'Genealogy Mistakes' - George Franklin PARRY

We all make mistakes when researching.  Sometimes they are fairly simple ones, easily done, for example, typing a 6 instead of 9 in a year, or forgetting to add an "m." before a date, to signify it's the person's marriage, rather than their birth year (both of which I have recently done. Hopefully discovered - and corrected - before the information is published in a rather permanent form.) 

Such simple mistakes mainly cause difficulty in finding the relevant records again in the future (and, perhaps, some embarrassment at the time of discovery! :-) )

But more serious mistakes can result in us spending years researching the wrong family.  In this post I'm going to consider some of the evidence relating to the origins of a "George Franklin PARRY", who is said to have died in Texas in 1878. Although I imagine issues have arisen because of the difficulties faced when tracing an immigrant ancestor back to their home country, the tendency for people to just copy other people's family trees can soon result in the spread of misinformation.  

How can we counteract this?

My attention was first drawn to this family back in March 2018, when one of my autosomal DNA matches in America told me that his paternal grandfather was a George Frank PARRY - obviously someone of interest to me, given the surname. I began researching George through the various online sites, such as Family Search, Ancestry, FindMyPast, etc.  What seems to be established is that this George Frank PARRY, also known as George Franklin PARRY, was born on the 5th November 1874, in Madison, Illinois, and his parents were recorded as another George F PARRY and Emma WALTERS (that information, at least, comes a Social Security file on Family Search¹, rather than just family trees, but it is from the son's record.  I have yet to find any original records relating to his father in the US.)   The family moved from Illinois to Texas, where the father died in 1878, and the mother later remarried. George junior married in 1897, and had five children, four daughters - Viola, Ida Ruba, Hazel Ellis, and Willie Mae, and one son, who always seems to be referred to as "B.L."

It's the earlier generation, of George F PARRY senior, that I'm concerned with here, since it would be him and his wife, Emma, who emigrated, and who therefore need identifying properly in the UK records, in order to trace the family further back.

Just to note initially, that I have looked at the "parent's birthplace" recorded in the US censuses in entries linked to George junior on Family Search, which show George senior as born in England in 1910 and 1920, and then, according to the 1930 census, in the United States. But I'm not placing a great deal of weight on that information - given that George senior had died in 1878, when George junior was only aged four, it would be very easy for a mistake to be made regarding the deceased father's birthplace. [There are also some anomalies in the linked records, eg in the entry for 1910, the surname is recorded as PEARY, and in the entry for 1930, George and his wife's forenames/initials are reversed. I haven't carried out additonal searching to confirm these are the correct entries.]  Another possible entry, in the 1880 census, which has the surname as "PERRY", would also indicate that George senior was born in England. 

So it was interesting to note that the majority of the family trees on Ancestry that show a birthplace for George senior, placed it in Wales, rather than in England.  

I did a quick assessment regarding the information shown in the various Ancestry trees - which is a bit of a 'nightmare' to summarise, as many researchers can probably imagine!

Basically, as at September 2024, there are over fifty family trees visible on Ancestry showing George Franklin PARRY junior.  Only twenty of them show his parents.  Of those, fifteen show his father as George Franklin PARRY and five show him as just George F PARRY.  Dates for George senior are shown in several versions - as just the death date of 1878 in five trees, as 1843-1878 in one tree, and as 1849-1878 in thirteen others. George junior's mother, Emma, is shown with her surname as WALTERS in twelve trees (one of them also including an additional middle name of "Lovisa"), as WATERS in seven trees, and as PARRY in one.

As mentioned above, I haven't seen any references to original records in the US relating specifically to George senior so, apart from the Social Security document for his son, there seems to be no contemporary evidence for George senior having used the middle name of "Frank," or "Franklin," despite what twenty family trees say.

Seven of the twenty family trees also show parents for George senior, two just showing a father called Thomas PARRY, four showing both parents as Thomas PARRY (1811- ) and Martha MORRIS (1812-1900), and the last one showing both Thomas and Martha as PARRY, along with just their birth dates. 

The UK 'facts' attached to "George Franklin PARRY" (senior) in the various trees are as follows:

Birth: 

April 1849 Abergavenny, Monmouthshire (12 trees) or just "Monmouthshire" (5 trees) 

[Only one tree is linked to the "England & Wales, Civil Registration Birth Index 1837-1915", the others have no source.]

1851 Residence: 

New Moat, Pembrokeshire, Wales [1851 Wales Census.  Class: HO107; Piece: 2475; Folio: 169; Page: 11; ]

1861 Residences: 

New Moat, Pembrokeshire, Wales [1861 Wales Census. Class: RG9; Piece: 4147; Folio: 27; Page: 2;]

Or

Blaenavon, Monmouthshire, Wales [1861 Wales Census. Class: RG9; Piece: 4147; Folio: 27; Page: 2;]

Marriage of George PARRY to Emma WALTERS/WATERS: 

1868 (no place given)

1868 Monmouthshire, Wales 

18 December 1868 

6 May 1869 Llanelen, UK

18 December 1869 Llanellen, Monmouthshire, Wales

July 1870, Abergavenny, Monmouthshire

Or just "Bef. 1870"

The "July 1870" entry is linked to the "England & Wales, Civil Registration Marriage Index, 1837-1915" but, since the four names shown in the database for that reference are Martial Espian, Mary James, Ellen Jones, and George Parry, this clearly isn't the right entry for the marriage of George PARRY to Emma WALTERS.

Amusingly, the "1868 Monmouthshire" entry is the only one of the 'facts' that is linked to the "Monmouthshire, Wales, Anglican Baptisms, Marriages and Burials, 1551-1994" database, showing the certificate for a marriage between a George PARRY and an Emma WALTERS, which took place in Llanellen on 6 May 1869! [This particular tree also includes a fact for Marriage Banns, with a date of 18 December 1969, Llanellen, Monmouthshire, Wales - no source. But one wonders why that specific date of "18th December" appears in some trees, even if the year varies?]

If the George PARRY who emigrated was married to the Emma WALTERS - which later records in the US for Emma and their children do seem to indicate is true - this marriage is probably the correct one, since there are no other marriages in the Civil Registration database for a George PARRY to either an Emma WALTERS, or to an Emma WATERS.

From the details of the marriage certificate, the father of the George PARRY who married Emma WALTERS was a Thomas PARRY. George and his father, Thomas, were both labourers. George and Emma are both shown as "of full age", and both are living in Llanellen, Monmouthshire. [Note - there's no middle name recorded for George PARRY on the marriage certificate - an official record, which one might expect to include the middle name, if it existed.]

Following up the census entries quoted in the family trees:

1851 New Moat, Pembrokeshire HO107; Piece: 2475; Folio: 169; Pages 10 & 11

Enumerator's schedule: 40, Address: Pont Garreg

Thomas Parry Head 41 Ag. Lab.                 Llanddewi, Pembrokeshire  

Martha Parry Wife     38                         Llancefn, Pembrokeshire

Sarah Parry Daur 13 Ag. Lab's Daur New Moat, Pembrokeshire

John Parry Son         10 Ag. Lab's Son         New Moat, Pembrokeshire

Hanah Parry Daur 4 Ag. Lab's Daur New Moat, Pembrokeshire

George Parry Son         1 Ag. Lab's Son         New Moat, Pembrokeshire

1861 New Moat, Pembrokeshire Class: RG9; Piece: 4147; Folio: 27; Page: 2, and Folio 28, Page 3;

Enumerator's schedule: 10, Address: Pontcarreg

Thomas Parry         Head     Mar 50 Ag. Lab.         Lampeter

Martha Parry         Wife     Mar 49                 Llanycefen

George Parry         Son                 11 Scholar         New Moat

Sarah Llewellin Daur     Mar 22 Ag Lab wife New Moat

Owen Parry         Grandson 6/12                         New Moat

Eleanor Parry         Granddaur 6/12                         New Moat

[The county for all of these birth entries has been 'dittoed' down from Carmarthen.  However, Lampeter would have been in Cardiganshire, the rest are in Pembrokeshire.]

One can immediately (hopefully!) see a problem with these census entries, in that the birthplace for the son, George, is New Moat, Pembrokeshire, and not Abergavenny, Monmouthshire. So, if these are the correct census entries, then the "Abergavenny" as the birthplace in the trees must be incorrect.

A search of the GRO Birth Index for any George PARRYs registered in 1849 +/-2 produces 40 records, only eight of which are in Wales - three in Wrexham, Denbighshire, and one each in Abergavenny Monmouthshire, Narberth Pembrokeshire, Bangor Anglesey, Crickhowell Breconshire, and Chepstow Monmouthshire.

Since New Moat is in the Registration District of Narberth, Pembrokeshire, and the mother's maiden name for the Narberth entry in the civil registration index is MORRIS, that explains where the 'MORRIS' has come from, as the maiden name for George's mother in some of the family trees.  Clearly the Narberth birth registration would be more likely to be the correct one for the family in the census.

But is it the right family for George senior?  Is the George PARRY from New Moat the one who marries Emma in Llanellen (in Monmouthshire) and then emigrates?

Returning to the censuses and looking for George in 1871, it is possible to find the following entry in New Moat, Pembrokeshire, at Class: RG10; Piece: 5506; Folio: 59; Page: 10;

Enumerator's schedule: 51, Address: Pontcarreg

Martha Parry Head Wid 63 Formerly labourer's wife Llandcefn, Pembrokeshire

George Parry Son Unmar 21 Carpenter New Moat, Pembrokeshire

Eleanor Parry Granddaur 11 Scholar New Moat, Pembrokeshire

So, at a time when the relevant George PARRY is married and potentially emigrating to the US, this George is unmarried and still living at home, with his mother and a niece, in Pembrokeshire.

Later records also confirm that the George PARRY, born 1849 in New Moat, continues to live there, marries a Mary DAVIES on the 9th June 1874, and then they go on to have about ten children, before he dies in 1917.

Clearly, the Narberth George PARRY is not the correct one, and any of the family trees containing that information could mislead other researchers.  While the census entries for the New Moat family might be one of the very few showing a George PARRY, of a suitable age, and with a father called Thomas, one can't assume a particular entry is the correct one, just because it's the only one found.  There are many reasons why a child might not appear with their father in a census. 

One family tree quoted a different 1861 census entry, in Blaenavon, Monmouthshire, Wales [1861 Wales Census. Class: RG9; Piece: 4147; Folio: 27; Page: 2;]

Enumerator's schedule: 214, Address: John Street

Anne Parry Head Mar 63 Ho(r/u?)sekeeper Llangredmore, Pembrokeshire

George Parry Son         Un 27 Coal miner         Blaenavon, Monmouthshire

Apart from the fact that this entry would give a birth date of 1834, fifteen years earlier than that suggested for the George who emigrates, later census entries for this George can also be found in the Blaenavon area up until his probable death in 1909.

Where does this leave us?  Basically, with the only relevant UK record being the marriage in Llanellen on 6 May 1869.

So, are there any other George PARRYs in the UK records who might be candidates for marrying Emma WALTERS? 

To be honest, unfortunately, yes - there are over a hundred births for a "George PARRY" registered across England and Wales in the period from 1841-1851.  Narrowing that area down to birth registrations in the county of Monmouthshire produces eleven possibilities. Narrowing that down further, to just the Abergavenny registration district (which covers Llanellen), still results in seven entries as follows:

 Name:     Mother's Maiden Surname: 

PARRY, GEORGE    -                      GRO Reference: 1841  D Quarter in ABERGAVENNY  Volume 26  Page 23

PARRY, GEORGE    HUGHES       GRO Reference: 1843  M Quarter in ABERGAVENNY  Volume 26  Page 22

PARRY, GEORGE    WATKINS      GRO Reference: 1843  J Quarter in ABERGAVENNY  Volume 26  Page 25

PARRY, GEORGE    BOWEN         GRO Reference: 1843  S Quarter in ABERGAVENNY  Volume 26  Page 58

PARRY, GEORGE    FISHER          GRO Reference: 1844  J Quarter in ABERGAVENNY  Volume 26  Page 53

PARRY, GEORGE    HUGHES        GRO Reference: 1845  M Quarter in ABERGAVENNY  Volume 26  Page 5

PARRY, GEORGE    PERKS            GRO Reference: 1849  J Quarter in ABERGAVENNY  Volume 26  Page 70

Eventually I hope to be able to match up all of the corresponding civil registration births, marriages and deaths, for PARRYs in certain counties, along with their relevant census entries as well, but I haven't achieved that yet.

[And, if I didn't have other evidence, then only researching these seven would involve making the risky assumption that the 'right' George PARRY was someone local, and not someone who moved into the area, before marrying Emma.]

I do know that some of these entries can be discounted - for example, there is a marriage of a William PARRY to a Sarah PERKS in 1838, in Crickhowell District (which covers part of Monmouthshire), and an 1851 census entry shows William and Sarah with a one year old son, George, as well as other children whose birth registrations showed a mother's maiden name of PERKS.  So that discounts the George Parry registered in 1849, since his father's name is not Thomas.  

There are also some, potentially relevant, deaths of George PARRYs in the Abergavenny district - infants in 1842 and 1843, a 5 year old in 1849, and an 11 year old in 1855. Purchase of all the certificates would possibly clarify who is still alive at the time of the marriage - but the cost, even of just the cheaper pdf certificate versions, would soon become prohibitive, if one wasn't making assumptions to reduce the number of results.

Doing a search on FindMyPast for a George PARRY with a father Thomas, across all the record types in the Abergavenny district, within that 1846 +/-5 birth date range, might seem a useful method to narrow the entries down, especially since it results in only two entries, the marriage in Llanellen and a baptism of a George in Llanwenarth Ultra in 1843, the son of a Thomas and Hannah PARRY.  Unfortunately, I suspect that particular baptism isn't the correct one, since an infant George PARRY is buried in Llanwenarth less than a week after the baptism, and I know that the son of Thomas and Hannah that was born in 1843 dies soon after birth (although there is an anomaly with dates, since the baptism date is the day before his birth certificate indicates he was born! Such are the joys of genealogical records!) 

Identifying the correct George PARRY from the available information would seem to be an almost impossible task - and it would certainly help if there were more records available regarding his emigration with Emma, or in the US, when his children were born, or when he died.

But there was a clue as to a potential solution, at the start of this post, when I mentioned my autosomal DNA results.  

Because it just so happens that I have a 'missing' George PARRY, a sibling to my direct line.   He's the George PARRY whose birth was registered in the March quarter of 1845, with the mother's maiden name of HUGHES. 

Thomas PARRY and Hannah HUGHES, who married in May 1838, had a tendency to "border hop" around the Herefordshire, Breconshire and Monmouthshire area, probably in response to whatever work Thomas could find.  They were married in Llanelly, Breconshire, when they were recorded as living in "Twinclydach".

Six children followed:

Thomas, born in Llanwenarth Citra, Monmouthshire, in 1838

John born in Lloyndu, Abergavenny, Monmouthshire, in 1840

George, born in Llancavan, Llanwenarth Ultra, Monmouthshire, in 1843 (died at 23 hours)

The second George, born in Frogmore Ward, Abergavenny, Monmouthshire, in 1845

James, born in Upper Govilon, Llanwenarth Ultra, Monmouthshire, in 1848

And finally. Elizabeth, born in Longtown, Herefordshire, in 1851 (the family having been "removed" from Llanwenarth to Longtown.)

In the 1851 census, most of the family were in Longtown, Herefordshire

Class: HO107; Piece: 1978; Folio: 646; Page: 22;

Thos Parry     Head Mar 45 Poper Longtown, Herefordshire

Hannah Parry     Wife Mar 42         Llandilo, Monmouthshire

John Parry     Son 10         Abergavenny, Monmouthshire

George Parry     Son 6         Abergavenny, Monmouthshire

James Parry     Son 2         Llanwenarth, Monmouthshire

Elizabeth Parry    Daughter 9 Days         Longtown, Herefordshire

In the 1861 census, George is possibly the 15 year old servant living in Llanthewy Rytherch, a carter with his birthplace as "Govilon, Brecon" [Class: RG9; Piece: 3991; Folio: 44; Page: 7;] (Govilon is actually in Monmouthshire, a hamlet of Llanwenarth Ultra)  His mother, and brother James, are still in Longtown [Class: Rg 9; Piece: 1824; Folio: 59; Page: 13;] his father, and siblings, John & Elizabeth, all having died by then.  

In 1871 George's mother, recorded as "Anna" rather than "Hannah," is living in Llanellen, along with George's brothers, Thomas and James, and Thomas's four children:

Class: RG10; Piece: 5311; Folio: 28; Page: 9

Enumerator's schedule: 41 Address: No.1 Bryn-y-Betts

Anna Parry     Head            Wid         Female 65 1806 Ag labs wid Clydach, Herefordshire, England

Thomas Parry     Son         Widr        Male 30 1841 Ag lab         Clydach, Herefordshire, England

James Parry     Son         Unmar Male 23 1848 Forge lab         Clydach, Herefordshire, England

Tom Parry     Grandchild -     Male         7 1864 -                 Capel Y Fiele, Breconshire, Wales

John Parry     Grandchild -     Male         5 1866 -                 Capel Y Fiele, Breconshire, Wales

Elizabeth Parry    Grandchild -     Female 4 1867 -                 Cwm Llanelen, Monmouthshire, Wales

There's only one other Parry family living in Llanellen in 1871, headed by a father called William, so that family wouldn't fit the marriage detail.

According to the above 1871 census entry, Anna, Thomas, and James, were all born in Herefordshire, but I know from earlier records that, that was not the case - they were all born in Wales, in various places in Monmouthshire.  So this 'border hopping' across the Wales/England divide, without strong connections to Wales (as far as I am aware, none of them spoke Welsh) could easily explain why George Franklin PARRY gave his father's birthplace as England, rather than Wales.

As can also be seen from the above 1871 census entry, Elizabeth, Anna's grandchild (and daughter of the Thomas) was born in Upper Cwm, Llanellen, in April 1867.  Although Thomas and his family did move to Pwlldu for a time after that (in 1869/70, based on certificates for the birth and death of another child, as well as the death of Thomas's wife), it is possible Hannah/Anna continued to live in Llanellen during that period.  I will admit to not having spent a great deal of time looking for "my" George elsewhere, so it is possible he remained somewhere in the UK.  But the fact that members of the family were in the Llanellen area at the time the George PARRY married Emma WALTERS does seem to make "my" George a fairly good candidate to be the one marrying Emma and then emigrating.

What do you think?

In addition to the first autosomal DNA match, who brought the George Franklyn PARRY junior to my attention, I now have another autosomal DNA match who descends from a different child of the George Franklyn PARRY junior.  I also have an autosomal match with a descendant of James, the other brother of George and Thomas PARRY.  And that descendant of James also matches the descendant of George.

Of course, one thing that would really add to the evidence that "my" George is the correct one, would be if a direct male line descendant of the George Franklin PARRY was to take a Y-DNA test.  Since an uncle of mine has already taken that test, a match from such a descendant of George Franklin PARRY would help to confirm that the connection is through the direct male line.

Unfortunately, based on the Ancestry pedigrees, time for that might be running out, as their line looks to be as in danger of "daughtering out" as my branch now has.

Some final thoughts

While I have been commenting on the mistakes in these family trees on Ancestry, this post isn't meant, in any way, as a criticism of the individual researchers, or as yet another opportunity to have a moan about "Ancestry trees".  Instead, I've tried to indicate how such mistakes can come about, and perhaps offer some suggestions towards counteracting them.  The lack of available records about George PARRY senior in the US is a problem, because it means the details that do exist have often come through later generations. The discrepancies in records, such as the variations in birthplaces across census entries for the same person, can complicate research, as can the sheer numbers of possibilities when dealing with a 'frequently occurring' surname.  But such problems can be overcome, by carefully following up additional possibilities and trying to 'disprove' one's own theories, by not assuming the only entry found must be the correct one, and by educating oneself about the geography and records for areas that aren't familiar.

Oh, and putting the alternatives "out there" in the world, in the hope that a well-researched correction of a mistake might eventually gain more support than the original mistake.

The relationship of some of the places mentioned in the blog to Llanellen

References:

1. "United States, Social Security Numerical Identification Files (NUMIDENT), 1936-2007", database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:6K7L-FMTJ : 10 February 2023), George Franklin Parry, Jr, .

Possible US Census entries

"United States Census, 1880", , FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MFNZ-8WJ : Thu Mar 07 21:08:35 UTC 2024), Entry for John F Dugger and Joseph A Pope, 1880.

 "United States Census, 1910", , FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:M23R-4JQ : Fri Mar 08 11:05:41 UTC 2024), Entry for George F Peary and Mary S Peary, 1910.

"United States Census, 1920", , FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QK17-9NML : Fri Jul 12 07:50:39 UTC 2024), Entry for George F Parry and Mary S Parry, 1920.

"United States Census, 1930", , FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:HKM8-9N2 : Fri Mar 08 03:30:01 UTC 2024), Entry for Frank G Parry and Susie Parry, 1930.

The challenge of blogging - Guild inspiration

Last Saturday, I was in Littleton, near Winchester, attending a seminar organised by the Guild of One-Name Studies (dare I say it - my favourite genealogy organisation!)

The title for the seminar was "Tips and Wrinkles for One-Name Studies," and all of the topics related to aspects of carrying out a study, including two sessions specifically designed for new members, to help them get started.¹

As someone who joined the Guild in 2002, one might think such a seminar would hold little appeal for me but, the truth is, I often find these "member led" talks far more interesting, and inspiring, than presentations on general family history topics.   They are an opportunity to find out how, and why, other Guild members do what they do, and to pick up new ideas and tips, as well as to enjoy the shared interest in 'one-naming.'  (Isn't it wonderful to chat to other people whose eyes don't glaze over the moment we start talking about our hobby!)

Such gatherings can also be an opportunity to find solutions to the challenges many of us experience with our studies.  

One of the stages in carrying out a study is to publish the results, making them available for future generations. For many of us, who might never be in a position to write a book, or academic papers, about our surname, a favoured method for publication is a blog.  But so many of us (me, included) struggle to maintain a regular blogging habit.  A few months ago, I’d even carried out an assessment of the frequency (or otherwise!) of my blog posting, and what it revealed, which I’d intended to use as a ‘re-starting’ post - but never got further than collecting the statistics!

 As a result of the comments by members, Melody, who gave a talk about blogs and who has previously organised Guild blogging challenges, has set up a new challenge - a set of topics encouraging us to make one post each month, for the rest of the year (technically starting in August).

The topic for August is “The first person to…. “ 

Having a suggested topic can be a great help in getting started.  On the other hand, sometimes it can become a stumbling block - more on that in a moment.

Having considered, and dismissed, a few other options, I settled on, “The first person to register a Parry One-Name Study with the Guild.” 😀

I’m not going to bore you by actually writing about me, but I found it interesting to look back at my very first blog post, in 2006, and the fact that I’d described the blog as an “experiment.”²

So this is about some of the things I've learnt as a result of the experiment (in no particular order.)

Frequency of posts

Looking back, it seems I started off okay, with 24 posts in each of my first two years.  Things then tailed off - 15, 3, 8, 7, 3, followed by only 5 posts in seven years.  The initial decline was due to joining a local non-genealogy society, and getting involved with their practical activities. And, by the end of that period, I know I was dealing with an elderly relative who'd had to move into a nursing home seventy miles away from me, and who required regular visits, followed by various related tasks after they passed away.  2020 saw a flurry of 12 posts - all concentrated in the first four months of the year and very much helped by the Guild blog challenge organised by Melody at that time.  But I didn't join in the 2021 Blogging Challenge and, apart from two posts in 2023, there's been no other 'action' since, predominantly due to time given over to involvement with a local historic house.

It would be very easy to feel discouraged about these results but, whether it's due to family or health issues, or other activities taking priority, sometimes we just have to accept the fact that the rest of life can get in the way of our studies.  

Don't let a long gap prevent you from posting something!

Correspondents

It is fascinating to read how many new contacts I was mentioning in my early posts.  One thing I'd always noticed was that, the more active I was on mailing lists, message boards, or the blog etc, the more responses I got - but, consequently, the less time I then had for developing the study in the way I'd planned, because I was often trying to resolve other people's queries instead.  

Obviously there is a 'trade-off' here - I'm always glad to receive information about the PARRY surname, I want the research to be of assistance to people, and I would love to build a community of people interested in the surname, and who might also be willing to contribute to developing the study.

But this takes time and sometimes I feel it's easier to just quietly get on with the research, without actually telling anyone about it. 😀

So this is an area which requires careful consideration and, for some of us, perhaps it is necessary to set limits as to how far we are prepared to go, in helping others with their research.

Content and Prompts

Back in 2008 I wrote:

"One of the difficulties with this blog is getting the balance right between meeting the purpose of the blog (which is to keep people informed about what is happening with the study) and making it something that people will actually want to read. I try to log down in Word what I am doing as I do it but, with having a largish study, many tasks take time to complete. This means the blog can turn into a list of half completed activities, forever repeating the same things as ongoing - but the alternative is large gaps between entries, especially when other (non-genealogical) activities also get in the way and delay the finishing of things."³

I think this is always going to be an issue for me.

An alternative to posting about the recent activities of the study would be to follow a topic based system - effectively, what the Guild Blog Challenges, and other systems, such as the "52 ancestors in 52 weeks Challenge", organised by Amy Johnson Crow⁴, involve.

These can be great for encouraging people to start and maintain blogging.  

But, as I mentioned above, prompts can also sometimes become a 'stumbling block', particularly if the set topic doesn't seem to 'fit' any of the information we have.  I know there must be many Parrys who were first at something - but I initially struggled to decide what to write about in this post, thinking: 

• "first one with the surname?" - too difficult to find with a multiple origin Welsh patronymic, 
• "first emigrant/immigrant?" - again, too difficult to identify, 
• "first one in my database?" - too long ago to remember, 
• "first one in my family line?"- still stuck with the initial Thomas Parry, born about 1788 somewhere outside of Herefordshire, and probably already written about several times as the initial reason behind the study, 
• "first Y-DNA tester?" - that one was a possibility but, again, already written about him and still no matching Y-DNA tests, so not a lot 'new' to say (although the frustration of having a Parry who matches on autosomal DNA but never replies to my offers to buy a Y-DNA kit for them is rather frustrating!)

So, prompts can be a great help but, sometimes, one needs to be prepared to 'adjust' them, to suit your own study.

Organisation

This is an issue I found I'd written about on several occasions - generally commenting on the lack of it and the need to be more organised.  Most of us in the Guild are aware of the "seven pillars" of a one-name study (data collection, data analysis, synthesis from the collected data, responding to enquiries, publicising the study, publication of the results, and preserving the study).

I seem to have been fairly good at collecting information over the years but often that's as far as the process had got to.  That lack of the later stages of analysis and synthesis, in particular, contributes to the failure to post here. So, improved organisation, with a greater focus on distilling the data into something useable, and then posting about it, has to be one of my goals.

Final thoughts - Motivation

My son once told me, "Motivation comes from action, not the other way round."

In that particular case, he was right!

There's no doubt tons of information, and advice, to be found online regarding motivation, and I'm no expert.  But, fundamentally, I'm asking myself, "Why am I writing this blog?"  

Because the answer to that question will probably determine how well I can keep up with writing posts!  

Notes:

1. You can see the seminar topics on the Guild page at https://one-name.org/2024_littleton_ons/ 
2. The first post in the PARRY ONS Blog - https://parry-one-name-study.blogspot.com/2006/06/hi.html
3. The quoted post - https://parry-one-name-study.blogspot.com/2008/12/one-name-study-blogs.html
4. Amy Johnson Crow's "52 ancestors in 52 weeks Challenge" - https://www.amyjohnsoncrow.com/52ancestors52weeks/

A Parry Puzzle - Rosina Jane Parry in 1921

Last year, when the 1921 census was released, I looked for my ancestors who I knew should be recorded in there, along with their closest relatives.  Although I did find most of the people I expected to, there were one or two that eluded me.  One of those that I was unable to find was Rosina Jane Parry, the sister of my grandfather, Donald Parry.

Rosina was born in Hereford, in April 1905.  Her mother died later that month, as a result of giving birth, so Rosina and her brother were brought up by their father, John, no doubt assisted by other members of the family, as well as friends.  John then died in 1918, when Donald was fourteen and Rosina aged thirteen.  They were each taken in by different relatives - in Rosina's case, I believe it was her aunt, Mary Parry, formely ROBERTS, the widow of John's brother, Thomas.

The family story is that Rosina then went to London when she was sixteen, ie round about the time of the 1921 census.

I recently returned to searching for her, trying various spellings and also missing out information, such as her surname.  I was intrigued to discover an entry for a "Rosina J TARY", born 1905, working as a servant in St George's Hanover Square, London, Middlesex, and giving her birthplace as Toronto, Canada.  The age would be exactly right for Rosina Parry, since the 1921 census was taken in June that year.

I have sometimes found TARY/TARRY as mistranscriptions for PARRY, which was one reason for taking a closer look at the entry.  And, comparing the "T" of TARY to the "T" of Toronto, the former does seem to be more curved, as if it could be a "P":

But there are some other "P"s on the page, which are more completely curved, so I could be wrong:

Another reason for taking a closer look at the entry was that, in 1924, Donald went out to Canada.

I have been unable to find any relevant entries for Rosina J TARY (or PARRY) in Canada, or entering the UK.

So, is it possible that Rosina and her brother, Donald, perhaps unhappy at the circumstances they found themselves in after their father died, dreamt of leaving and going to Canada - and that, having moved to London, Rosina adopted that as her birthplace?  [I have no evidence as to whether Rosina "ran away" to London, or whether it was with her aunt's blessing.] 

Am I making too big an assumption that this could be 'my' Rosina?

Can any of you reading this find evidence in other records that would prove the existence of the Rosina J TARY, and therefore prove my assumption wrong? 

 

Tempus Fugit

I spent a very enjoyable day yesterday, meeting up with several of the local members of the Guild of One-Name Studies.

We discussed a variety of topics, including:

    - the difficulty of identifying (or even realising!) what has happened in a case where someone marries a second spouse who has an identical name and birth year/parish to their first spouse, 

    - the availability of mother's maiden names in indexes such as the UK General Register Office, 

    - navigating the Guild's web site, 

    - what would happen to our study if we were to die today, and the various options for preserving our data on the Guild site, such as the Members' Websites project (https://one-name.org/the-members-websites-program-mwp/  ).  

    - how the Guild began and the background to some Guild projects, such as the Marriage Challenges and the Marriage Locator (https://one-name.org/marriage-locator/ ), 

    - what records are available to help with finding graves in a local cemetery.

In the course of chatting about data storage, and the types of files to keep, the question of the collection of 'Births, Deaths and Marriages' arose and was it worth keeping spreadsheets of these, now that the entries are so easily available on many sites.  I think some One-Namers no longer collect them in that format, but I still see some benefits to doing so.  They can help with keeping track of how 'complete' the study is. If additional information is added to the spreadsheet, to identify which entry relates to who, then that will also be helpful to future researchers, and (hopefully) save them from purchasing incorrect certificates, which is an important consideration with 'popular' surnames, where there might be several, identically named, registrations, in the same district, in one quarter.  

I also think that the ease with which statistical tables, graphs, or distribution maps, can be produced from such spreadsheets, is another benefit.  Producing, and publishing, such "added value" is one of the aims of carrying out a surname study, which takes it beyond just the "family history" of everyone with the surname. 

The time together with the other members soon flew by - which might explain the title of this post.

Then again, it could be the only 'explanation' I have for not posting anything since 2020. 

Or maybe, as a result of struggling to carry out some "non-Parry" research into the owners of a local historic house during the Tudor period, I've just got latin on my mind! 

[* "I don't understand," according to Google Translate :-) ]

 

Missing an annual treat, new data, and surname distributions

This past weekend, I should have been away, at the annual conference of the Guild of One-Name Studies.  But, like so many other events, this has had to be postponed until next year, due to the current Coronavirus situation.  A "virtual AGM" was held - which I managed to miss (oops!)  Let's hope everyone keeps safe and well until next year, as it is always such fun (and educational, of course!) when we meet up for the weekend.

The current lovely weather has meant that my garden received more attention than my Study did over the past fortnight - apart from replying to a couple of queries, both of which involved the PARRY DNA Project, as well as genealogy, I haven't done any research at all!

But there's plenty to be done - these are the numbers of PARRYs in the databases that FindMyPast have added in the last two weeks:

FindMyPast Friday email dated 17 April 2020 

• Surrey Burials - 133
• Greater London Burial Index - 816
• United States Billion Graves Index - 1756
• Canada Billion Graves Cemetery Index - 123

FindMyPast Friday email dated 24 April 2020

• Kent Baptisms - 374
• Kent Marriages and Banns - 396
• Kent Burials - 379

Those will keep me busy (when I get around to looking into them 🙂 )

A recent query on the Guild's mailing list about the old "publicprofiler" surname distribution site resulted in this link to a current website being posted - https://gbnames.mappingdutchman.com/

It's always interesting to look at the results for PARRY on sites like this.  I know what I would expect, based on the data, but the picture presented can vary.  One of the nice things about this new site is that, rather than the limited date ranges of the previous, this one now includes results for most of the census years, as well as more recent data.  There's also a slider so you can easily follow the pattern of change over time.

For 1851, the earliest date, the map shows concentrations of the surname PARRY from Anglesey, across all of North Wales and into Lancashire, another concentration around the Herefordshire/Monmouthshire border area, a third in London, and a final, less concentrated, area around about Birmingham.

By 2016, the North Wales concentration centres more around Liverpool, the Herefordshire/Breconshire concentration has moved south, centering more on the Monmouthshire and Glamorganshire border area, the London concentration has expanded and the Birmingham concentration has both expanded and become more dense.

In various intervening years, the North Wales and Birmingham/West Midlands concentrations join up and then split apart again.

There are several factors to consider with regard to comparing distributions like this, such as how the data has been organised (eg by counties, administrative areas, or postcode areas), whether it shows total numbers, numbers as proportions of the general population, or as percentages of the total in that surname etc. and I haven't yet read all the details about the methodology used on this site.

But it reminded me of the work I did years ago, in 2005, on plotting distributions of the PARRY surname.

This was one of the series I produced from the census data, showing the actual numbers of PARRYs in each of the English and Welsh counties:

The distributions of PARRYs in censuses, per county, based on actual numbers per year.

And this is one of the maps produced during my attempt to plot a modern distribution of the PARRY surname, based on electoral roll data for 2002:

Point distribution of the PARRY surname in 2002, based on Post Towns

All of which reminds me that I really must deal with getting my old web pages back online, as there is so much fascinating information in them!

Beyond the Guild Blog Challenge

I am very grateful to Corinne for initiating the Guild Blog Challenge, and to Melody for setting up the associated Facebook Group, in order to encourage Guild members to start, or restart, blogging about their studies.  It was tough to get all my ten posts completed before the end of March, but I did manage it, thanks to a last minute dash at the end.

For many of us, the Challenge definitely served as a motivator and prompted us to stop putting off publishing information from our research.  And it is great that the Group will keep going, enabling anyone who hasn't yet completed the Challenge to do so, as well as encouraging us all to continue blogging.

The question for me, though, is exactly how to continue.

The Challenge reminded me of several 'conclusions' that I knew anyway, ie
1. That the Guild's main asset is the members, who are encouraging and supportive,
2. That words are not my forte - but that regular writing, and reviewing what I am going to post, does help to improve it. (well, I think it does - maybe any readers were just too polite to tell me what they really thought 🙂 )

The Challenge also highlighted some issues I need to improve on - for example, finding relevant photographs, or pictures, to illustrate a post.

Coming back to the study after a few years of very little planned research, the Challenge also helped to clarify what it is that I would like to achieve with the PARRY Study - which I have realised relates more to the 'bigger picture' about the data - frequencies, distributions, change rates etc - rather than the minutiae of individual family trees or stories.  Perhaps I shouldn't make such a confession but I don't (often) find other people's family history interesting.  I'm not a 'story' person.  Occasionally something might 'grab me' about a particular individual or family, but I have enough trouble keeping up with all the information on my own ancestors and their descendants, without trying to go into that much detail for all of the other PARRYs!   

There were definitely times over the last few months when I felt 'bogged down' by not getting something done on time - to the extent, at one point, I even considered deregistering the surname!  Examples of posts not completed include analysing the Norfolk records, which I'd extracted early on, also some records for Cumbria that had been mentioned as being on Family Search and which, like the Norfolk records, turned out to involve more than just a simple extraction task, because of the way the records are organised.

When I look back at my third post, "The state of the study. And some Norfolk records". and consider the extent to which the Study moved forward on those three 'big issues' over these months, I would have to answer, "it didn't."

Somewhere in there, is perhaps a hint about why some of us have problems with regular blogging, which is easiest to illustrate by comparing the difference between the impression given in WDYTYA! programmes and 'real research'.

Whenever the WDYTYA! series is on, with the celebrity walking into Registry Offices, or local Archives, and almost immediately coming out with the right piece of information to enable them to move on to the next stage of their journey, there is a chorus of comments from family historians that "real research isn't like that", that it takes time, and that sometimes hours of work produce very little reward (except the 'value' of negative searches, or course!  🙂)

The programme is designed to make a good story - and I think that's what I found myself trying to achieve with my posts.  So I ended up doing research in order to write a post (and which therefore has a need to be 'finished'), rather than writing a post as a result of the research I'm doing anyway (where it doesn't matter if the research isn't finished - such a post is still a record of how the study is progressing.)

So, moving forward, there's likely to be a change in the type of posts I write, with more of the "weekly update" style.  I think that's better than reducing the frequency of posts. 

Fundamentally, the PARRY Study blog has to encourage progress on the PARRY study.  If I happen to occasionally produce an interesting story as a result of that, that will be great - but I'm going to try not to let that become my focus, as it reduces the chances of me publishing anything!

Guild Blog Challenge Post 10: What's in a Name? Pluvius Cambria PARRY

Considering the topic of the previous few posts, perhaps I should subtitle this one, "and now for something completely different." 🙂

As one-namers, we are all used to the idea that names have meanings.  For surnames, that's usually related to the origin of the name - for example, there are surnames derived from occupations, from nicknames, from geographical or topographical features, and from a parent's name, as in patronymic or matronymic naming systems. PARRY is an example of a patronymic surname, since it comes from the Welsh use of 'ap', or 'son of', before a father's name of 'Harry'.

First names often have some form of meaning attached to them, as well.  There are meanings based on the origin of the word, eg for 'Harry', this is described as a Medieval English form of Henry, as well as being used in modern times as a shortened version of both Henry and Harold. Henry was itself derived from a German name, meaning 'home ruler'

But first names are also called 'given names' - a clue to another type of meaning, the meaning placed on it by the parents (or whoever named the child) in choosing that name and giving it to the child.

Sometimes names are chosen because the family are following a tradition:

First son was named after the father’s father.
Second son was named after the mother’s father.
Third son was named after the father.
The fourth son was named after the father's eldest brother
The first daughter after the mother's mother
The second daughter after the father's mother
The third daughter after the mother
The fourth daughter after the mother's eldest sister*

Other times, the name might have some personal relevance to the family - maybe a special relative, or someone who had assisted and supported them in some way, or someone they admired. It might mark an event of personal or national importance, or be a virtue the parents hope for the child (or experienced themselves).

Whatever the reason, 'given names' are chosen names - and, for some names, this just begs the question:

Why?

Why would parents inflict such a name on their child?!

I came up with my own scenario for the strangest name I have so far come across, in the PARRY One-name Study.  Imagine the scene, in a house in Wales, where new mother, Eliza, is talking to her husband, Powell, following their recent house move from England:

"It's raining"

"Yes dear, I know it's raining, but I need to go out to register the baby's birth"

"But, really, look at the weather!  It is *still* raining.  Does it never stop raining here?"

 "Well, it does,...er... sometimes.  But I still need to go out and register the baby's birth now.  What are we going to call him?"

"Rain in the morning, rain during the day, rain in the evening.  That's all I've seen since we arrived here.  RAIN! "

"Yes, dear.  I'm going out the door now - what shall we call him?"

"RAINY WALES!"

……

[a little while later, in an office in town]

"Yes, Registrar, I know it's a strange name.  But that's definitely what my wife said.  You think it might sound better in Latin?   Yes, I think you're right - please register his name as "Pluvius Cambria Parry"

……

[the End]

I may never discover the real reason why Powell and Eliza PARRY gave their son the names "Pluvius Cambria" but that story came to mind when I first discovered them in the censuses.  Powell came from Mold, Flintshire, but Eliza was from Berkhamstead, Hertfordshire.  Pluvius was born in Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire so, when the family appear in Mold, Flintshire, in the 1841 census, I could just imagine the name as a new mother's response to being uprooted to live in a wet and soggy North Wales.

It was a nice story but I now know that it couldn't be true - since the birth of Pluvius was not actually registered, and he was also christened while they were still in Tewkesbury, on the 18 Dec 1839. 

In 1841, Powell (30), Eliza (20) and their one year old son, Pluvius, are in Mold, Flintshire, in the same household as a Cain PARRY, aged 25, and Ann PARRY, aged 60.  Cain and Ann, potentially, are Powell's brother and mother, although I haven't yet tried researching Powell's parentage.

Powell's occupation in 1841 is recorded as "Poor rate collector" - which seems a bit of a change from "Railway Contractor", which was his occupation when Pluvius was christened.

In 1851, the family are still living in Mold.  Powell (43) is now an "Auctioneer" and it is this census which tells us that Powell was born in Mold, while his wife, Eliza aged 34, was born in Berkhamstead, Hertfordshire.   As well as Pluvius, aged eleven, two further children have been born, Llewelyn Horne, aged seven, and Amanda Ann, aged five.

In 1855, Powell dies and, by the 1861 census, Eliza, Llwellyn and Amanda have moved to Eliza's birthplace, Berkhampstead, in Hertfordshire.  I did think I'd found Pluvius in all of the relevant censuses but, if I did, for some reason I didn't keep a record of where he was in 1861.  [So that's a 'mission', should anyone choose to accept it! ]

By 1871, Pluvius is living in Charles Street, St. Marylebone, London, working as a drapers assistant.

On the 4 Dec 1873, Pluvius married Anne Eliza OWEN at St George Hanover Square.  The details for this from the church records were obtained for me some years ago, as a result of one of the marriage challenges.  But, thanks to the newspaper collection on the National Library of Wales, I now know that the marriage was announced in the "Wrexham and Denbighshire Advertiser and Cheshire Shropshire and North Wales Register":

PARRY-OWEN - On the 4th inst., at St. George's Church, Hanover Square, London, by the Rev. J. H. Murray, Pluvius C. Parry, formerly of Mold, to Anne Eliza, daughter of the late Mr William Owen, Tre'r Dryw Farm, Llanidan, Anglesea.

It appears that Pluvius might have ventured into a change of occupation - on the 14th January 1875,  Pluvius and his wife were in Llanwrwst, as the "North Wales Chronicle and Advertiser for the Principality" published the following on the 23rd January 1875:

LLANRWST. THE ROYAL HOTEL.—A supper took place at the Royal Hotel in this town, on Thursday, the 14th instant, on the occasion of Mr Pluvius Cambria Parry, from London, having taken the hotel, when a numerous and respectable party attended and enjoyed a capital spread. After the cloth was removed the usual loyal and patriotic toasts were proposed and drunk. The healths of the worthy proprietor and proprietress coupled with kind wishes for the future happiness and prosperity, the healths of the president and vice-president and other toasts were also drunk. Much credit is due to Mr and Mrs Parry for the way in which they catered for the enjoyment of their friends, who one and all expressed themselves much satisfied with the entertainment which had been provided for them. 

At first, knowing that Pluvius and Eliza are in Marylebone in 1881, I thought this report might just have meant that Pluvius and his wife were staying at the hotel, and put on a meal for their friends there.  However, they clearly did spend some time as the proprietors of the Royal Hotel, as another newspaper report, in "Llais Y Wlad" on the 2nd July 1875, has an account of a court case relating to charges of drunkenness and negligence against a Mr Roberts, which mentions Pluvius.

Llais Y Wlad is a Welsh language newspaper but, thanks to the wonders of modern technology in the form of Google Translate, we learn that it reads:

Pluvius Parry, proprietor of the Royal Hotel, Llanrwst, testified that Mr Roberts had been in the coffee-room at his hotel on the evening of the 6th of May. He remained in conversation with him for about an hour, and the witness, to whom he was essentially an individual, had not the slightest hesitation in saying that he was perfectly sober. Mr Roberts left between five and six o'clock, and both had a glass of beer each.  

I don't know how long Pluvius and Anne were at the Royal Hotel but, by the 1881 census, they are again living in St Marylebone - if I hadn't been searching for probate entries for his father, Powell, in the National Library of Wales, and then carried out a 'random search' for Pluvius amongst the newspaper records, I would not have even realised that the couple had spent time back in Wales.

They have no children with them in 1881, so it seems likely that they never had any (surviving) children.  They are living in 248 Great Portland Street, as are two other families and we know, from the electoral rolls, that they were renting a large unfurnished room on the second floor at 4 shillings a week.  Pluvius is working as a "clerk clothworkers". 

By 1883, they have moved to 43 Museum Street, Finsbury, and are renting one front room, on the second floor, at 6 shillings a week.  The Electoral Rolls on Ancestry.com for 1884, 1885, 1888, 1889, 1890, and 1891 continue to place them there.

Pluvius dies on the 2 Nov 1890 and the administration of his estate is granted to his wife, Anne Eliza, on the 17 Nov 1890.

Every time we visit Wales, and it rains, I think about poor Pluvius and wonder why his parents gave him that name.  From my newspaper searches, I was interested to find numerous references to "Jupiter Pluvius", in particular regarding events that were disrupted by rain.  This was derived from the Ancient Roman mythological concept of Jupiter as the god of the sky and thunder, and therefore as the bringer of rain.

So perhaps naming their child "Pluvius Cambria" really was a response to the idea of moving to Wales!



*
Relationship naming pattern - https://www.genealogy.com/articles/research/35_donna.html

Census Entries
1841: Class: HO107; Piece: 1410; Book: 12; Civil Parish: Mold; County: Flintshire; Enumeration District: 1; Folio: 12; Page: 15; Line: 5;
1851: Class: HO107; Piece: 2501; Folio: 566; Page: 20;
1861:
1871: Class: RG10; Piece: 148; Folio: 51; Page: 32;
1881: Class: RG11; Piece: 137; Folio: 89; Page: 24;

"Jupiter Pluvius" meaning - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_(mythology)