Strange convoluted biography

+4 votes
437 views

If anyone is interested in commenting upon my research notes for Ann BLACK [Black-24782] I would appreciate hearing from them. If I have her story correct it is one of the strangest I have encountered. 

WikiTree profile: Ann Inglis
in Genealogy Help by Bob Shepherd G2G4 (4.8k points)
retagged by Ellen Smith

4 Answers

+5 votes

Is there reason to doubt that there were two different Ann Inglises married to different Inglis men?

by M. Hebert G2G6 Mach 1 (14.2k points)
+3 votes

Yes, it is a bit convoluted to follow. 

After interweaving the facts that are down in the research notes into the biography, I am not convinced this is all the same person. Here's what I can gather, based on the records you have cited:

Ann Duncan, was b. 1826 to William Duncan and Ann Innes. In 1841, she may have been enumerated with her cousins, George Black & family. 

In 1851, a woman named Ann Inglis, of the same age as Ann Duncan, was enumerated with the Duncan family and listed as married and a daughter.

In 1861, Ann Inglis is enumerated with the Duncans and listed as widowed and a daughter.

In 1861, Ann Black marries John Inglis. Subsequent to that they have three children. They are together on the 1871 census. 

In 1901, two separate [?] deaths occur: One for Ann Black whose mother's maiden name was Robb, and one for Ann Inglis whose mother's maiden name was also Robb.

I can only see the transcriptions for the censuses and nothing for the other records, but I assume you've seen the originals.

Questions & comments:

  1. Where are all of these people in 1831?
  2. Are you confident that George Black did not have a daughter named Ann? Or is it possible Ann was mistakenly listed as a Black while staying with her cousins? I frequently see records of girls about that age being traded around to help family when someone is sick, there's a new baby, etc., so it doesn't surprise me to see her with cousins.
  3. Is is possible there's an earlier marriage record for Ann to another Inglis? Maybe she was recently married to a different Inglis who has work (sailor, fisherman, criminal) that takes him away, so she stays with her parents. He dies. Later she marries again to his...cousin? Brother? It would be worthwhile checking the exact date the 1861 census was taken*, since she may have remarried later in the year. Also, the citation for the marriage record says it happened in 1961. I'm assuming that's just a typo, since you have them together in 1871.
  4. Are those actually two different death records? Or different versions of the same record, one under her maiden name and one under her married name?
*I don't know about the UK, but in the US the census takers are supposed to use the "official census date" and enumerate where people were living in that date. In my experience, though, they usually just wrote down whoever lived there or was there for an extended visit on they day they actually showed up to take the count. On US census pages in 1850 & later the enumerators wrote the date of their visit, so that can be helpful in tracing events.
by Regan Conley G2G6 Mach 4 (49.5k points)
Background and Answers. Firstly genealogy is not a passion for me as it perhaps would be if I were Mormon.  Instead I'm simply an 82 year old stuck in a senior's residence with nothing to do all day but spend time sitting at the computer in my room. At the start of COVID in early 2020 we were locked into our rooms for several months and to occupy my time I resurrected my interest in genealogy from early in the century when I was attempting to assist a grandchild with a school project.  Anyway, I am not a paying member of Ancestry.com or any other such group, nor can I afford to buy credits to use Scotlandspeople.  I rely solely on Scotlandspeople free index searches, FreeCen and the WikiTree link to FamilySearch and whatever is freely shown in Ancestry.com.  Finally, I live in Canada and my only prior research was for Scottish relations which places further limitations on my abilities.

Having said the above, I have no means of knowing where any of the questioned individuals were in 1831.  And yes it is true that there are either 2 entirely different individuals named Ann or 2 different individuals named John Inglis.  In fact it bothers me that Ann in the Blacks 1841 census would appear to have been born in 1828 which is consistent with the Ann in 1851-1871 censuses and her death registration, but her birth registration as Ann Duncan was 1826.  However, those same 1851-1871 censuses is where she is shown as the daughter of the Duncans.

So, in my mind there is still the question of why she is indicated as being married in 1851, widowed in 1861 and married again in 1871. The only supposition in my mind is that the husband in 1851 had the surname Inglis, died before 1861 census and she then re-married to an entirely different husband name Inglis.  But, I can't find a record of an earlier marriage.  In any case if Ann were truly married to anyone by the 1851 census, she would have had to have married offly young.
I just picked-up on your mention of the marriage year. That was my typo and is corrected.  As things now stand, I'm also conflicted if the profile ID and profile heading shouldn't be changed to Duncan, rather than Black. Also the surname used in her biography.
You really do have some tricky questions with this one.

It's possible that there might be more, or clearer information on the copies of the original records. So, I'd just put that on a list of "one day, when you have a chance." Sometimes there are free days for things, etc.

Now the COVID restrictions are lifted, can you get to a public library? Most public libraries in the US and Canada have Ancestry available to use on their computers for free along with some other genealogy databases.

I don't do a ton of research in Scotland, so I'm not an expert at where to look next.
+5 votes

I looked for the family of William Duncan in the 1841 census.  If this is the correct family

Wm Duncan in 1841

then Ann Black isn't his daughter because he has an Ann of the right age living with him.  However, just to complicate things, she appears to have been born Ann Thomson, not Ann Duncan...  Perhaps, looking at the list of children, this was a second marriage for both parents? 

by L Parr G2G6 Mach 3 (30.9k points)
What is the evidence that Ann was born Ann Thomson? How is she linked to the Ann Black in the 1841 census?
Sorry, I haven't explained myself very well.  

I don't think either Ann Thomson or the Duncan family are linked to Ann Black.  

I think the Ann Thomson in the 1841 census with the Duncan family is the same person as the Ann Inglis who appears with the Duncan family as their daughter in the 1851 and 1861 censuses and that Ann Black cannot therefore be connected to the Duncan family, as you found her with George and Elizabeth Black in 1841.  

As M Hebert suggests, I think there were two women called Ann Inglis - Ann (Black) Inglis whose marriage you've found; and Ann (Thomson) Inglis who was with the Duncan family as a daughter in 1841 / 1851 /1861.

Which brings us back to your original problem - not being able to find Ann Black, daughter of George and Elizabeth Black in either the 1851 or 1861 censuses.  George Black was a ship's carpenter, which to my mind makes it quite likely that Ann was the sort of girl who went into domestic service in her mid-teens, but that's just a guess on my part.

I think the answer from L Parr is very likely correct. I was being led by not being able to find a birth record, while finding the other children of George and Elizabeth straightforward. There is a very likely 1851 census for Ann Black, aged 22, born at Foveran (like the other Black children) and working as a servant in Aberdeen.  It's not that unusual in the early 1800 to be unable to find a birth registration.  I have also found an 1861 census for an Ann Black living as the wife of a John Inglis and can only presume the census occurred prior to their 1861 marriage.  Muddying the waters, she is shown as married and that she was born in Newburgh, Aberdeenshire. As according to MSMaps, Newburg is right beside Foveran so that seems acceptable..  It would also appear from children also shown on the 1861 census, that John was likely previously married. I will correct Ann's profile based on that info and then get to work on her husband John.  Thanks everyone for your assistance.

+5 votes

I can't help but notice that the death records you reference in ScotlandsPeople for "Anne Inglis" and "Anne Black" point to the exact same physical record, "Ref: 481 / B2 / 65, RD Name: GRANGEMOUTH."  Have you looked at the jpeg image for either of these records?  It seems like there might be a transcription error.

by Nancy Freeman G2G6 Mach 3 (37.0k points)
I doubt it's a transcription error, but rather a recording of two different surnames for the same woman in the database. It was common in Scotland for a married woman to use her maiden name, or else both her maiden and married names at different times. And it is common in the civil death records to find both names recorded. Scotland's People then make the record searchable using either name as the surname of interest, and that seems to be what happened here.

I described a way to exploit this database design here:

https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1142025/scotlandspeople-trick-hack
That's interesting; I haven't run into this phenomenon myself.  With the death records I've been looking at (untangling my Inglis and Louden ancestors in Fife), both the married name and the maiden name appear in the original handwritten record, but it's indexed in the database only by the married name.
I don't have access to the images as I am intent on not spending any money on this passtime, i.e. credits to buy document images from Scotlandspeople. Deaths of married females from 1855 onward are indexed by Scotlandspeople under both maiden and married surnames.
Yes, in Scotland after the state took over the record keeping from the churches in 1855, women's deaths are recorded under their birth name, and also, under their married name (if they were married). This is a useful way of discovering if a woman in your tree married, because you can then often trace husband and children

Related questions

+4 votes
1 answer
+1 vote
1 answer
+3 votes
2 answers
+5 votes
1 answer
+1 vote
1 answer
86 views asked May 13, 2018 in Genealogy Help by anonymous
+18 votes
2 answers
161 views asked Apr 22, 2021 in The Tree House by Paul Black G2G Crew (670 points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...