How do you choose?

[Carla]

This week I have been researching some ancestors that were born in the mid 1700s, and I have come across a bit of a problem. Let me explain, and then could anyone advise me on what to look for please.....

A direct ancestor is Elizabeth Gradley b1788 St George in the East, Tower Hamlets, Middlesex
her baptism states her parents are Robt Gradley and Ann Gradley and they married in 1782. I know Ann's maiden name is Falder. So far so good and I am happy this is the correct person.

I have been trying to identify her father Robert, and have found two possibilities.
One is
NAME: Robert Gridley
PARENTS: Robert Gridley
Anne Gridley
BAPTISM: 19 Jan 1751 - St Paul, Shadwell, Middlesex, England
or
NAME: Robert Gridley
PARENTS: Robert Gridley
Elizabeth Gridley
BAPTISM: 5 Mar 1760 - All Hallows the Great, London, England

So how do I choose which one is correct? I originally had the second one in my tree but on checking out a lot of other ancestral trees the first option seems to be the prefered choice. Both have Robert as father. Every tree I looked at has Elizabeth's grandfather the same as I do bcause there only appears to be one Robert born around the correct time and in the area

London, England, Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, 1538-1812 about Robert Gradley
Name:Robert Gradley
Baptism Date:8 Mar 1729
Parish:St Mary, Whitechapel
County:Middlesex
Borough:Tower Hamlets
Parent(s):John,
Elizabeth
Record Type:Baptism
Register TypeParish Register

So the only thing that seems to cause a problem for everyone to decide is was Elizabeth's father born in 1751 or 1760? Was his mother Ann or Elizabeth? How do you chose which one is correct? I must be missing something but I feel a bit brain dead now as I have been mulling this over for three days now. Help!

 

[AndyMick]

The only thing I can think of at the moment is following both of these men and seeing if you can bury them or marry them off to someone else. This has no guarantee of success. I'm looking for my 3xgg'father's baptism and I have a choice of several - and I can't sort them out either.

 

[Liberty]

I think we all have this situation at least once in our tree.
My 'best' suggestion is to see if you can look around and gather any more information. E.g. *If* you can find names of witnesses at a wedding, sometimes this provides a vital link. Or a distinctive Christian name running down the generations. Or a will naming a grandchild. Any clues as to occupation? If, say, Robert was shoemaker and one of his possible fathers was tanner, and the other a fishmonger....
However, you are getting quite long way back , and this may just be the point at which the trail runs cold.
Good luck.

 

[Tony]

Having found a transcription or index entry, it's always advisable to view images of the register entries in case they show additional information and to check the transcription. That may not provide anything different, but it's worth following up.

 

[SuzanneD]

Without having done any research beyond the info you give above, my instinct would be that 'your' man is the one baptised 1751 in Shadwell, as that parish is right next to St George in the East, while All Hallows is some distance to the west in the City.

But as others have said, unless you can find a will that links everyone up, you'll just have to make a best guess. Luckily, the parish registers of this period for the East End / Tower Hamlets - especially the baptism registers - tend to be quite detailed and so your chances of narrowing your options and tracking back further are quite good. The wills for the area are also online at Ancestry.

I'd recommend you build up a detailed picture of the various Gridley / Gradley families in the area - trace baptisms, marriages, burials and wills for as many people as you can - and then look which seems the most plausible solution. Take note of not just the names and dates, but also street addresses and occupations where you can find them. Check each original image yourself on Ancestry if you have access, as the transcriptions don't record all of the detail in the entry. I'd ignore trees posted by others at the moment and rely on the original sources.

You might also want to try searching for variations on the name using wildcards (e.g. Gr*l*y, Gr*d*y, Cr*d*y, Cr*l*y- C and G often get mistaken). Check at as many as you can of the different sites that cover this area/time (Ancestry, Find My Past, and FamilySearch). Only Ancestry has the original images but searching the other sites might find people who have been mis-transcribed elsewhere, and even a free search at FindMyPast will give a year and parish.

Apologies if this is telling you how to suck eggs - it's the techniques I've used to untangle my own East End ancestry of this period. Let's just say I feel your pain...

 

[trebor]

The only thing I can think of at the moment is following both of these men and seeing if you can bury them or marry them off to someone else. This has no guarantee of success. I'm looking for my 3xgg'father's baptism and I have a choice of several - and I can't sort them out either.

I agree - I had 5 options for my gt grandfather and only found the answer by killing off, marrying off the other 4.

 

[peter]

The first thing to figure out is whether there were two Roberts, or one who married twice. Clearly if there was only one then you must be descended from his second marriage.

There's a lot you can do - the first step is to find all the other children born to the two couples - if they overlap then there surely must have been two fathers named Robert - and if so they must have had different fathers.

You should also look for burials and wills. Don't worry too much about what other people show in their trees - the chances are they're not nearly as experienced as you.

 

[Alexander Bisset]

I agree - I had 5 options for my gt grandfather and only found the answer by killing off, marrying off the other 4.

Of course you need to consider there may have been a 6th option you didn't find. The absence of a candidate unfortunately doesn't make the one you find, or in this case the one left standing, correct.

 

[trebor]

Of course you need to consider there may have been a 6th option you didn't find. The absence of a candidate unfortunately doesn't make the one you find, or in this case the one left standing, correct.

Obviously you are right with your statement that there may be a 6th (if not more) option but in this instance I had searched every possible avenue to find all possible candidates for the role of my ancestor. Every website known to me had been interrogated over several years of research and many hours spent searching through the archives many miles from home. I am sure that in the majority of instances we can never be 100% certain that the option we have selected is the correct one but in this case I am as sure as I will ever be without the benefit of a time machine to allow me to go back and ask the actual persons involved. I just hope that my confidence is justified

Your next challenge is to build something in to FTA to find any possible errors

 

[Carla]

Don't worry too much about what other people show in their trees - the chances are they're not nearly as experienced as you.

Thank you for that compliment Peter but if you see the other thread about the fact I can't find a particular marriage you may well change your mind! Thanks for the suggestions, which I will follow up, and as I said in another post i am so thank ful to everyone for their help.

 

[SuzanneD]

Without sounding completely backwards, the *worst* time to rely on the information in online trees is when you're having trouble finding the records yourself! Odds are other researchers have had the same problem, and one of them may have made a 'close enough' guess that has been copied into multiple trees. That's not a black and white rule, of course, especially if a tree looks otherwise well-researched and has access to sources you don't.