March 2026 Update

 This month saw the restart of the Warwickshire Guild members 'face-to-face' meetings for the year.  I really appreciate our regional representative organising these - carrying out a one-name study can be quite a 'solitary' activity, so it is always nice to get together with other, like-minded, people. We had a good time catching up with where we are all at, either with our own studies, or with personal family history research, whichever had been taking priority recently.

One of the topics discussed in the morning was Rootstech - "the world's largest genealogy conference".  I must admit, I don't watch many webinars.  I should, especially having taken out a subscription to Legacy Family Tree Webinars last year, when they ran an offer, and then forgetting to cancel it for this! 

But Rootstech is so huge that the schedule can be daunting.  However, one advantage is that many of the recorded sessions remain available, for free, afterwards. There are also bloggers, such as Janet Few, who publish 'roundup' posts of those presentations they watched.¹

So it's not difficult to narrow down a few of those talks that I’m more likely to find interesting, or useful, and after the encouragement at our local meeting, I will make more effort to watch some of these over the coming months.

One zoom talk I did manage to attend during this month was presented through Midland Ancestors, called "Posted in the Past: Stories from 20th century postcards", by Helen Baggott. I found this very helpful, because of my own little collection of PARRY postcards, which I will be doing more research on in the future.

It was during this talk that the "Historic Hospitals Admission Project" was mentioned.² This site includes admission records for the period from 1852-1921, for four children's hospitals, one in Glasgow, the other three in London. Checking it out later, I discovered 31 entries relating to PARRYs, so that will be useful for filling in some of those family stories.

It has actually been quite a month for 'medical' records.  There was a discussion on the Guild list about the St Bartholomew's hospital archives, after the hospital featured in a television programme.³

I found 25 PARRY entries in their catalogue, some relating to staff and students, but also property leases, the Hospital Rifle Club, research by a retired surgeon that resulted in a book about a PARRY, and also a portrait painted by a PARRY.

Several of the new databases on FindMyPast during March have also been connected to the medical profession, and include PARRY entries:

- "Surgeons' Case Books, University College London, 1836-1851" produced ten results, but only covering four individuals.

- "Britain, Register Of Anaesthetics 1909-1911", contained two entries

- "Britain, The Medical Registers" contained 250 entries but, since the Registers are for multiple years, many of the entries were duplications and a quick examination narrowed it down to about 35 individuals. 

- Likewise, the "London (and Provincial) Medical Directory", which contained 291 entries, narrowed down to just 40, once duplicates were removed. But I see even those will narrow down further because some entries, eg "A Ap H", "Augustus A H" and "Augustus Af Henry" are quite likely to relate to the same individual.

But these sorts of entries will be very useful for adding detail to people's histories.

Education and teaching has also featured in some of the new databases.  The "Britain, Directory of Women Teachers, 1927" contained eleven entries and a search of the "College of Preceptors, Student Registers and Diploma Examinations, 1881-1931" also resulted in eleven, although possibly only relating to seven individuals, since several entries look like the same students taking different exams.

Multiple entries for the same students is also a feature in the database of the "University of London School Register", which contained 38 entries, but many of the entries seem to relate to the fee for a particular term.  Following through entries for specific students could give a good idea of how long they were studying there. 

There were only a couple of databases for the UK & Ireland labelled as 'new' at Ancestry - the "Personnel of the Polish Air Force in Great Britain, 1940-1947" which, as one might imagine, contained zero PARRY entries, and the "Shropshire, England, Electoral Registers and Poll Books, 1676-1954", which contained so many that I wouldn't even contemplate collecting them. (19,386, if you really want to know. ☺) 

But, like all electoral rolls, those could be very useful for anyone tracing specific PARRY families in Shropshire.

Among the databases noted as "updated" on Ancestry were Find a Grave, the marriage index on Newspapers.com, the "UK and Ireland, Obituary Index, 2004-Current", and the PCC Wills, all very useful.

Another interesting site was mentioned on the Guild list, that of the marriage index of the "Clark County Clerk's Office",⁴ which includes marriages in Las Vegas. For a one-name study, information is collected world-wide anyway, but it is worth noting that, sometimes, people from the UK travel out to get married in places, such as Las Vegas. 

However, since there are 658 PARRY entries in the database, I don't think I shall be following many of them up at the moment. ☺

March is "Women's History Month". So I thought I ought to include at least a little bit about one specific woman.  But, having 'randomly' picked one of the ladies who appears in the "College Of Preceptors, Student Registers And Diploma Examinations, 1881-1931" - Kate Helen PARRY, who appears three times, in 1893 (when she passed English, History and Geography, but failed Arithmetic), 1895 (failed Theory & Practice, Arithmetic again, and also French), and finally, in 1896, (when she passed those three, and was awarded her diploma, on the 25 July 1996) - I then discovered that she was one of the daughters of Julius Colston PARRY, and that her story is likely to be much more interesting than the brief time left this month to research it.

So that's another story that will have to wait for now.    

Notes & Sources

1. Janet Few's 'roundup' posts of some Rootstech presentations :

https://thehistoryinterpreter.com/2026/03/05/rootstech-roundup-day-1/
https://thehistoryinterpreter.com/2026/03/07/rootstech-roundup-part-2/
https://thehistoryinterpreter.com/2026/03/08/rootstech-roundup-part-3/

2.  The "Historic Hospitals Admission Project" : https://hharp.org/ 

3. Television program "Our Hospital Through Time": https://www.liontv.com/our-shows/alice-roberts-our-hospital-through-time  

St Bartholomew's hospital archives search page: https://www.calmview.co.uk/BartsHealth/CalmView/default.aspx

4. Clark County Clerk's Office marriage index search page:  https://clerk.clarkcountynv.gov/AcclaimWeb/Marriage/FindMyMarriageRecordSearch

The Guild Seminar and more databases (a belated update on February's activities)

 A Guild seminar was held on the 21st February, at Alwalton, near Peterborough, entitled "From Waterways to Railways: A journey through Britain’s working past."  I always try to attend any of the seminars that are reasonably local to me, even if the topics don't particularly match with what I am working on at the time.  There is very much a social aspect to attending - an opportunity to catch up with friends that I only see at Guild events, to meet other members that I might not know so well, if at all, and to put faces to some of the names seen on the mailing lists, forum, or the Facebook Group.

But I often find that I gain a lot from the talks, even if I hadn't expected to beforehand, and so it was with this seminar.  

After a welcome by Alison, the first talk of the day was by one of the Guild members, David Scrimgeour.  David had been a volunteer at the Yorkshire Waterways Museum and, after that closed in 2019, he became a trustee of the "Yorkshire Waterways Heritage Society."¹ This was set up to continue to carry out research, and to promote the history and heritage of the waterways, by creating a permanent, digital, memorial to the people involved.

I like maps so I particularly enjoyed seeing the one David showed of the navigable canals and rivers in Yorkshire - it was a good reminder that our ancestors had a variety of options for travelling around the countryside.  I was also interested to learn that there was a "Bradshaw's Guide" to the canals, long before the railway guides we so often hear about. 

[Having  sidetracked to investigate further, I came across Bradshaw's map of the canals and navigable rivers in the midlands², which has confirmed something relating to one of my other interests - isn't it great when hobbies overlap like that! ☺]

The second session was a talk by Chris Turland, about the history of the railway ships from Harwich to the Continent.  I didn't know anything about this topic, so found it interesting to learn about the development of the port, and the various ships used over the years.  

There were a couple of war-time stories that particularly stuck in my mind, although I wasn't able to take note of all the details during the talk.  The first was about a British ship, captured by the Germans and refitted by them, which then hit a mine when coming out of Hamburg, and was 'finished off' by the Royal Navy.

While that might raise a smile at the turn of events, the second story, about one of the British merchant captains, certainly didn't. I hadn't written the Captain's name down correctly, and the papers are full of details of incidents where the German submarines had sunk British fishing and merchant ships. But it didn't take much searching to identify the relevant Captain, owing to the vast number of newspaper reports covering this specific series of events. 

Captain Charles Algernon FRYATT worked for the Great Eastern Railway Company.   On the 4th March 1915, newspapers reported that the Captain, at the time master of the Company's steamer, Wrexham, had arrived in Harwich having been chased, but outrun, a German submarine.

Later that month, on the 28th, there was another incident, this time while Captain FRYATT was master of the Great Eastern Railway Company's steamer, Brussels - a German submarine "called on the Brussels to stop, but Captain Fryatt ordered full steam ahead. The submarine went under the surface, and the Brussels now chased the raider, whose periscope was still visible. The fireman working below suddenly felt a shock, and nothing more was seen of the submarine."³

[While it might have sounded as if the submarine was destroyed, the Germans later reported that the submarine "escaped the steamer by a few metres only by immediately diving".⁴ Since, according to the newspapers, this was at a time when the declaration from Germany was that they "would treat all armed merchantment as belligerent vessels and attack them at sight wherever they might be encountered", the British Government's view was that it was a legitimate defensive act, for a merchant ship to steer towards an enemy submarine in order to force them to dive.⁵]

On the 21st June 1915, there are reports of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty presenting to Captain Fryatt "a hunter gold watch, bearing a suitable inscription, together with their appreciation on vellum" in recognition of his seamanship during this latter incident.  The chief officer and chief engineer were also reported as receiving watches.  It was noted that, three weeks earlier, the chairman and directors of the Great Eastern Railway Company had also presented Captan Fryatt with a watch, for the first incident, when he eluded the submarine.⁶

Over a year later, from the 25th June 1916, there are reports that the Brussels had been captured and taken to Zeebrugge.  Initially, the outlook seemed promising, as the Evening Star reported, on the 26th June 1916 that, "it is a welcome change from the sink-at-sight policy usually followed by these pirates of the sea. We can therefore be certain that neither Captain Fryatt nor any of his gallant crew have lost their lives", although it was also reported elsewhere that "it is to be feared that the crew will be sent to Germany as prisoners."⁷

On the 22nd July, 1916, the Army and Navy Gazette reported that "Captain Fryatt of the Brussels, is in prison awaiting trial at Ghent on a charge of sinking a German submarine." The charge was "founded on an inscription in a gold watch alleged to have been found on the captain."

Then, on the 29th July, 1916, many newspapers reported that the Captain had been executed - the execution had taken place immediately after the trial on the 27th July 1916.  At the time, it was not known whether the Captain had even been defended, and the speed of execution allowed for no appeals. 

The papers reported on the "deep indignation" caused by the case, and likened the Captain's execution to that of the British nurse, Edith Cavell.

At least one newspaper carried a report that indicated the capture of the Brussels might have been achieved through a deception, in that the German officer had "employed a strategem by making the captain of the Brussels believe that a British torpedo-boat had come alongside"⁸ , although I didn't look for any confirmation as to whether that was true or not. However, reports in the days following the Captain's death did claim that there had been, "special plans laid to capture the Brussels" and that the Captain was, "doomed before his trial."⁹

The Captain was married, and had seven children, with ages ranging, at the time, from three years to eighteen.¹⁰

The case had nothing to do with any PARRYs, but it was a reminder (as if we need one!) of the innumerable tragedies of war, and how principles that we expect to exist can so easily be overridden. 

The usual excellent buffet lunch followed this second talk, along with the opportunity to explore the displays some members, and speakers, had brought, as well as to look at purchase books from the FHS stand.   

After lunch, Dr Nicholas Dixon spoke about tracing 18c and 19c mariners (a 'mariner' being in the merchant service, a 'sailor' being in the Royal Navy, or a fisherman.)  Again, this was an interesting talk, with some potentially useful references mentioned, such as the Lloyds Registers, which are now digitised¹¹, the Soundtoll¹², which is a record of the tolls paid by ships passing through the Sound, the strait between Sweden and Denmark, between 1497-1857, and the Welsh Mariners site.¹³

In the Soundtoll site, once I'd worked out how to search, (since using the "All indexed fields" did not produce any results), I found 28 entries where the shipmaster was surnamed PARRY.

The Welsh Mariners site contained 291 PARRY entries in the "merchant seamen" database, which covers those active from 1800 to 1945, and 21 in the "Royal Navy" database, which included two of those I have previously mentioned on this blog, as being at the Battle of Trafalgar.

The topics then moved on from water to rail, with Dr Richard Marks' talk on Railway History. He covered some of the companies, and the changes to them through the years, but also highlighted sources, such as records of the railway unions, where the payment of subscriptions can be helpful in tracing an ancestor's career.  I also noted not to assume that someone recorded as a 'locomotive driver' worked for the most local, or the 'obvious' company, since companies often had depots in various areas, and some towns might have several depots belonging to different companies. Also railway companies sometimes built houses for their workers so, occasionally, an address can help to identify whether someone worked for a railway company.

It was also interesting to be learn about, (or be reminded of) some of the impacts that the spread of the railways would have had on our ancestors' lives, for example, new jobs and occupations that hadn't previously existed, with faster transport links came access to a wider variety of fresh food, and the develpment of things such as fish and chip shops, as well as the opportunities for 'national' sporting events, rather than just local ones. 

It wasn't all positive though, as the railways also allowed larger manufacturers to transport their goods further afield, competing with smaller, more local, businesses, which often led to the decline of the latter.  The brewery, and shoe manufacturing, were two of the industries specifically mentioned regarding this.  

Again there were some specific details that stuck in my mind, such as the comment about the "ikea church" (referring to the 'tin tabernacle' of the Methodists, which was packed up and relocated, whenever the navvies building the railways moved on), that ancestors might appear to change which company they worked for, but it was really to do with mergers, or nationalization, of the companies (a bit like ancestors who seem to move counties between censuses, yet actually live in the same house - it's just the county boundary changed!), and some of the engineering ideas, which were dismissed as 'bizarre', or unworkable at the time, but which have since been 'rediscovered', such as a nuclear powered space vehicle.¹⁴

In contrast to Dr Marks' talk, which largely dealt with the 'bigger picture' of the development of the railways, the final session of the day was from Dr Mike Esbester, looking at "What Life Working on the Railways was really like", which focused much more on individuals involved in railway work, and the dangers they faced. Again, a few specifics I noted - that there were many 'invisible roles' on the railways (eg cleaners, bill posters, steam laundry workers, hotel service workers, etc), that companies were more concerned about passenger accidents, than their workers' accidents, viewing accidents on the job as "a natural part of life", and preferring to pay compensation, rather than taking steps to improve overall worker safety, that workers in the railway 'factory' workshops came under a different inspectorate from those actually working on the railways, leading to under-reporting of railway accidents, and that the railway inspectorate did not have the power to go beyond "repeated warnings" in order to enforce safer working practices.  

Many of the accidents have been recorded as a result of the "Railway Work, Life & Death" project, which has produced a database of railway worker accidents.¹⁵  This currently contains over 200 references to PARRYs (while I might, generally, like finding databases with lots of PARRYs in them, that's not the case this time!) 

But, as you can tell, as well as being an interesting and enjoyable day out, the seminar has provided me with quite a bit of additional information to add to the one-name study.

Other news from February

During the month, I picked up two more postcards relating to PARRYs, one addressed to a "Mrs O PARRY", who lived in Ormskirk, Lancashire, in 1915.  

It didn't take long to identify Alice, with her husband, Owen, and some of their children, Isabel, Jack, Malcolm, Gordon, and Margaret, in the 1911, and 1921 censuses, as well as in the 1939 Register.  There are four trees on Ancestry for Owen and Alice but, as is often the case, it looks like there's a few errors, with incorrect records being added in, so I will need to do some more research on them, in order to confirm the details, and perhaps also look for the friend who sent the postcard from Keswick.  

The second postcard hasn't been posted, but features a PARRY Draper and Milliner, in Bromsgrove, Worcestershire, from around 1920. 

I suspect this might be the property of Norman and Ada PARRY - in the 1939 register, Ada is managing the business, since Norman is recorded as "incapacitated", and their address is described as "Bank House", which would tie in with a 1905 postcard I've seen on ebay for the same property, at which time it was described as "Lloyds Bank."  Although Norman was born in Worcestershire, it appears that he was a drapers apprentice in Staffordshire, in 1891, before moving to Leicester, where he appears in the 1901 census working as a draper's assistant in a "large drapery establishment" at 18 Market Street.  Leicester is possibly where he met his future wife, Ada, since there is an Ada M LEAVIS working in a Millinery establishment in Leicester in the 1901 census, although her birthplace, stated as Newcross, Derby, differs from the later censuses.   Norman PARRY and Ada LEAVIS married in Camberwell in 1906, before returning to Bromsgrove, to set up business there.

Again, more research is needed to 'tidy up' all the details, but it is encouraging when so much information can be found fairly easily.

At the end of January, a post on facebook, about the Convict Death Registers for New South Wales, led to three PARRY entries - which then increased to 53, when I searched the whole "Convicts Index 1791-1873" collection.¹⁶

While carrying out some research relating to one of my other interests, I came across "A register of the scholars admitted into Merchant Taylors' School : from A. D. 1562 to 1874", which contains some PARRYs.  I also found an interesting thesis on "Education in England in the Middle Ages", which happened to be written by a PARRY in 1920. (Albert William PARRY, Dean of St. David's.)

And finally, there was quite a variety of new, or updated, databases during February, which included monumental inscriptions from Yorkshire, and from Scotland, some army and navy records, marriages from Yorkshire, burials from Kent, and rate books for Greater Manchester.  The numbers of PARRY entries in these varied from 15, up to almost 11,000.

As you can see, there's never a shortage of things to investigate, with the PARRY one-name study!

Notes and Sources

1. "Yorkshire Waterways Heritage Society": https://ywhs.org.uk/

2. Bradshaw's map: Bradshaw, George, 1801-1853.; Gardner, W. R.; Twyford & Wilson., G. Bradshaw's map of canals, navigable rivers, rail roads &c., in the midland counties of England : from actual survey shewing the heights of the ponds on the lines of navigation from a level of 6ft.10in. under the Old Dock Sill at Liverpool / from levels, 1830. On the National Library of Scotland site, at https://maps.nls.uk/countries/england-and-wales/rec/13147

3. The quote about the incident on 28th March 1915: Northampton Chronicle and Echo 29 March 2015, accessed through FindMyPast

4. The escape of the submarine by diving: Irish News and Belfast Morning News 29 July 1916, accessed through FindMyPast

5. British Government's view: Birmingham Daily Gazette 29 July 1916, accessed through FindMyPast

6. Presentations to Captain Fryatt and the chief officer/chief engineer: Hartlepool Northern Daily Mail 21 June 1915, accessed through FindMyPast

7. Potentially would be prisoners in Germany: 1st July Dorking and Leatherhead Advertiser, accessed through FindMyPast

8. The Brussels potentially captured through a deception: 7th July 1916 Birmingham Daily Post, accessed through FindMyPast

9. The claims the Brussels had been targeted, and Captain doomed: Weekly Dispatch (London) 30 July 1916, accessed through FindMyPast

10. Details of the Captain's family: Star 29 July 1916, accessed through FindMyPast

11. Lloyds Registers: https://hec.lrfoundation.org.uk/

12. The Soundtoll: https://www.soundtoll.nl/ 

13. Welsh Mariners site: https://www.welshmariners.org.uk/

14. Nuclear powered space vehicle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_flying_saucer 

15. Railway worker accidents: https://www.railwayaccidents.port.ac.uk/

16. New South Wales, "Convicts Index 1791-1873" collection: https://mhnsw.au/indexes/convicts/convicts-index/

PARRYs at the Battle of Trafalgar

Back in October, I mentioned that two of the new databases on FindMyPast were the "British Royal Navy, Battle Of Trafalgar 1805" and the "British Royal Navy, Battle Of Trafalgar Prize Book", and I made it one of my intentions for this year, to follow these up in more detail. 

So that is what I have been working on recently.

It has been an interesting change (and challenge!) from what I sometimes do - I think most guides to genealogical good practice will suggest, somewhere, that it is important to understand the records you are dealing with, to know what date periods they cover, and whether any dates are missing, to know how reliable the information in them is, whether it is a 'primary' source, or composed from other sources. etc.  

But I often find myself just 'collecting' the PARRYs, without investigating such details.    

Of course, the intention is there, to process and understand the information more fully, in order to add it into the study 'properly' in the future.  But it can be quite time consuming to read all about a dataset before doing any work on it (especially if a quick initial search only shows a limited number of results).  

Most of us, I imagine, have to balance the time and effort required, against the potential results achieved, when carrying out our studies.

But it has felt quite rewarding to investigate these in more detail (even if I have tackled things 'backwards'!)

Starting point - collecting the information.
As I mentioned in October, the two datasets contain eight and six PARRY entries, respectively.  It was immediately apparent that some of the men were listed in both datasets, and that the prize book only contained three men, who were all listed twice.  

This latter point was intriguing, so I decided to look at that dataset first, especially since images of the original records were available.  Each page in the book(s) lists up to seventeen names and, for each man, gave their number, name, quality (ie rank), the sum they were paid, the date of payment, to whom the money was paid, and a witness' initial.  

The "to whom paid" column might occasionally be useful for researchers. However, the majority of payments just had "his X mark" entered.  The writing of these was all very regular, as if written by the same person, and often bracketed in small groups with just one witness initial.  The dates of payments are also not consecutive. Which all makes me wonder about the process of production for the books, but I haven't looked into that in detail.   

And none of that helped to explain why there were two entries for each man.

I backtracked though the images, to look for an 'explanation', initially stopping at the first page for each ship, and then back to the beginning of the book(s) to see what was written there.  By this time, I had realised that there were two sequences of images, relating to two separate books.  Although the text was very similar, there were differences - which I'd have appreciated earlier, if I had looked at the transcription pages on FindMyPast where, although the record set is described as "Battle Of Trafalgar Prize Book", the descriptions varied between "Trafalgar Prize Money" and "Trafalgar Parliamentary Grant".

The search page¹ gives some more information, explaining how ships captured by the Royal Navy would be sold and the profits divided among the crew.  While this might have been an incentive for some to join the navy, and it could be lucrative, there was no guarantee of success - even if a battle was won, and enemy ships captured, the ships might be lost before they could be brought back to Britain and sold.

And this is what happened, following the Battle of Trafalgar.  

The battle had taken place on the 21 October 1805, when 27 British ships met a combined French and Spanish fleet of 33 ships.  Thanks to Admiral Nelson's tactics, it seems 18 enemy ships were either destroyed or captured, while the British didn't lose any ships.  However, reading the account on Wikipedia,² it seems that, following the initial battle, there were attempts by the French and Spanish to retake some of their ships, which resulted in British sailors becoming prisoners. Both sides were also affected by the weather and, in the end, only four of the "prize ships" were brought back to Britain.

It seems, normally, that would be it. Ships lost = no prize money. 

But, because of the scale and importance of the victory, Parliament then awarded a grant of £300,000, to be divided among the sailors in the same way that the prize money would have been.  

Hence, there are the two books, one recording the distribution of the prize money from the four ships that were successfully brought back, the other recording the distribution of the Parliamentary grant.

FindMyPast indicates that the two prize books are in the National Museum of the Royal Navy, which is in Portsmouth.³ Their catalogue doesn't seem to be available at the moment, and I haven't been able to find the books listed in the National Archives catalogue either.  However, I did find what appear to be the relevant descriptions on the forum of the Society for Nautical research, which indicates the books are "RNM Naval Trophy/1983/1062/1 Trafalgar Awards List", and "RNM Naval Trophy/1983/1062/2 Trafalgar Awards List Supplementary Award granted by Parliament".⁴ It appears the Parliamentary Grant was issued first, in 1806, and the Prize Money was issued in 1807. 

Looking at the images on FindMyPast, each book contains a note from someone who, I assume, had possession of them before they went into the archive.  In the "Trafalgar Parliamentary Grant" book (FMP series containing 331 images), it says:

"A most valuable & interesting record of the various amounts that were paid out of £300,000 which Parliament voted as grants to the crews of all the ships that had taken part in the Great Battle of Trafalgar: - every officer, seaman & marine being apportioned a sum according to his rank & standing. The Grants were paid by a firm of London Bankers (now non existent) & an acknowledgement given either by the recipient himself or his legal representative (or heirs in the case of those who were killed) - as herein recorded."

The note in the "Prize Money" book (FMP series containing 287 images) is very similar, as might be expected - but the final paragraph sheds more light on the history of the records!:

"An extremely valuable and interesting record of the various sums of money that were awarded as Prize-money to the crews of all the ships that had taken part in the capture and destruction of the French and Spanish fleets at Trafalgar:- every officer, seaman & marine being apportioned an amount according to his rank & standing. The money was paid by a firm of Bankers in London (now non-existent) & an acknowledgement given either by the recipients themselves or their legal representatives as herein recorded.

The "Neptune" list was unfortunately stolen before the Book came into my possession: all the others are complete."

The comment about "all" the others being complete needs to be understood in the context of what was included to start with.  The information page on FindMyPast states "These books only cover ship names P-V. Unfortunately, it is not known what happened to the volumes for ships A-O." 

That isn't strictly correct, in that the Index at the start of each book lists the following ships:

Neptune

Orion

Polyphemus

Prince

Revenge

Royal Sovereign

Spartiate

Swiftsure

Temeraire

Tonnant

Thunderer

Victory

Euryalus

Naiad

Phoebe

Sirius

Pickle

Entreprenante

So, as you can see, a couple of ships beginning with "E" are included.

At the start of each ship's entry, more detail is included regarding what the men were signing for.  For the Parliamentary Grant this generally states:

"We whose Names & Marks are hereunto subscribed being the Captain Officers & Company of His Majesty's Ship {ship name} under the Command of the late Rt Hon. Lord Nelson in the Battle off Cape Trafalgar on the 21 October 1805 do acknowledge to have received by ourselves or our legal representatives thro' the hands of Messrs C(hristopher) Cooke & J(ames) Halford for & on acct of the Rt Hon. Lord Howick, John Earl Spencer & Lord Henry Petty Trustees for the Distribution of £300,000 voted by Parliament, the several sums expressed against our Names being our respective Proportions of the said Grant.

And we do hereby discharge our said Trustees as well as the said Messrs Cooke & Halford from any further demand on account thereof"

(There are some minor variations, such as having "the amount of our proportions of the said Grant" instead of " our respective Proportions of the said Grant" etc.)

In the Prize Book, the text is similar. However, the Bankers are Messrs Christopher Cooke & William Rd Cosway and the money received is described as "being the amount of our respective proportions of the proceeds of 4 French & Spanish ships captured on that day together with proceeds of Bounty Bills for the Enemy's ships destroyed."

Some more background - and resolving some potential confusion

While researching, I was interested to find that the "British Naval Biographical Dictionary, 1849", which is on Ancestry, includes a list of "General Actions" between 1794 - 1840, as well as tables showing the returns of numbers killed and wounded at each.  Based on the return for the Battle of Trafalgar, it appears that the following will be the ships where the prize money records have been lost:

Britannia

Dreadnought

Mars

Bellerophon

Minotaur

Conqueror

Leviathan

Ajax

Agememnon

Africa

Belleisle

Colossus

Achille

Defence

Defiance

This did cause me some initial confusion - because there are twenty seven ships in that table (which agrees with the number said to be at the battle). 

However, six of the ships in the prize books do not appear in the table, ie Euryalus, Naiad, Phoebe, Sirius, Pickle, and Entreprenante.

Thanks to the Nelson Society, who have published a pdf entitled "The Trafalgar Roll",⁵ I discovered that four of these six ships (Euryalus, Naiad, Phoebe, and Sirius), were frigates, which were too small to be actively engaged in the battle, although the Euryalus is mentioned as performing "valuable service" during the battle by making signals after one of the larger ships was disabled.

From Wikipedia, it appears the other two ships, Pickle and Entreprenante, were also both present but, again, were too small to take part in the fighting, although they were involved in rescuing sailors during the battle. Pickle also carried news of Nelson's death, and of the victory in the battle, back to Britain.⁶

I had another confusing moment when I found the Phoebe described as assisting two of the "prizes", one of which was called Swiftsure, ie the name of one of the ships on the British side during the Battle of Trafalgar.⁷

  

It turned out that there were two such ships in the battle - one on the British side, the other, originally British, but captured by the French in 1801, and so fighting on the French side!⁸

So, although only 27 British ships were engaged in the fighting, more ships were present in the area and were involved in other aspects of what took place.

Moving on to the PARRYs, and research into who they were 

Although the prize books currently only appear on FindMyPast, the other database on the site, 

"British Royal Navy, Battle Of Trafalgar 1805" seems to be the same as the "England, Battle of Trafalgar Crew Lists, 1805-1806" on Ancestry.  And the source for both is the "Trafalgar Ancestors" database at the TNA.⁹

The information on each site varies slightly. For example, searching for "Parry" on both Ancestry and FindMyPast produces eight results, but only seven on the National Archives site.  It's easy to spot the cause - one of the entries on FindMyPast has a question mark after the surname. This entry appears without the "?" on Ancestry, but is only found on the TNA site by searching for "Parry?" 

So it seems worth checking all three sites, if possible, not just to pick up any such spelling variations, but also some of the additional comments, which don't seem to be included on both the genealogical sites.  

The TNA database is also described as an ongoing project so, potentially, more information will become available in the future.  Most of the men only have one source listed - the ships muster list or pay book covering around (but not always including) the date of the Battle of Trafalgar.  Since muster lists for other date periods exist in the TNA, anyone interested in a particular person could potentially find out more about their service etc, through those records.

Looking at what I have discovered, so far, for each PARRY in turn: 

Andrew PARRY [https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/details.asp?id=4030]

In 1805, Andrew was a midshipman on HMS Britannia, one of the ships not included in the prize books. He was aged 20, and born in London. There is a comment, which states "see former books", so more information on him should be available in the navy records.

I found four references in the TNA to an Andrew PARRY connected with the navy:

- In January 1803, in a letter to the captain of HMS Ethalion, Sheerness, a midshipman Andrew PARRY asks to be discharged because of his wounds, and the Captain passes the letter on, asking that the request be complied with. (ADM 1/2509/103)

-  In July 1811, there's a request submitted from HMS Ulysses, for "a Lieutenant senior to Andrew Parry, whose seniority dates from September 18, 1809, as Lt Parry has just joined the ship from half pay, having been obliged to give up his previous appointment because of deafness." (ADM 1/1550/169)

-  In September 1811, a similar request to the above, this time specifically asking that a Lieutenant Lauzen be "appointed to HMS Ulysses in place of Lieutenant Andrew Parry." (ADM 1/1551/60)

-  In December 1813, the "Will of Andrew Parry, Lieutenant in the Royal Navy of Brockhurst, Hampshire" is proved in the PCC (PROB 11/1550/474)

 I suspect that the 1803 reference might relate to a different Andrew Parry - although he is a midshipman, if his wounds were such that he was unable to carry out his duties at that time, and his Captain agreed, is it likely that he would still be serving over two years later, at the Battle of Trafalgar, yet alone potentially progressing further to become a Lieutenant?   [A Lieutenant was the next rank up from a midshipman, but required passing an exam.¹⁰]

Ancestry has a database of the "Commissioned Sea Officers of the Royal Navy, 1660-1815", which shows an Andrew PARRY becoming a Lieutenant on the 18 September 1809.  

This matches to the July 1811 entry in the TNA. Perhaps the 'deafness' could have been caused during the battle of Trafalgar?

Tieing in with the probate entry, a Lieutenant Andrew PARRY is buried at Alverstoke, Hampshire on the 16th December 1813.  He was aged 28, which matches to a birthdate of 1785, and would make him 20 in 1805.  The address at burial was given as "Hardway", which is a hamlet in the parish of Alverstoke. "Brockhurst", the address in the probate entry, is another hamlet in the same area.¹¹

 In the Will, Andrew mentions his wife, Isabella, his brother, Henry, and his father - who he doesn't name but who is described as "Andrew Parry, gent" when the Will is proved.

An Andrew PARRY married an Isabella EMLEY in Alverstoke in 1813. There are three different dates shown for the marriage on FindMyPast (1st February, 5th July, and 6th July.) Ancestry just shows 6th July 1813.  Neither of the sites have images for the marriage, so I haven't been able to confirm any of the details.  However, Ancestry does also have the Pallot's Marriage Index, which indicates that this Andrew was a Lieutenant in the RN.

So several of these entries do seem to match up, indicating that the Andrew PARRY, who was present at the battle of Trafalgar, potentially became a Lieutenant in 1809, married in 1813, and then died later that year.

It is also possible that his father was an "Andrew PARRY, gentleman of Southwark", whose Will was proved in 1815. However, I haven't yet found a suitable baptism for Andrew junior. 

Howard Lewis Parry [https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/details.asp?id=17107]

In 1805, Howard was serving as a "boy" on HMS Tonnant, aged 14, and is described as born in Chatham, Kent.  He is listed in the prize books.

He is also the one entry that I have found a reasonable quantity of information for and, since I am running out of time to get this posted before the end of the month, I am going to write Howard's information up as a separate post, next month. 

James PARRY [https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/details.asp?id=2036]

James was an ordinary seaman ("able seaman" in the FMP Index), serving on HMS Ajax, in 1805.  He was aged 26, and described as born in "Cultarton, Devon", a parish that doesn't seem to exist!  

I haven't been able to confirm any other records as even potentially relating to him, and the Ajax is one of the ships not listed in the prize books.

The dates quoted on his page show "1 March 1805 to 1 June 1805", with an additional "2 June 1805" not connected to any information. However, the linked source seems to be for dates "1805 Aug - 1806 Jan".  Also, there is a comment stating, "see former books", so more information on James is probably available in the navy records.

John PARRY ["Jjohn" in the TNA entry at https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/details.asp?id=13688]

John was another 14 year old "boy", this time serving on HMS Royal Sovereign in 1805.  The comments described him as "late Gladiator".  The ship called HMS Gladiator, at that date, seems to have been permanently on harbour service.¹² The information about John in the Trafalgar database is said to have come from the Marine Society, whose historical records are held at the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich.¹³ [Searching for PARRY in their catalogue returns a large number of entries, so I haven't explored that further.]

In the prize books, John received £4 12s 6d on 27 Oct 1806, from the Parliamentary Grant, and £1 17s 6d,  on 23 Aug 1807, from the prize money.  On both occasions, the receipt was acknowledge by his mark.

John was from Worcester, in Worcestershire. There are several baptisms for John PARRYs in, and near, Worcester around 1791, so more information would be needed to identify a relevant baptism.

However, it is possible he was admitted to the Greenwich Hospital pensioners in 1847.  Entries in the "Entry Book of Pensioners", and the "Rough Entry Book of Pensioners", within the database "British Royal Navy & Royal Marines Service And Pension Records, 1704-1939" on FindMyPast, show a John PARRY, aged 58, being admitted on the 2nd December 1847. He had been a seaman, but his trade was now described as a labourer.  His last ship had been the Monarch.  Described as born in Worcester, his last residence was recorded as Chelsea, and he had a ticket number of 712, which I believe indicates that he had previously been receiving a pension while living independently (ie not in the Royal Hospital at Greenwich). He was married to a Mary, with three children under twelve, a boy and two girls, and he had lost a finger.  He was supplied with his "first clothing" on the 3rd December, and his "second clothing" on the 14th April, which, I imagine, refer to the distinctive coats worn by the hospital pensioners.

Based on the ticket number, it is also possible to find three entries that might be of relevance for John, on Ancestry, in the "UK, Royal Hospital Chelsea Returns of Payment of Army and Other Pensions, 1842-1883". The first is a pensioner being transferred from the 2nd West London district. He was in receipt of a permanent pension, was "Admitted In Pensioner per War Office letter 6/12(?)/47", and he had been paid his pension up until the 2nd December prior to being transferred.  That would seem to tie in with the admission record on FindMyPast.

The second entry shows a John PARRY under the section headed "Pensioners newly admitted to out-pension", with the 18th March 1855 being the date the pension starts being paid by the 2nd West London district.  If this was John being transferred back out of the hospital, one wonders why he wasn't listed under the section "Pensioners transferred to the District" instead, since he had previously been receiving a pension. 

 The third entry shows a John PARRY under the section of "Pensioners transferred from the District", with an "Admission to Out-Pension" date of 15 March 1855, being transferred to Deptford, with his pension paid up to 31st October 1860. 

Clearly more work is required to match up all these records properly, but it shows there is potential for discovering more.

In the 1841 census, there is a John PARRY, aged 45, a labourer, who was not born in the county, with a wife, Mary, and daughter, Betsey, aged 10, living in St Luke, Chelsea (HO107/688/6/7) which is a 'possibility' for John. I haven't been able to find any other census entries or a death/burial record for him.   

John PARRY [https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/details.asp?id=17878]

This John was a private in the marines, serving on HMS Victory. He is shown as aged 25, but his birth year is calculated as 1778 by Ancestry and FindMyPast, since that has been calculated from 1803, the start date for the particular pay book the information comes from. This book is available for download from the TNA site (ADM 36/15900) and consists of multiple sections, with John PARRY's name appearing in several of them. So there is more to be learnt about him.  

On the TNA site, he is described as being at Trafalgar.  There are two comments for him, the first, "from Chatham HQ", the second "Discharged 15 Jan 1806 Chatham Headquarters HMS Victory paid off."

The prize books show him receiving £4 12s 6d, on the 18th Nov 1806, as his portion from the Parliamentary Grant, and £1 17s 6d, on the 3rd Oct 1807, from the prize money.

John is said to be born in Chirk, Shropshire. Shropshire is an area where the PARRY surname occurs fairly frequently, so I think more information on him from naval records would be needed, before many other records can be identified.  It is possible he appears on Ancestry, in the "Royal Hospital Chelsea Returns of Payment of Army and Other Pensions, 1842-1883" since there is a John PARRY, born about 1776, who served in the 1st Division RM, received a permanent Out-Pension from 15 August 1816, and then died on the 15th January 1855, aged 79.  

Richard PARRY [https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/details.asp?id=2037]

Richard was another private in the marines, this time serving on HMS Ajax.  There's no age or birthplace given for him, and the Ajax is one of the ships that isn't listed in the prize books.  

I think the initial route to finding any additional information on him will be to follow the comment on the TNA page, which says to "see former books". 

Robert PARRY [https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/details.asp?id=430]

Robert was an able seaman, serving on HMS Achille in 1805, aged 34.  He had previously served on HMS Renown. His birthplace is described as "Hollowell, Wales", which, I imagine, should be Holywell, in Flintshire.  

He is the only one of the eight PARRYs in the database that has a death date noted - he died at sea, on the 7 June 1807.  However, there is no indication where the death information came from, so further research is needed on that.

John PARRY? [https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/details.asp?id=9288]

This John was 21, a midshipman serving on HMS Minotaur. Since the Minotaur isn't one of the ships in the prize books, I've not been able to check the surname in any images.

John is described as born in Portsmouth. 

Additional Finds

During the course of researching this man, I came across two marriages relating to sailors:

On 23 Jan 1800, a John PARRY, of HMS Achille, married an Ann MIALL, in Portsea, St Marys

On 27 Mar 1813, a John PARRY, Royal Marine, married a Maria LEE, in Portsmouth, St Thomas.

Neither of these can be conclusively matched up to any of the above entries, but I have included them here, in case the information helps anyone else researching the Royal Navy seamen.

So there we are, a post about (most of) the PARRYs who served in the Battle of Trafalgar, just scraping in as my monthly post for February. Phew!

Notes and Sources

1. The Prize Book search page on FMP: https://www.findmypast.co.uk/discover/military-armed-forces-and-conflict/regimental-and-service-records/british-royal-navy-battle-of-trafalgar-prize-book 

2. Wikipedia account of the Battle of Trafalgar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Trafalgar

3. National Museum of the Royal Navy: https://www.nmrn.org.uk/

4. The Society for Nautical research Forum query regarding the Prize Books: https://snr.org.uk/snr-forum/topic/trafalgar-prize-money-and-300000-l-special-award-payment-details/

5. The Nelson Society pdf "The Trafalgar Roll": https://www.nelson-society.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/TheBattleOfTrafalgar.pdf

6. Wikipedia re the two ships Entrepante and Pickle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Entreprenante and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Pickle_(1800) 

7. Phoebe assisting a prize called Swiftsure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Phoebe_(1795)

8. The earlier British ship called Swiftsure: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Swiftsure_(1787)

9. The "Trafalgar Ancestors" database at the TNA:  https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/trafalgarancestors/

10. A Lieutenant being the next rank up from a midshipman: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Navy_ranks,_rates,_and_uniforms_of_the_18th_and_19th_centuries#/media/File:NormalEntryCommissionRoute.png and  https://19thcentury.us/19th-century-royal-navy-ranks/ 

11. "Hardway" and "Brockhurst" being hamlets in the parish of Alverstoke: https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/hants/vol3/pp202-208  and https://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/HAM/Alverstoke

12. HMS Gladiator on harbour service: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Gladiator

13. The Marine Society, and their historical records at Greenwich: https://www.marine-society.org/history and https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/archive/search/parry

January 2026: Company totals, tracking numbers, and future plans.

 In some ways, this is a follow-on from my post in October last year, when I wrote about getting back into systematically collecting information for the study, and about tracking the numbers of PARRY entries within the genealogical company databases.  The idea behind doing that is to (eventually!) be able to identify how 'complete' the study is, through some quantifiable measure.

Of course, I will never be able to collect every reference - an exact search for the surname in each of the main genealogical sites currently produces the following total numbers:

Ancestry: 3,211,449

FindMyPast: 1,303,026

My Heritage: 7,725,522

TheGenealogist: 640,550

Family Search: 1,044,594

(and there's 3,965 PARRY related profiles on Wikitree.)

 I have spent some time this month looking at how easy it might be to keep track of totals in the various databases but the simple answer, for anyone who likes 'exact' figures, is that it isn't!

Ancestry is the easiest to collect totals from - but the totals for individual databases within each category (eg "All BMD...", "All census...", "All military..." etc) don't always add up to the overall total given for that category to start with. Some databases also seem to 'disappear' when you click through to see them all, as illustrated in the following two smaller sets of results, in which I was searching using an additional exact keyword of "navy", as well as the exact surname:

where "See All" led to just the RNLI records:

and:

where "See All" just led to the Wills: 

Imagine trying to identify which databases are 'missing', if you found such differences having collected totals from over seven thousand databases.

The other companies either do not show the individual database totals, or only do so if you click down through various levels for any that contain above a certain number of results. 

And, again, the totals obtained by adding the results for individual areas (ie, on FMP, the separate "Australia & New Zealand", "Ireland", "All Britain", and "All US & Canada" totals) does not always add up to the same total as when you search under "The World".  Even the total obtained when searching just the two countries, Canada and the United States, separately, isn't the same as when searching for them both together, yet alone the total obtained when searching under the five separate regions of Britain, compared to an "All Britain" search.

I'm sure there are reasons behind why that happens. 

But there is clearly little point trying to measure 'completeness' based on such general numbers of entries (although it can be interesting to look at the lists of individual databases available - discovering there are entries in databases such as the "Mayflower Source Records", various Mexican Catholic records, or the "Mariners of the American Revolution", can lead into totally unexpected areas of research.)

And, while it might be fun to produce graphs like this:

or this:

...they're not exactly informative, other than to demonstrate the fairly obvious conclusion that a few databases have large numbers of PARRY entries, while the majority of databases contain a relatively small number of entries (and that the "Wales, Newspapers.com™ Stories and Events Index, 1800's to current" certainly skews the results! ☺)

 Such graphs are not very helpful in terms of developing a strategy for progress on the study.

Of more use might be a graph limited to a particular category of results, such as the census results, within the UK and Ireland Collection:

Once again, summarising the number of databases containing the various totals shows how the majority of the databases contain relatively small numbers of results (less than 2501, according to the scale but, in reality, all less than 150 entries), about a third of the databases contain between  2501 - 17501 entries, and only one database (the 1939 Register, where totals for the UK's constituent regions are not given separately), approaches 30,000.

Now, from such figures, it is much easier to plan a 'collection strategy', and to identify which databases will need subdividing further, to make the process more manageable.  It will also be possible to measure against the totals expected, to obtain some level of 'completeness'.

I know that many one-namers base their studies around marriage records but, for me, the censuses have always seemed a 'better' choice.  They give a snapshot of which PARRYs were alive at a particular moment in time and that provides a framework on which to hang all the other data.  

So census details are going to be a focus for progress over this year.

But, since I imagine just working on the censuses, and reciting statistics for how many more census entries I have transcribed each month, will drive me (yet alone any readers) slightly 'nuts', I shall also be working on other topics alongside that. Recalling the list of topics I included in my December post, the first one of these will be the PARRYs at the Battle of Trafalgar.  

I have already begun to look at these but will make that a separate post.

I might expand that topic to include other records of PARRYs in the UK's Royal Navy - bearing in mind that the forthcoming Guild Conference will take place in Portsmouth, the site of "one of the Royal Navy’s most historically significant bases".¹

Talking of the Guild, last week, I was reading the most recent Guild Journal, in particular the article by Stephen Coker, about Frederick Norman Filby (1915-1995), who was described as the "Architect of the One-Name Study Movement".  It really made me aware of how much we, as current one-namers, "stand upon the shoulders of giants", those who accomplished so much, and who laid down the foundations for what we do now.

In three years time, 2029 will see the Guild's 50th anniversary - now that's a good target to aim for, to see some major progress in the study.

Notes & Sources 

1 The historical significance of Portsmouth: specific quote from the "Overview of UK Royal Navy Bases" at https://www.defenseadvancement.com/resources/royal-navy-bases/

National Museum of the Royal Navy at Portsmouth Historic Dockyard: https://www.nmrn.org.uk/visit-us/portsmouth-historic-dockyard

 

A review of this year

It's that time of year again, when many of us look back at what we have achieved over the last twelve months and then forward to all we hope to achieve during the next twelve.

On the Blog
At the beginning of 2025, I reviewed my attempt at the "Guild Blog Challenge 2024" and, from that, made a pact with myself that I would continue to try to write at least one post here each month.  I didn't manage to do that every month, missing out on posting in July.  However, both June and August (as well as January) contained two posts so, overall, including this one, I will have made fourteen posts.  

While that's not 'perfect', it means I have maintained a reasonable level of publication, which I hope to continue into next year. Making a pact with myself, like that, does help to deal with any 'motivation' issues.

Another intention derived from my review of the Guild Challenge was to create a list of "potential blog topics" - I didn't manage to go through all of the past Guild Blog Challenges to collect the topics from those, or to take a look at some of the other series one-namers have created, or followed.¹ However, I did manage to find the themes for several years of Amy Johnson Crow's "52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks" challenges² and created an excel file containing those.  

Although I initially started to combine all of the years' topics into one list, to which I intended to add suggestions for ways the topics could be interpreted by a one-namer, I've ended up deciding against that additional process.  Amy's intention, as stated in her 2015 post, was that the themes were 'general — one might even say “ambiguous.”' This was quite deliberate, since her aim was "to inspire, rather than dictate."  

Given the wide range of One-Name Studies - not just because of the different frequencies of the surnames, and the locations where the surnames predominate, but also in the methods used by individual one-namers - I don't think the extra process is necessary.  Bearing in mind that one-namers generally have some advantages over those who are only researching their own ancestry, because:

- a one-name study tends to include a larger number of individuals, than a personal family history,

- and, potentially, those individuals will have a wider variety of backgrounds, and circumstances in their lives - there's more options to choose from to fit particular topics.

- A one-name study also undertakes to develop the research beyond just the individuals, by synthesising the data into conclusions about the surname itself etc, so that produces even more options for interpreting a topic, by writing about methodology, or results, etc.

So I think most one-namers should be able find a way of interpreting the topics to fit their own study, if they want to follow a 'topic based' method for publication. So I have just included links to where I found the lists in the 'Notes & Sources' below.

Rather than writing about particular topics, an alternative approach is to write about whatever research is currently being carried out - when I began my blog, I said it was intended to provide a record of all the ongoing "happenings" in the study, ie "contacts being made, new resources found, links discovered, and general ongoing development, etc." 

So, really, as long as I am working on the study, I should have something to write about! (In hindsight, maybe that statement does explain some of the periods without posts! ☺ )

My "fall back" option for a post, which is to take a look at the most recent updates from any (or all!) of whichever genealogical companies I happen to have a subscription to, and comment on entries for my surname (or the lack of such entries.☺) is nicely covered by the inclusion of "new resources found," in the above description of the purpose of the blog.

So subject matter for posts here really shouldn't be an issue!

However, I have identified two particular aspects of blogging that I need to work on, and will possibly be looking for feedback on, over the coming year.

Firstly, dealing with whether I know enough on a topic to write about it.  Doubts about this were why my attempts at following the "52 ancestors in 52 weeks" challenge with my own family history failed in both 2018 and 2020.  It is so easy to keep on researching, looking for that one more piece of information, one more answer to a question, when one can still identify gaps in one's knowledge, rather than writing up what is already known.  I hope that, by reminding myself this is an 'ongoing' study, and that research does not always need to be 'finished' in order to be written up, I will make some progress with this.

The second aspect relates to *how* to write up the research.  

When I commented in September that the "Lloyd George Domesday Land Records" had reminded me about the family of PARRYs buried in Potton, and that their story would become the topic for October, I had not anticipated that it would take me until the end of November to 'finish' that post. The problem, apart from the sheer quantity of relevant references, and the time it took to make sense of some of them, was in deciding whether to write a 'family story', or the 'research story', ie a third person account of the family, or an account of my research into them.

Back in April, when writing about the Guild's Conference, I mentioned an emphasis on how 'every story matters', and the fact that "we're not just compiling names and dates etc (a habit it is easy to fall into, with a study of a relatively frequently occurring surname) but actually revealing the humanity of the people we write about, who they were, what they did and, where possible, the why of it, their hopes and their heartbreaks.  

So a 'family story' seems to be an ideal worth aiming for.

But I naturally tend towards writing the research story, because it's easier to write about what I have done, and the research I have carried out - and to include all the caveats about each of the records found, something that often seems to get overlooked in family stories.  (I often wonder how many 'fictional lives' appear in people's family trees, through inappropriate reconstruction of "facts" from records.)  

Another advantage to writing the research story, is that it can be written as the researcher carries out the research, rather than waiting until sufficient records have been traced in order to construct the family story. This saves on time and also the potential hassle of having to re-arrange all the records into the right order for the story. (No prizes for identifying how I know that!) 

But the question I kept asking myself, was, "which version would be the more interesting one to read?"

For a while, I considered writing up both versions and asking any readers to comment on which they preferred. In the end, I opted to try to write the family story first, since writing the blog is still a learning process for me and so it seemed important to try something 'different', even if I struggled with it. And now, having taken so long to write the post, I'm not sure I have the stamina to write up a research account (yet alone inflict reading it on anyone else, having seen how long the family story became!)

So the question (as to which version would be more interesting to read) still remains, and this is something I shall continue to consider, and work on, over this coming year.

Finally with regard to the blog, I imagine we all have more ideas about things we ‘could’ do on our studies, than the time that is available to do them. As part of my review of the year, I went through all three of my blogs and noted the items that I’d mentioned as requiring follow up - this ONS blog easily had the most!

I can't promise that the following are all going to become priorities for this coming year, but I am listing them here now, since it will be a measure of 'progress' to see how many of them have been achieved by the end of 2026. (The month in brackets is when I mentioned them during 2025 - not the month I am setting as a goal to do them!): 

Individuals or Families

Identifying the Thomas Parrye mentioned in the 1377 poll tax for Birdforth, North Yorkshire (January)

Research into the PARRYs mentioned on the post cards (and add the "Notes & Sources" to that post) (February)

The PARRY family in Walterstone (May)

My 2x great grandfather, Thomas PARRY (May)

The PARRYs from the Golden Vale (June)

Follow up regarding education records, and the Potton PARRYs (June, November)

Durham Home Guard enrolment forms (August)

Thomas PARRY's account book (August)

The PARRYs who served Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth I (August)

New Year gifts from PARRYs to Queen Elizabeth I (August)

PARRYs in the Postal Service Appointment Books (September)

Thomas PARRY in the Boer War (September)

PARRYs at the Battle of Trafalgar (October)

Mini Projects

Ireland (September)

Europe (October)

[Noting these has reminded me that I always said PARRYs in Dorset should be researched as a mini project, since many of the early entries relate to just one family.]  

Some wider ONS research topics

Why not every "son of Harry" became a "Parry" in Wales (January)

Census figures and distributions (March)

More follow up from Conference topics (e.g. internal migration, slave voyages, US 1950 census, and the issue of "every story matters") (April)

Recheck the "French register of deceased persons since 1970" (August)

Early pedigrees (August)

How to keep track of the numbers of PARRY entries (October)

PARRYs in Doncaster (October. Links to 'internal migration')

Genealogical research Directory (October)

The blog comments relating to several of the above items were linked to my 'currently defunct' website, and so highlight the need to update that and put the information online again. 

Changing subject slightly, I was interested to hear Paul Howes mention, at a recent talk to the Yorkshire Regional Meeting of the Guild, that he concentrates on family reconstruction. [I did think he also commented that he leaves others to deal with the 'stories' - but I can't find that reference now, so perhaps I imagined it!☺ ]

There is no right, or wrong, way to carry out a one-name study - although there are some recommendations - many of the methods chosen depend, not only on the individual carrying out the study, but also on the surname being studied, its frequency, as well as its distribution around the world. 

But Paul's comment chimed with my current musings about publication on the blog, about organisation, and the tools used for recording the study, as well as the question of how I carry out the research, and what my focus is. 

So I have a lot to be working on for the coming year. But I am looking forward to it.  Having given up actively volunteering at a local historic house, I should have more time, and a better mindset, to make progress here, with the One-Name Study. 

So that's what I am anticipating for 2026! 

Happy New Year to All

[Postcard from "Alice" to Mr E T PARRY, of Swansea, sent 30 December 1913]

Notes and Sources

1. Julie Goucher's blog, which includes several examples of blog challenges: https://anglersrest.net/ 

2. Sources for topics from the "52 Ancestors in 52 Weeks" challenges, organised by Amy Johnson Crow:
2014 - No themes, aim was just to write about one ancestor each week: https://www.nostorytoosmall.com/posts/challenge-52-ancestors-in-52-weeks/
2015 - Full list from Amy's site: start at https://www.nostorytoosmall.com/posts/announcing-52-ancestors-in-52-weeks-2015-edition/ and follow the links
2016 - (List not found)
2017 - (List not found)
2018 - Not from Amy's own site: https://walkingthegenes.com/odds-and-ends/52-ancestors-in-52-weeks-2018-challenge
2019 - Amy's: https://www.amyjohnsoncrow.com/52-ancestors-in-52-weeks-2019-themes-testing/
2020 - Amy's: https://www.amyjohnsoncrow.com/52-ancestors-in-52-weeks-2020-themes/ 
2021 - Not from Amy's own site: https://www.familytreeforum.com/forum/research-advice/the-writers-shed/72278-52-ancestors-in-52-weeks-contents-for-2020-2021-2022#post1158899 (shows 2020-2022)
2022 - Not from Amy's own site: https://www.familytreeforum.com/forum/research-advice/the-writers-shed/72278-52-ancestors-in-52-weeks-contents-for-2020-2021-2022#post1158899 (shows 2020-2022)
2023 - Not from Amy's own site: https://petrinipage.com/2023/01/21/52-ancestors-52-weeks-52-themes/
2024 - Not from Amy's own site: https://petrinipage.com/2023/12/29/52-ancestors-in-52-weeks-of-2024/
2025 - Amy's: https://www.amyjohnsoncrow.com/52-ancestors-in-52-weeks-themes-2025/
2026 - Amy's: https://www.amyjohnsoncrow.com/52-ancestors-in-52-weeks-themes-for-2026/