Sunday, 8 June 2014

What to keep and what to chuck?

Some people keep everything, even their baby toys, old school reports, the dress they wore for their first date, bus tickets, the list is endless.


Others live a minimal lifestyle and don't keep anything.

But most of us are somewhere in between:  we don't have lots of storage space but there are things from our - and other family members' - past, which we'd like to keep, for whatever reason.

It seems that the type of things which we like the younger generation aren't so keen on.  So no need to keep the Royal Worcester Dinner Service just in case they decide later that they'd like to have it.  Ditto all the knick knacks brought back from holidays abroad and dozens of mis-matched glasses.

It doesn't seem fair to keep everything, then when we're gone - or have moved into supported housing with minimal space - to expect our children to sort through all our stuff.

However, we come from the post-WWII generation which kept things 'because they might come in useful' or might not be in the shops when we needed them.  

I love the story which was in the paper many years ago when someone was clearing out her aunt's house and found a small paper bag in the kitchen drawer.  On the outside it read 'pieces of string too small to do anything with'.  And that set me thinking that we are often guilty of keeping items which there's no way that they'll ever be any use to us - or even to anyone else.


My minimalist daughter says not to keep anything, but to take pictures of everything, as a reminder (and then presumably not lose the pictures!).

Another story I once heard was when a young novice Buddhist monk was asked how he coped with no longer having possessions: 'Did he miss his music collection?'.  His reply was that all the tunes were in his head, so he had no need for the actual vinyl copies any more.

Perhaps we should be letting go of possessions as much as possible. 

Also: should we keep things which mean something to us - or should we be keeping items which are important to the family in general?

I was talking to a friend about an heirloom handed down from his grandfather, and his response was how could the items be important to him as he'd never even met his grandfather?  Good point, but perhaps that heirloom may give clues to future generations about that person.  Would that be important?  Do we need to know about past generations?  

Another point this friend made was how would future generations get a good picture of their ancestor from items something behind?  Perhaps that item did not accurately reflect that person himself, only one aspect of them. 

Indeed, it's going to be very difficult in the future to only tell our children/grandchildren what we'd like them to know, in effect to 'guild the lily'.  They're going to probably know more about us than we'd like!  


At least 100 years ago it was possible to have family secrets. A good example is the family secret only discovered about 20 years after my grandmother died: that she was illegitimate, something which is commonplace now but in those days (1898) was to be very ashamed of.


I was reading somewhere today that things which are often passed down the generations are items which people can remember from earlier in their lives: perhaps an old chair which their father used to sit in every evening; the quilt which was on their bed when they went to stay with Grandma; or 

On balance I think it's important to keep some things from years ago.  People who have had nothing handed down from parents, grandparents, grandparents seem to wish that they had just a few items from their past.  

Remember, every item handed down has a story, a meaning to it.  Keep heirlooms if you can, and attach the details to the item as it's no good doing what many people do and having boxes of photos which no information on the back saying who is who!  

If you don't have the space to store any family memorabilia, see if someone else can; or as a last resort donate it to a local history society.

But it's vital not to lumber the younger generation with boxes and boxes of our 'stuff', like a burden which they'll feel guilty if they throw it all away - and loaded down if they keep it.

If you're still going to keep stuff, here are some tips on how best to store those articles: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-05-03/features/os-marni-jameson-storing-heirlooms-20130503_1_the-container-store-sneak-peek-storage-solutions

Wednesday, 30 April 2014

Birthdays are good for you.

Statistics show that the people who have the most birthdays live longest (Larry Lorenzoni)


Recording births

Before the 19th century, dates of birth were not officially noted, although baptisms occasionally were.  England began keeping parish records of births, deaths and marriages in 1538 but this wasn't implemented for the entire population until the Registration Act of 1836.  
The first British census in 1801 didn't record age, and age wasn't introduced as a question until the 1831 census - even then it wasn't mandatory to actually answer this question.  It wasn't until the 1851 census that people had to record their precise age.

In the 1841 Census a policy of rounding down ages was in place. As such, people aged:

15-19 were recorded as 15
20-24 were recorded as 20
25-29 were recorded as 25
30-34 were recorded as 30
35-39 were recorded as 35...and so on

1841 was the first time that the head of each household was given a form to fill in on behalf of everyone in the dwelling on a set day. This system still forms the basis of the method used today.

The 1841 census was taken on the night of 6 June 1841 and gave the total population as 18,553,124.


It's a pity that until 1841 copies of censuses were not kept as no use could be thought of for them - and even some of the 1841 census was destroyed.  

1851 censuses onwards had far more information included, such as the correct age of people and also where they were born.  In the 1841 census it was 'here' or 'not here'.


Interesting: http://www.schoolhistory.co.uk/year9links/industrial/population.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_in_the_United_Kingdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_censuses gives dates when census actually took place, which is interesting for at least two reasons:
  1. The age of an ancestor can be determined more easily from this information but it's still important to take any ages given with a pinch of salt (especially for 'ladies of a certain age').
  2. Realising on what date the census occurred could give indication as to why some people may not be at their place of residence for the census - for instance it might be Easter, when they could be visiting family for the festival.
1851 census: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Census_1851


What is the purpose of having a census?

The main purpose of the census is to gain information on population development, population structure, households and living conditions.

It is typical for the census to gain information on the national perspective as well as information right down to parish level, on a specific date.

To a significant degree, this type of information is impossible to collect in any other way (information on population structure according to education, economic activity and nationality as well as on families and households', structure and quality of dwelling and housing stock, on commuting to work and school etc.).


The purpose of the census is to provide data on ourselves. It is not an activity for statisticians but for society.  It shows us where we are as a nation and enables future planning.

Having said all this, so much information is gathered about us now electronically, via such items as driving licences, tax, electoral register that perhaps in the future it will no longer be relevant to hold a ten-yearly census.

Diagram: one of the purposes of the census was to help with future planning:



When gardening today, I was wandering round the garden with a bucket and remembered a story which dates back to the early 1970s.  

My widowed grandmother became ill and she didn't want to live in her great big house any more, miles away from her three daughters. 

She decided that she'd like to come and leave near her eldest daughter, in Cornwall - presumably because it was much warmer than nearer the other daughters - in Manchester and in Edinburgh.

She found a lovely bungalow in Saltash which, although in the next street, happened to be at the bottom of my parents' garden.  This was very convenient, my father ran a line down the garden so Grandma could talk to the family whenever she needed.  

Considering she wasn't in the best of health and had been transplanted from her native Yorkshire, where she'd lived for the best part of 80 years, she settled in very well.  

She had a cleaner, also fish and other food items were delivered in those days by a man coming round in his van once a week and all the housewives used to look forward to them coming.

The bungalow must have seemed very small to her, having lived in an enormous farmhouse and then retired to a very big house in Scarborough.

Anyway, to go back to the bucket.

One day my father appeared carrying a bucket (just like me) and my Grandma said: 'Oh, have you come to drown the kittens?'.  

That would seem a very strange thing to hear today.  But if we go back to my Grandma living on the farm, there were always lots of 'outside' cats (often feral), the ones who caught the mice and the rats.  Unfortunately it wasn't easy to catch them and have them neutered.  So a man used to come round regularly and dispatch any unwanted moggies.

These days we'd probably be reported to the RSPCA - but in those days it was perfectly legal (see: https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20101029071148AAJynZB).

Sunday, 22 September 2013

One of the descendants of JHH Smale, Alfred Gardner Pickthall Hodgson,  looks rather interesting ... 

Firstly, to see where he fits in:

Daughter of JHH Smale
Charlotte E Smale
Born: 1851 Woolwich
Married:  Joseph Ralph W Bridle
Born: 1849 Portsea, Parents: Charles James Bridle and Jane E Smith

Children:
Lillian Charlotte, b 1876, Portsea (see below)
Claude Hamilton:  b 1881 Portsea, no issue


Their daughter: Lillian Charlotte Bridle
Called herself Lillian Paumier when an actress

Married: 1895 Manchester to Alfred Gardner Pickthall Hodgson (Paumier)(see bottom of this article)

Children:
Ronald Harker Joseph Alfred Ralph Pickthall , Christchurch 1896
John Hamilton Pickthall Hodgson, b Christchurch 1913


Son No 1: Ronald Harker Joseph Alfred Richard Hodgson-Paumier: Died: 16.8.1917, (515147 Pte Ronald Harker Joseph Alfred Richard Hodgson-Paumier joined 3rd Btn early 1917. Killed in action 16.8.1917, near Hooge during 3rd Battle Ypres, buried in Perth (China Wall) Military Cemetery, Zillebeke, Belgium. Attended Bournemouth School.)

Son No 2: John Hamilton Hodgson Paumier: Death 1940 (source Commonwealth War Graves. Band corporal in Royal Marine Band, on HMS Glorious d aged 27, memorial Portsmouth Naval Memorial in Hants.  Panel 43, column 3.  First married Ivy Brewer in 1937, daughter of that marriage Ann Hodgson Paumier.



To return to Lillian's husband: 
Alfred Gardner Pickthall Hodgson (later Paumier)
Born 1870 Everton, Lancs, Parents: Alfred Richard Hodgson and Diana Peck Boadle
1915 changed his name, London Gazette 14/5/1915 from Alfred Gardner Pickthall Hodgson to Alfred Gardner Pickthall Hodgson Paumier.
Died: 25 1.1951 aged 80, Surrey Alfred GPH Paumier.

Actor:

1914; active in Broadway in The Story of The Rosary, see above picture.

1916: The Lifeguardsman, adventure film, silent, made in UK.

1916: Wanted: A Widow, short, comedy.


1920. The Amateur Gentleman. Directed by Maurice Elvey, who probably also wrote the scenario. Featuring:
1.      Langhorn Burton as Barnabas Barty
2.      Madge Stuart as Lady Cleone Meredith
3.      Cecil Humphreys (I) as Wilfred Chichester
4.      Herbert Synott as John Barty
5.      Pardoe Woodman as Ronald Barrymaine
6.      Alfred Paumier as Prince Regent
7.      Gerald McCarthy as Viscount Horatio Debenham
8.      Geoffrey Wilmer as Captain Slingsby
9.      Sydney Seaward as Sir Mortimer Carnaby
10.  E. Vivian Reynolds as Jasper Gaunt
11.  Dalton Somers as Natty Bell
12.  Teddy Arundell as Digby Smivvle
13.  Will Corrie as Captain Chumley
14.  Judd Green as Jerry the Bosun
15.  A.C. Fotheringham-Lysons as Peterby 


Alfred Paumier plays the boxer who inherits a fortune & poses as a nobleman. He has to save his father from unjust imprisonment & strive not to lose the love of aristocratic Lady Cleone Meredith when inevitably his true identity is revealed.


http://www.violetbooks.com/farnol-films.html (unfortunately this a/c has now been suspended)











Saturday, 24 August 2013

this looks like a good way to record the ancestors!FamilySearch fan chart feature

Friday, 19 April 2013

Genealogy Mistakes to Avoid

  1. Forgetting your living relatives.
  2. Not being aware of the sensitivities of older member of the family when you ask them for/or impart information.
  3. Accepting family legends as fact as nine times out of ten  you will be disappointed.
  4. Don't ridicule people in old photographs as their memory may be held dear.
  5. Assume your ancestors were boring - usually far from it.
  6. Disregard brothers and sisters (collateral ancestors) - they could hold vital clues.
  7. Think genealogy is no more than just names and dates.
  8. Limiting yourself to just one spelling.
  9. Be taken in by generic family histories.
  10. Don't misspell the word genealogy.


Friday, 8 March 2013

For explanations for people new to genealogy and family history see:
http://www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html.

For instance genealogy is the study of blood lines, whereas family history the relating of members of your family to social history and the times in which they lived.