punch*drunk]

I have a new puzzle to solve...a friend wants me to try and find what happened to her grandmother. Apparently her grandfather kicked her out of the house in 1952 and they never saw her again.

I might email you some information later Flashie to see if you can help at all. So far I'm drawing blanks. If she started using a different name after she left, I may never find her.

[punch*drunk]

Just found her in someone elses tree, she remarried in 1994 and passed away in 2004.

[the_great_she_elephant]

Punch, I don't think the different spelling is significent. I have the original  marriage certificate for mygreat great grandmother and her maiden name is spelt two different ways on the same certificate.

[punch*drunk]

Not concerned about the spelling, its more the discrepancy in parents names.

I'm 99.9% sure the parents of all 3 boys are James & Elizabeth. Roberts babtism record was messed up when they put down Sarah & Elizabeth, and then even further messed up when they changed it to Robert and Sarah.

We have definite proof that the 3 boys are brothers in their convict and immigration records, the only point we're stuck on is the parents names.

When I say "we" I mean me (believeing it James & Elizabeth) and everyone else who has researched this family and has been searching for Robert and Sarah. I dont think they exist.

[punch*drunk]

Why cant I get south australian electoral roll...dont we let them vote??

[punch*drunk]

They dont even have a functional state archives website. I cant even get results searching for Smith!! Surely there must have been at least one Smith in the state in the past 200 years?