Genealogy Chat

Thanks everyone Rebs that's an interesting bit of information, hon, thanks for that David I haven't located the family on the 1841 census. Lancashire isn't name indexed and there was no address on the baptism notes, it just said Abode: Ashton under Lyne, which isn't particularly helpful. I've located a possible marriage for one of the son's in 1842 so I plan to look that up the next time I go to the RO, in the hope that it will give a 'proper' address to be checked against the 41 census Lou

my auntie nancy is really and Ann. thank god they didn't carry on the tradition. ann

Hi Lou Have you found the the family in the 1841 census? You might get lucky and find that the kids are all still at home. Regards David

I have an ancestor who is listed as 'Joseph' on one census and 'James' on all of the other documents. I know Joseph is the right person -- I think he used his middle name, for whatever reason. My nephew is Joseph Brian, but we called him Brian. During high school he wanted to be called Joe, so now his new friends know him as Joe and his old friends and family still call him Bri. One ancestor was William Vaus. His first two children have the spelling Vaus, the third has Vaux -- which we think was William's original spelling. I found William's gt-granddaughter on the 1881 census and she was using the Vaux spelling again. I don't trust anything I read anymore. I don't know of many 'pet names' for my ancestors, but I do know a lot of the females did use their middle names, which I found surprising.

I have an aunt Nancy and her proper name is actually Agnes...mite be worth checking that out too J x

Nell The eldest Ann in 1817 has the mother as Nancy and the son James in 1824. The others say Hannah. It was a 2nd child called Ann being born 2yrs later to parents John and Hannah that originally made me think that it might be the same woman, as giving the next born daughter the name of one who had died was a common occurence as I know you are aware. Crista Thanks for that, much appreciated. I think for now I'll pencil the 2 children to John and Nancy in. I'll see whether I can trace these children through to their marriages when I next go to the local RO and hope that maybe witnesses to their marriages might be siblings which will confirm the connection. Thanks to both of you for your help Lou

The children seem to be born at the regular 2 yearly intervals, suggesting no break - therefore no maternal death, so I guess its the same woman. nell

Lou, When you search for 'Nancy' at the LDS Family Search site, it also calls up the names Ann(e) and Hannah. Crista

Which years were the two children born with Nancy as mother? nell

Hi Nell John and Hannah married 9 Sep 1816. Children born 1817, 1819, 1821, 1822, 1824, 1825 and 1827. Two of the children are called Ann (the elder Ann died at 9 mths), on all the baptism records, John is stated as a Labourer. All the children baptised at the same church, the same one they married at. But no address for comparison and being a Labourer doesn't really make him stand out. I went through the PR's from 1815 to 1825 and couldn't find a John/Nancy marriage! Lou

If its possible that Hannah and Nancy are two separate women who married John, I would check to see if there is an unusual age gap between the children born to each. nell

I haven't heard of Nancy being short for Hannah, but I do know that Ann is short for Hannah, and in Jane Austen's book 'Sense & Sensibility' Anne Steele is called Nancy by her sister. So its possible Hannah = Ann = Nancy but I would want confirmation, I think. nell

Can Nancy be a shortened version of Hannah? Have found a likely marriage and 7 baptisms that all tie in but 5 have the parents as John and Hannah, the other 2 as John and Nancy, yet I can't find a marriage between John and Nancy. Never heard of Nancy being used for Hannah before so thought I'd ask! Thanks Lou