I am glad I have attempted the "52 ancestors in 52 weeks" principle again, even if I wasn't sticking to the suggested topics. But it is clear to me that I currently do not have the research documented well enough to try working to that schedule. Hence I won't be including that as part of the title anymore and will remove the badge from the blog, as well. From now on, I shall just be posting about my ancestors, and their descendants, as and when it suits the research carried out.
Anyway, on with my second set of paternal great grandparents, my Dad's maternal grandparents, George THOMAS and Rose Hannah HAYNES.
George and Rose were married on the 25th December 1895, in Bromyard parish Church. Although Rose Hannah's names had been recorded as "Rose Hannah" at her birth, and "Rosannah" in the 1881 census, perhaps indicating that the family did make common use of her middle name, at her marriage only the name "Rose" is recorded:
 |
| The 1895 marriage certificate of George THOMAS & Rose HAYNES |
Marriage dates like this always tend to stand out, when I come across them in the records. Why marry on the 25th December - Christmas Day? It is probably not a date that many of us in the UK these days would consider getting married on.
But, in George and Rose Hannah's time, there weren't the 'holiday entitlements' that the majority of working folk enjoy now. Most people worked six days a week and, if they didn't work, they didn't get paid. So taking time off to get married was often not an option. Weddings were therefore planned for the few public holidays that existed.
When George and Rose Hannah married, George was 24, working as a carter and living at Stoke Bliss, and Rose was 21, a domestic servant, resident in Bromyard. The certified copy of the certificate that I have was hand written in 1980, so does not contain any of the genuine signatures, but it appears that both George and Rose, as well as their two witnesses, Henry JAMES and Lilly THOMAS (probably one of George's sisters) were able to sign for themselves.
George and Rose's first child, Edith, was born on the 30th October 1896. At that time they were living at Brick Barns, Underley, Wolferlow, in Herefordshire.
In the 1891 census, there were three properties called "Underley" (Lower, Middle and Upper), as well as two cottages called "Underley Cottage" The Brick Barns were enumerated in between Middle Underley and Upper Underley and two of George's sisters, Matilda and Annie, were working as servants at Upper Underley. The two girls were living with the family of a Samuel JONES. But a William BALDWIN lived at Lower Underley and I believe, from family stories, that various members of the THOMAS family have worked for the BALDWINs over the years.
Both Upper Underley and Lower Underley are listed buildings, the former a medieval hall house, the latter dating from the late eighteenth century. A barn to the north west of Lower Underley, dating from the early nineteenth century, is also a listed building. Described as a "large red brick barn with twin gabled wing. Tile roof with gable ends," one wonders if this might have been where George and Rose were living when Edith was born.
However, based on the enumeration order, since "Middle Underley" was further north than the listed barn (which is within the same group of buildings as Lower Underley), it seems more likely that the relevant "Brick Barns" was closer to Upper Underley.
George and Rose's second child, Ernest, was born on the 2nd May 1899. The address this time is just given as Underley, Wolferlow, so it is impossible to identify which of the Underley properties the family were living in.
But when their third child, Hilda Mary, is born on the 13th November 1900, their address is again listed as Brick Barns, Underley, so it seems plausible they had been living there all the time.
By the time of the 1901 census, the family had moved to Coombs Wood, Collington - still in Herefordshire. I suspect this was somewhere in the region identified as "Cwm Wood" on contemporary maps.
It was here that my grandmother, Elsie May, was born on the 3rd April 1902. George, who had been described as a "general laborer" for their first three children's births, was this time described as a "Farmer".
However, when their fifth child, Ada Annie, was born on the 20th April 1904, his occupation was once again "General Laborer". George was the informant for each of these births so one wonders why the variation. Perhaps, as I have found with other ancestors, George was engaged in some small scale farming for himself, whilst also labouring on behalf of an employer, so both occupations were correct.
Matilda Jane was the next child, born on the 17th May 1906, followed by Emily, on the 25th April 1908. Emily's is the first birth registered by their mother, Rose. One suspects registration had initially been forgotten, as the birth isn't registered until the 11th June 1908, five days over the 42 day time limit. They might have been fined for this late registration, but perhaps there was some leeway as to when fines were applied. Since the Registrar was the same one who had registered all of their previous children, he would be in a position to identify that they were not generally a family who were 'non-compliant', so I hope he was able to waive the fine. (I wonder if the Registrars kept records of fines?)
On the 30th April 1910, the eighth child and second son, George John, was born.
The 1911 census shows the family at "Coombs Wood in Whitbourne, Worcester" - I suspect this is yet another case where the family haven't moved but the county boundary (at least, administratively for the census) has! Present are George, Rose, Ernest, Hilda, Elsie, Ada, Matilda, Emily and George.
The oldest daughter, Edith, aged 14, is working as a general domestic servant at Butterley Mill Bromyard. Although it is often difficult to identify individuals working as servants away from their families, I think the fact that Edith's birth place is recorded as "Barn House Woffellow", I can be quite confident about this entry.🙂
In the years following the census, two further children were born, both girls, Olive, on the 5th December 1912, and finally, Dorothy Rose, on the 1st June 1915.
From my point of view, there is a benefit from this number of children being in the family - it has led to there being many descendants, which increases the chances of some of them deciding to take a DNA test.
George and Rose had twenty nine grandchildren (that I know of) and I am aware of at least fifty two other great grandchildren. Since these great grandchildren are all within the range of 'siblings to second cousins' to me, any of them that take a DNA test should show up as matching me.
Already, I have a cluster of "shared matches" as a result, and any new matches that also match people in this cluster can therefore be identified as connected to my THOMAS/HAYNES ancestral lines in some way, even if I don't know the exact link.
It is wonderful to be able to confirm my genealogy through the use of DNA like this.
References
Christmas Day weddings - https://www.findmypast.co.uk/blog/discoveries/christmas-day-weddings
Historic England Listings for Underley, Herefordshire:
https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/results/?searchType=NHLE+Simple&search=underley%2C+herefordshire
Census
1891: (Matilda and Annie THOMAS) Class RG12; Piece: 2071; Folio: 12; Page: 2
1901: Class: RG13; Piece: 2491; Folio: 8; Page: 7
1911: Class: RG14; Piece: 15795; Schedule Number: 20
1911 (Edith): Class: RG14; Piece: 15787; Schedule Number: 50
