Hi Connie, Thanks for the correction on the interpretation of "double keyed" and "single keyed". The message I was responding to came from you, so.. No harm done! Margaret Taylor Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: "Connie" <connie.sparrer@gmail.com> To: leicestershire-plus@rootsweb.com Sent: Sunday, June 1, 2014 12:44:49 PM Subject: Re: [LEI] Thomas WARREN d 1851-1853 (was: Request) On 01/06/2014 18:03, MARGARET TAYLOR wrote: > Hi Connie, > > I checked the FREE BMD website. There are 2 Thomas Warren's, whose deaths are registered > between the Quarters ending March 1851 and December 1853 (ie. January 1851 to December 1853). > > Both of them passed away in 1851 - one in the quarter ending in March 1851, and the second > in the quarter ending in June 1851. The March 1851 entry has been "double keyed" which means > that is has been entered TWICE, while the other is a lighter shade of gray, so "Single Keyed". > > There are no "age of death" on the entries, but thought that these might give you a > "few threads" to follow. It wasn't me who was interested in finding Thomas WARREN's death but Marlyn. I believe "double keyed" means an entry has been double checked, single keyed means it hasn't and that the lighter colour means there could be data missing. -- Connie http://oursalmons.wordpress.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

If sks has a death index for Leicestershire, I am trying to locate the death of Thomas Warren who died in Leicestershire in the years 1851-1853. Thomas Warren was born about 1813 and was a brick maker by trade. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. Marlynn Johnson Ocean City, NJ USA

Hi Connie, I checked the FREE BMD website. There are 2 Thomas Warren's, whose deaths are registered between the Quarters ending March 1851 and December 1853 (ie. January 1851 to December 1853). Both of them passed away in 1851 - one in the quarter ending in March 1851, and the second in the quarter ending in June 1851. The March 1851 entry has been "double keyed" which means that is has been entered TWICE, while the other is a lighter shade of gray, so "Single Keyed". There are no "age of death" on the entries, but thought that these might give you a "few threads" to follow. Margaret Taylor Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: "Connie" <connie.sparrer@gmail.com> To: leicestershire-plus@rootsweb.com Sent: Sunday, June 1, 2014 10:29:21 AM Subject: Re: [LEI] request On 01/06/2014 16:21, Marlyn wrote: > If sks has a death index for Leicestershire, I am trying to locate the death > of Thomas Warren who died in Leicestershire in the years 1851-1853. Thomas > Warren was born about 1813 and was a brick maker by trade. Have you tried for a burial on www.freereg.org.uk ? It won't give you the date of death which would have been approximately 7 days before the burial nor the cause of death. English and Welsh death certificates don't give the names of the parents or children unless the deceased was a child. It will give the father's name in the occupation column and the mother might be the informant. In the case of an adult, an older or adult child might be the informant. You could also try Deceased Online (http://www.deceasedonline.com/). It is a PAYG site which you can search free of charge and which does sometimes give the date of death. It is a volunteer led site so still a work in progress. I've found this site useful with what is or is not on English and Welsh certificates: http://home.clara.net/dixons/Certificates/indexbd.htm -- Connie http://oursalmons.wordpress.com/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Even more odd, some nearby parishes such as Donisthorpe, Appleby Magna and, if my memory serves me right, Measham, had some parts of the village in each county! Geraldine Researching in Leics: ADAMS, BANCROFT, BEET, COOK, GOWTAGE/GOWTRIDGE, MEASURES, MORTIMER, NEAL, ROSE, SHARP(E), STATHAM, YEOMANS Regards Geraldine Bancroft -----Original Message----- From: David Armstrong Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 1:59 AM To: leicestershire-plus@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LEI] Willesley - 1800 G'day Winston In the late 19th century, many anomalies in county jurisdictions were eliminated. These anomalies had arisen in medieval times when various parishes became the "property" of a diocese with the Bishop having the revenues from the estates involved. This resulted in some parishes being "islands" of one county totally surrounded by the land of another county. It is these anomalies that were reformed in the 19th century. It appears that Willesley was one of these parishes, belonging to Derbyshire but totally surrounded by Leicestershire until the reforms. Regards David Armstrong Maylands, Western Australia ----- Original Message ----- From: Winston Cochrane To: DERBYSGEN@rootsweb.com ; LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 2:50 AM Subject: [LEI] Willesley - 1800 I am looking to find a record of a marriage in the year 1800 in Willesley. A transcription I found in Family Search says Willesley was in Derbyshire. In Google Earth it looks like it is in Leicestershire. In which county was Willesley located in 1800? Thanks. Winston Cochrane Maineville, OH ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

G'day Winston In the late 19th century, many anomalies in county jurisdictions were eliminated. These anomalies had arisen in medieval times when various parishes became the "property" of a diocese with the Bishop having the revenues from the estates involved. This resulted in some parishes being "islands" of one county totally surrounded by the land of another county. It is these anomalies that were reformed in the 19th century. It appears that Willesley was one of these parishes, belonging to Derbyshire but totally surrounded by Leicestershire until the reforms. Regards David Armstrong Maylands, Western Australia ----- Original Message ----- From: Winston Cochrane To: DERBYSGEN@rootsweb.com ; LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 2:50 AM Subject: [LEI] Willesley - 1800 I am looking to find a record of a marriage in the year 1800 in Willesley. A transcription I found in Family Search says Willesley was in Derbyshire. In Google Earth it looks like it is in Leicestershire. In which county was Willesley located in 1800? Thanks. Winston Cochrane Maineville, OH ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com

I am looking to find a record of a marriage in the year 1800 in Willesley. A transcription I found in Family Search says Willesley was in Derbyshire. In Google Earth it looks like it is in Leicestershire. In which county was Willesley located in 1800? Thanks. Winston Cochrane Maineville, OH

Found in the Baptism register of Weston by Welland, Northamptonshire Matthew baseborn son of Ann of Weston 1850 08-Sep born May 3, reputed father Robert Garford (Medbourn) Marilyn   Free lookups are available from Northamptonshire Baptism, Marriage and Burial indexes at   http://www.familyhistorynorthants.co.uk/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------

Should it be of any interest to those on the list .... The Guild of One Name Studies has arranged a seminar on modern records for family historians called "Printed Sources" . Seminars are held quarterly and this seminar is being held at Nuthall near Nottingham, and all seminars are open to members of the public as well as members of the Guild. The cost is £15 per attendee including Lunch and Refreshments. I believe there will be something new even for the most experienced family historian The official programme is as shown below 09:30 - 10:00 Arrival: Registration and Coffee 10:00 - 10:15 Welcome to the Seminar by Dominic Johnson 10:15 - 11:15 All the news that’s fit to read: Newspaper archives (ESTC, Police Gazette, Newspaper Archives, Trade Cards, BBTI, +Finding Family History you never knew existed) — Richard Heaton 11:15 - 11:30 Comfort Break 11:30 - 12:30 Heraldic Detective Work from Scratch – John Titford 12:30 - 13:30 Lunch break 13:30 - 14:30 Standing on the shoulders of giants: Printed genealogies in the Society of Genealogists – Else Churchill 14:30 - 15:00 Tea break 15:00 - 16:00 Electoral Registers and Directories — Dominic Johnson 16:00 - 16:30 Question the Panel 16:30 Close of Seminar If interested you can book a place through the link below http://www.one-name.org/seminar_2014may_printsources.html Very Best Regards Richard Heaton

Hi, other Carolyn! Your mention of an ancestor named Florence Nightingale, etc. prompted me to remember another child naming plan--this time in my own family. My maternal grandmother, Florence Lenore Leffingwell, was the next to the last child in a series of at least six children. I didn't ever hear of any that didn't live, and I think she would have told me if there were. My grandmother's parents started out conventionally naming their children as they were born using names common in the mid-to late 1800s. (Alanson, Laurens, Maude, Fanny, and the sixth child was Charles) I don't know why they strayed from their usual tradition with my grandmother, but she was not named until she was 5 years old. The family called her Baby. When she was five, she was allowed to choose her own name. Florence Nightingale was by that time a legendary heroine in the US and my grandmother picked Florence Nightingale as a name. Then, my great grandfather decided he liked the name, Thenora and lobbied to call my grandmother Florence Thenora. That was vetoed by my great grandmother and my grandmother's name became Florence Lenore. My grandmother didn't know why she was treated differently than the other children, but it didn't seem to bother her! In another more recent situation in my own family, my brother has three girls, born fairly close together. The two oldest girls were included in discussions of what to name the new baby. What the two little girls(ages two and five) decided on was Alice in Wonderland! The family settled on "Allison" Joan. The only part missing was Wonderland. I thought that was quite creative, and a name that would carry Allison with dignity through old age. My husband and I will be attending "Allison's" wedding in August. Carolyn in Minnesota, USA -----Original Message----- From: leicestershire-plus-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:leicestershire-plus-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Carolyn Perkes Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2014 11:55 PM To: leicestershire-plus@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LEI] Sibling deaths Seconded. Well done, Nivard! Among my ancestors there also many instances where a first-born child did not survive and a later child was given the same first name. I had assumed that families wanted to preserve paternal and maternal namesakes. In another vein, I have one very eager, ambitious family in mid-19th century London. There is a Florence Nightingale Eveline, an Inkermann Victor Emmanuel, an Ebenezer Constantine Augustus and an Albert Vansittart Walcott Maurice. Three of these children shed the most obvious historically referenced names (Albert did not survive to adulthood). I wonder how it must have felt, being saddled with such parental aspirations. Carolyn

Seconded. Well done, Nivard! Among my ancestors there also many instances where a first-born child did not survive and a later child was given the same first name. I had assumed that families wanted to preserve paternal and maternal namesakes. In another vein, I have one very eager, ambitious family in mid-19th century London. There is a Florence Nightingale Eveline, an Inkermann Victor Emmanuel, an Ebenezer Constantine Augustus and an Albert Vansittart Walcott Maurice. Three of these children shed the most obvious historically referenced names (Albert did not survive to adulthood). I wonder how it must have felt, being saddled with such parental aspirations. Carolyn On 2014-05-08, at 8:16 AM, Charles Sidebottom wrote: > Well said, Nivard > > -----Original Message----- > > > Hi Brian > > Well done for shaking the branches, you have woken several up enough to > prompt them to post :-) > > Some welcome activity on the list(s), all of which have been far to > quiet of late > > On your questions, the first thing I would say is that we are unlikely > to ever know the whole truth of the situation, but we are in danger of > putting todays interpretations of events onto yesterdays happenings > > I have come across all sorts of naming situations, if there is a > variable, I suspect we have come across it at some stage > > Because some think it odd, quirky or as one or two have said, creepy, it > could not have been the case for those that did it as otherwise they > wouldn't have done so > > Naming was not the free for all it is these days, choice was much more > limited for most people but if using the same name was not their choice > they wouldn't have done it > > I am not named after a deceased sibling so I can't say for certain but > if I were I feel I would not be thinking anything of it > > IMHO in the main, people have always loved their children, mourned their > loss and made the best of life that they could and supported their > living children in the best possible way open to them > > However as I said before, we are unlikely to ever know the whole story > as we don't know what they were thinking at that time, and like today, I > doubt that everyone thought the same way then either > > NB I will reply to both Notts & Leicester separately > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) >

Naming a child after a deceased sibling can have strange results. My great-grandmother lost a son, Albert, known as "Bertie" at one year old. She decided the next child should be called "Bertie" as well. So it was that my great-aunt had to live with the name "Bertie" or "Bert" for the next eighty years. [She was actually christened Beatrice] This actually worked quite well as she lived with her sister Gertrude, always known as "Gertie" or "Gert". On 7 May 2014 23:23, <lastpot@comcast.net> wrote: > It was called "Naming Patterns" and all ethnic groups had their own. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Charles Sidebottom" <sidebc1@comcast.net> > To: "Brian Binns" <bnbinns@gmail.com>, NOTTSGEN-L@rootsweb.com, > leicestershire-plus@rootsweb.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 1:04:27 PM > Subject: Re: [LEI] [NTT] Sibling deaths > > What a fun topic, Brian! > > In the US, the situation was exactly the same. I think in most cases, it > was intended as an honor, but that doesn't mean that it was always > interpreted that way. > > Similar naming has always happened across generations. Most common is when > sons are named the same as their fathers, or less commonly, daughters who > are given the same name as their mothers. In these cases, the younger > generation is always saddled with comments about how they "measure up to > their parents, or grandparents. Personally, if I were in that situation, I > think I would prefer a unique name! > > Winston may recall this extreme bit of nonsense perpetrated by an arrogant > minor celebrity in the United States, George Foreman. I think he was a > boxer (don't hold me to that, I don't follow boxing) when he was younger. > Now he sells small kitchen appliances. Were you all aware that George > Foreman has a rather large family and that ALL his children are legally > named George! Why would his wife put up with that? > > Some listers have mentioned plans or patterns for naming children. I am > aware of published plans for naming schemes that I have seen occasionally > in various genealogy literature. If anyone is interested, I can attempt to > find one of these for you. All of these schemes are similar--the first son > is named after his father. The first daughter is named after her mother, > the third child is supposed to be named after somebody else (probably > grandparents, and so forth. > > In my maternal line, there was a scheme where the first daughter of the > second child (I dare you to try to figure out how to keep that going!) was > supposed to be named Gertrude! My mother fell into this web! She hated her > name, but hated Trudy and Gertie worse. She could have used her middle > name, Mae, but some of the Gertrudes were still alive and she didn't want > to > hurt anyone's feelings, so she was stuck. I am so glad that it was my > cousin Sally who was supposed to be named Gertrude instead of me! I think > she may be MORE thankful that my mother talked her sister into ending this > tradition! > > Another interesting, but sad situation involved Mrs. Abraham Lincoln. We > now know her by the name Mary Todd Lincoln. She began life as Mary Ann Todd > When she was a young child (around four or five, her mother died and her > father remarried. When they had a daughter, the new Mrs. Lincoln wanted the > name Mary Ann for her baby, so weak-willed Mr. Todd allowed Ann to be > stripped from Mary Ann's name and given to this new interloper in her > family. The new baby was Mary Ann Todd. Former Mary Ann Todd was known by > Mary Todd until she married. No wonder Mary Todd Lincoln was always a bit > insecure! > > When it comes to baby names, apparently anything goes! > > Carolyn, in Minnesota, USA > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- *Anthony Martin* *Clerk to the Parish Council* *Down St Mary*

Brian's post, and some of the replies, have struck several chords with me (and prompted me to take time away from the living to chase the dead - Thanks Brian!!) - on my Dad's paternal line we have the scottish naming tradition used, and when the first James HEATHERILL in the family died young, my direct ancestor was also named James - and thankfully lived to a ripe old age, moving the family business from Scotland to Leicester where his daughter Agnes married great grandad Edwin Henry BUTLER (a.k.a. E H BUTLER II). My Dad is E H BUTLER IV - but having had 3 daughters is the last in the line of Leicester chemists "E H BUTLER & SON LTD". My current brick wall concerns the BUTLERs further up the tree. Edward Henry BUTLER (EHB I)'s father was John, the first chemist in the line, who died young in 1834 and was buried at St Martin's. His father, Henry BUTLER, born Leics c. 1769 according to the 1841, married Elizabeth FIELDING in 1799 at St Martin's, and conducted his Cordwainer's business in Cank Street, High Street and Highcross Street. Henry died in 1849, aged 80, in Leicester. The brick wall is where in Leics was Henry born, and who was his father??!! >From a page in a family bible I know that Henry's mother was Margaret, who died Feb 16 1807, aged 75. Have checked settlement certificates/wills at the Record office to no avail, have yet to track down records from the Guild of Shoemakers, or where Margaret died. Any further suggestions as to how to progress Henry's story backwards welcomed. Thanks, Maggie Formerly OzDais/Halfajigsaw/Charnwood06@aol.com http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/s/i/l/Margaret-A-Silver/

Well said, Nivard -----Original Message----- From: leicestershire-plus-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:leicestershire-plus-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Nivard Ovington Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 3:38 PM To: leicestershire-plus@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LEI] Sibling deaths Hi Brian Well done for shaking the branches, you have woken several up enough to prompt them to post :-) Some welcome activity on the list(s), all of which have been far to quiet of late On your questions, the first thing I would say is that we are unlikely to ever know the whole truth of the situation, but we are in danger of putting todays interpretations of events onto yesterdays happenings I have come across all sorts of naming situations, if there is a variable, I suspect we have come across it at some stage Because some think it odd, quirky or as one or two have said, creepy, it could not have been the case for those that did it as otherwise they wouldn't have done so Naming was not the free for all it is these days, choice was much more limited for most people but if using the same name was not their choice they wouldn't have done it I am not named after a deceased sibling so I can't say for certain but if I were I feel I would not be thinking anything of it IMHO in the main, people have always loved their children, mourned their loss and made the best of life that they could and supported their living children in the best possible way open to them However as I said before, we are unlikely to ever know the whole story as we don't know what they were thinking at that time, and like today, I doubt that everyone thought the same way then either NB I will reply to both Notts & Leicester separately Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 07/05/2014 14:43, Brian Binns wrote:> The lists have been very quiet of late, so I thought that I would air some > thoughts that have been swirling inside my head for a few weeks - bear with > me, it is genealogy related. > > > > I am a fairly regular listener to "The Archers", which for people abroad who > don't know, is a BBC radio serial - the oldest continuous radio serial in > the world - ostensibly about a farming community in rural England. The main > story that has been running in recent weeks concerns Tom Archer who was due > to be married, in what would have been one of the biggest events in "The > Archers" for years. I say was due, because at the last minute - actually ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

It was called "Naming Patterns" and all ethnic groups had their own. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles Sidebottom" <sidebc1@comcast.net> To: "Brian Binns" <bnbinns@gmail.com>, NOTTSGEN-L@rootsweb.com, leicestershire-plus@rootsweb.com Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 1:04:27 PM Subject: Re: [LEI] [NTT] Sibling deaths What a fun topic, Brian! In the US, the situation was exactly the same. I think in most cases, it was intended as an honor, but that doesn't mean that it was always interpreted that way. Similar naming has always happened across generations. Most common is when sons are named the same as their fathers, or less commonly, daughters who are given the same name as their mothers. In these cases, the younger generation is always saddled with comments about how they "measure up to their parents, or grandparents. Personally, if I were in that situation, I think I would prefer a unique name! Winston may recall this extreme bit of nonsense perpetrated by an arrogant minor celebrity in the United States, George Foreman. I think he was a boxer (don't hold me to that, I don't follow boxing) when he was younger. Now he sells small kitchen appliances. Were you all aware that George Foreman has a rather large family and that ALL his children are legally named George! Why would his wife put up with that? Some listers have mentioned plans or patterns for naming children. I am aware of published plans for naming schemes that I have seen occasionally in various genealogy literature. If anyone is interested, I can attempt to find one of these for you. All of these schemes are similar--the first son is named after his father. The first daughter is named after her mother, the third child is supposed to be named after somebody else (probably grandparents, and so forth. In my maternal line, there was a scheme where the first daughter of the second child (I dare you to try to figure out how to keep that going!) was supposed to be named Gertrude! My mother fell into this web! She hated her name, but hated Trudy and Gertie worse. She could have used her middle name, Mae, but some of the Gertrudes were still alive and she didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings, so she was stuck. I am so glad that it was my cousin Sally who was supposed to be named Gertrude instead of me! I think she may be MORE thankful that my mother talked her sister into ending this tradition! Another interesting, but sad situation involved Mrs. Abraham Lincoln. We now know her by the name Mary Todd Lincoln. She began life as Mary Ann Todd When she was a young child (around four or five, her mother died and her father remarried. When they had a daughter, the new Mrs. Lincoln wanted the name Mary Ann for her baby, so weak-willed Mr. Todd allowed Ann to be stripped from Mary Ann's name and given to this new interloper in her family. The new baby was Mary Ann Todd. Former Mary Ann Todd was known by Mary Todd until she married. No wonder Mary Todd Lincoln was always a bit insecure! When it comes to baby names, apparently anything goes! Carolyn, in Minnesota, USA ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Brian Well done for shaking the branches, you have woken several up enough to prompt them to post :-) Some welcome activity on the list(s), all of which have been far to quiet of late On your questions, the first thing I would say is that we are unlikely to ever know the whole truth of the situation, but we are in danger of putting todays interpretations of events onto yesterdays happenings I have come across all sorts of naming situations, if there is a variable, I suspect we have come across it at some stage Because some think it odd, quirky or as one or two have said, creepy, it could not have been the case for those that did it as otherwise they wouldn't have done so Naming was not the free for all it is these days, choice was much more limited for most people but if using the same name was not their choice they wouldn't have done it I am not named after a deceased sibling so I can't say for certain but if I were I feel I would not be thinking anything of it IMHO in the main, people have always loved their children, mourned their loss and made the best of life that they could and supported their living children in the best possible way open to them However as I said before, we are unlikely to ever know the whole story as we don't know what they were thinking at that time, and like today, I doubt that everyone thought the same way then either NB I will reply to both Notts & Leicester separately Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 07/05/2014 14:43, Brian Binns wrote:> The lists have been very quiet of late, so I thought that I would air some > thoughts that have been swirling inside my head for a few weeks - bear with > me, it is genealogy related. > > > > I am a fairly regular listener to "The Archers", which for people abroad who > don't know, is a BBC radio serial - the oldest continuous radio serial in > the world - ostensibly about a farming community in rural England. The main > story that has been running in recent weeks concerns Tom Archer who was due > to be married, in what would have been one of the biggest events in "The > Archers" for years. I say was due, because at the last minute - actually

On Wed, 07 May 2014 20:04:04 +0100 Connie <connie.sparrer@gmail.com> wrote: Hello Connie, >This idea of being adopted seems to be quite common in children for >various reasons. I've heard it a number of times. Our eldest has used it on occasion to try and bait me and the missus; "You're not my parents, I'm adopted" and "Yes dad. If that's your real name..." I'm sure you know the sort of thing. >A childhood friend firmly believed she's been adopted, mainly on the >grounds she didn't look like her parents or her younger sister. Yet Yeah, but who thinks they look like their family? We all tend to see the differences, it's only the people around us that see the similarities. >she never questioned that three boys who lived opposite us were full >blood brothers despite the middle one being the only red head in the >family. It can happen. Not often perhaps. >Years later I discovered she wasn't but he was! :-)) -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent" You're the psychotic daughter of a psychotic mother Pure Mania - The Vibrators

On 07/05/2014 19:17, Brad Rogers wrote: > It's bizarre what some people think Particularly children. > > An acquaintance of mine told me a story regarding her own childhood: > There were fewer pictures of her than her older brother. This was partly > explained because the brother had been around longer to have pictures > taken of him, and partly because, with a second child, the parents had > less time to take pictures and partly because the incentive isn't > there. Despite all that being the case, and having it all explained to > her, my acquaintance was convinced (at the time) that the truth was > there were fewer pictures of her because she had been adopted. This idea of being adopted seems to be quite common in children for various reasons. I've heard it a number of times. A childhood friend firmly believed she's been adopted, mainly on the grounds she didn't look like her parents or her younger sister. Yet she never questioned that three boys who lived opposite us were full blood brothers despite the middle one being the only red head in the family. Years later I discovered she wasn't but he was! -- Connie http://oursalmons.wordpress.com/

On Wed, 07 May 2014 15:40:09 +0100 Connie <connie.sparrer@gmail.com> wrote: Hello Connie, >I don't think a child would have thought that had an older sibling not >died, they wouldn't have been born. I don't think children think like >that at all, even today. It's bizarre what some people think Particularly children. An acquaintance of mine told me a story regarding her own childhood: There were fewer pictures of her than her older brother. This was partly explained because the brother had been around longer to have pictures taken of him, and partly because, with a second child, the parents had less time to take pictures and partly because the incentive isn't there. Despite all that being the case, and having it all explained to her, my acquaintance was convinced (at the time) that the truth was there were fewer pictures of her because she had been adopted. She doesn't believe that now. -- Regards _ / ) "The blindingly obvious is / _)rad never immediately apparent" Chose to play the fool in a six piece band What A Waste - Ian Dury And The Blockheads

I often wondered about my father's christian names - Norman Harry - and assumed the Harry was after his mother's brother who had died a few years before in WW1. However on researching the family, I found that my father's grandmother had had a baby boy before she married who died at 6 weeks of age. His name was ... Norman Harry! So my father's mother had named my father after a half-brother and maybe the brother Harry was named after him too. I still don't know where the Norman came from - no others on any side of the family! Regards Geraldine Bancroft -----Original Message----- From: Brian Binns Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 2:43 PM To: NOTTSGEN-L@rootsweb.com ; leicestershire-plus@rootsweb.com Subject: [LEI] Sibling deaths The lists have been very quiet of late, so I thought that I would air some thoughts that have been swirling inside my head for a few weeks - bear with me, it is genealogy related. I am a fairly regular listener to "The Archers", which for people abroad who don't know, is a BBC radio serial - the oldest continuous radio serial in the world - ostensibly about a farming community in rural England. The main story that has been running in recent weeks concerns Tom Archer who was due to be married, in what would have been one of the biggest events in "The Archers" for years. I say was due, because at the last minute - actually inside the church - he jilted his bride to be, and has since "disappeared". At first he wouldn't/couldn't explain why he did what he did, but finally admitted to his mother that he felt his whole life had been a sham, with it all being mapped out - getting married, eventually inheriting the farm etc etc, and that this was due to the fact that his (fictitious) brother John had been killed in a farm accident many years ago. In other words, if John had not died, Tom's life would have been totally different and he had carrying this guilt ever since. Very deep and thought provoking I know, but it made me think about some of the lines in my family tree. I have many instances in my family tree of a child dying, and the subsequent child of the same sex, being given the same name, and I'm sure that I'm not alone in this. Now notwithstanding the story in The Archers, I have always though that that was rather odd and creepy. The succeeding child could go through life thinking that he/she would not have existed if his/her sibling hadn't died. Or am I thinking too deeply? Was life, and more particularly death, treated somewhat differently in the 19th century? Would one William for instance even know that there had been another William who had previously died? With families regularly getting towards double figures - births at least - perhaps the death of a child was sadly forgotten. It certainly was almost expected that all your children would not survive to adulthood. The inability of older people to know their age, we are told, was due to the fact that simply they were not aware of their birth year - for instance they wouldn't have celebrated each and every birthday as children do today, so childhood was most certainly different - and much shorter. A bit deep I accept, but as I say the thought of a child growing up with a dead child's name has always concerned me. Brian Binns ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On this subject of naming, I should disclose that my full name is William Winston Cochrane IV. Yes there is a V and a VI! Each time the name has been handed from father to son. To keep individuals straight, each was verbally called, in order, William, Will, Bill, Winston, Bill and Will. Although I have never felt any pressure to "live up to" anyone just because of my name, I am never the less proud of my namesake. William Winston emigrated from England or Wales to Virginia circa 1660, and became the progenitor of a very large and prosperous Winston family in Virginia. As an example of how the Winston family re-used names, in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th generations there were 46 men, and 29 of those had the names: William (11), Anthony (7), John (6) and Isaac (5). With a lot of the early Virginia records lost during wars, it has caused genealogists to spend a lot of time over 150 years trying to sort out who is who. I do know that I am directly descended from 2 of the progenitor's 3 sons. William Winston is both my 6th and 7th great-grandfather. My 3rd great-grandmother, Lucy Winston, married David Cochran in Virginia in 1774 when she was only 14! It is my understanding that this practice of women in the Colonies marrying quite young by our standards, wasn't all that uncommon then. I would like to hear anyone's comments on the why this was a somewhat frequent and accepted practice then, and if it was also the same in England. Sorry, but I didn't mean to get so far afield from Brian's original subject, but one thought led to another, etc. Thanks. Winston -----Original Message----- From: leicestershire-plus-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:leicestershire-plus-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Charles Sidebottom Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 1:04 PM To: 'Brian Binns'; NOTTSGEN-L@rootsweb.com; leicestershire-plus@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LEI] [NTT] Sibling deaths What a fun topic, Brian! In the US, the situation was exactly the same. I think in most cases, it was intended as an honor, but that doesn't mean that it was always interpreted that way. Similar naming has always happened across generations. Most common is when sons are named the same as their fathers, or less commonly, daughters who are given the same name as their mothers. In these cases, the younger generation is always saddled with comments about how they "measure up to their parents, or grandparents. Personally, if I were in that situation, I think I would prefer a unique name! Winston may recall this extreme bit of nonsense perpetrated by an arrogant minor celebrity in the United States, George Foreman. I think he was a boxer (don't hold me to that, I don't follow boxing) when he was younger. Now he sells small kitchen appliances. Were you all aware that George Foreman has a rather large family and that ALL his children are legally named George! Why would his wife put up with that? Some listers have mentioned plans or patterns for naming children. I am aware of published plans for naming schemes that I have seen occasionally in various genealogy literature. If anyone is interested, I can attempt to find one of these for you. All of these schemes are similar--the first son is named after his father. The first daughter is named after her mother, the third child is supposed to be named after somebody else (probably grandparents, and so forth. In my maternal line, there was a scheme where the first daughter of the second child (I dare you to try to figure out how to keep that going!) was supposed to be named Gertrude! My mother fell into this web! She hated her name, but hated Trudy and Gertie worse. She could have used her middle name, Mae, but some of the Gertrudes were still alive and she didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings, so she was stuck. I am so glad that it was my cousin Sally who was supposed to be named Gertrude instead of me! I think she may be MORE thankful that my mother talked her sister into ending this tradition! Another interesting, but sad situation involved Mrs. Abraham Lincoln. We now know her by the name Mary Todd Lincoln. She began life as Mary Ann Todd When she was a young child (around four or five, her mother died and her father remarried. When they had a daughter, the new Mrs. Lincoln wanted the name Mary Ann for her baby, so weak-willed Mr. Todd allowed Ann to be stripped from Mary Ann's name and given to this new interloper in her family. The new baby was Mary Ann Todd. Former Mary Ann Todd was known by Mary Todd until she married. No wonder Mary Todd Lincoln was always a bit insecure! When it comes to baby names, apparently anything goes! Carolyn, in Minnesota, USA ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LEICESTERSHIRE-PLUS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message