Genealogy Chat
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.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Can anyone explain?
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Caroline | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:43 |
|
I think the problem is I have started this with absolutely no idea what I am doing. I literally trawl through pages of info most of which I don't know what I am looking at. I am really enjoying it but get very frustrated when I hit something like this. Still this is the only way to learn and of course everyone on here is so helpful. Given time though I may just get to grips with it! |
|||
|
Cornish | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:38 |
|
I had the same problem with one of my relations. The census called them sons and daughters in law which had me perplexed I can tell you. I found out they were children from the wife's former marriage. Dont blame you for getting confused, I certainly was, lol. Now Ive just got to track down whether the husband died or whether they divorced... ah well... Good luck with your tree, Bex |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:12 |
|
Cath, I was going on the info from the 1851 census that states them as 'son in Law' but on further examination the 'wifes' birth place is Belper so I think you all correct, she must have been married previously> I really have got a lot to learn in all this! |
|||
|
Cath | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:09 |
|
Caroline how did you get son-in-law? The 1841 doesn't show relationships just names, ages, occupations and where born (in or out of county) Cath |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:08 |
|
Jess the example is in the 1841 census, Samuel Blackwell living in Wolverhampton with the Westwoods. He was born in Belper Derbyshire |
|||
|
Heather | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:06 |
|
A foster child would be called a nurse child (another one for your notes!). Status is always in relation to the head, so should be the children of the wifes previous marriage |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:05 |
|
I see, makes sense now. Going to have to dig further then. Thank you all so much! Caroline |
|||
|
Fred (“\(*-*)/”) | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:05 |
|
in-law could also mean step ie son in law = step son |
|||
|
Christine | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:05 |
|
I think it may mean 'stepson' - sure I read that somewhere. |
|||
|
Vicky | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:05 |
|
not a formal adoption - no such thing then. is this definitely 1841 - relationships weren't usually shown then |
|||
|
Chris in Sussex | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:05 |
|
Caroline Sons of the wife to the Head of the house. Wife had been previously married. Chris |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:04 |
|
So possibly adoption then? |
|||
|
Perranmaid | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:04 |
|
They were probably step children of head of house was the wife a widow??? when she married him. |
|||
|
Heather | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:04 |
|
Step son |
|||
|
Jess Bow Bag | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:03 |
|
it means something slightly different then legally our son ( son-in-terms of the law) maybe their mother remarried , or they are actually someone elses children they they have taken on. where is your particular example? |
|||
|
Caroline | Report | 22 Mar 2006 21:01 |
|
I am really confused, I have just received a copy of the 1841 census from a very kind member that looked uo the info for me but it has added to my confusion. I have 3 brothers all with the same surname, and they are living with what looks like another family but they are listed as 'son in Law'. These boys are only 11, 9 and 5 so they can't be married to the 'head' of the families daughter. What might this mean? Am I missing something? Cannot find any reference to their parents. I am still quite a newbie to this and I think I may be lacking some basic knowledge.Please advise! Thanks Caroline |
|||