Invaleed on baptism record

[Manila Jack]

Good evening. I have a copy of a baptism in Chester in 1759. After the father's name is the word "Invaleed". Does anyone know what this may mean? It reads "Williame son to Matthew Buchanan Invaleed & his wife Mary was baptised the 24th day of".

[Bertieone]

Perhaps a bad spelling of, Invalid, Disabled.

[Manila Jack]

Thanks Bert. I thought of that too but then I thought it may have been an obscure legal term.

[BarbaraW]

I thought invalid too after looking at the baptism register, it appears after the name where all the other entries have occupations, like labourer, ropemaker etc.

There is an earlier baptism in Chester 1757 for Mary daughter of Mathew Buchanan and his wife Mary of Handbridge. This entry clearly has the occupation Barber after Mathew's name.

[MaryA]

I suppose it could have meant Not Valid, but then I would have expected the entry to have been crossed out, so I would have to agree with the Disabled meaning, maybe he's suffered some sort of accident between the couple of years since the previous child's birth.

[Manila Jack]

Thank you Barbara and Mary. I'll be visiting Chester archives soon to do some more research on this ancestor.

[BarbaraW]

Hi Jack

You might want to consider joining Find My Past on a free trial or sign up for a month's subscription as they have what's called The Cheshire Collection, it has saved me literally hundreds of pounds in certificates as I have many ancestors in Cheshire, check this out:

http://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/pa ... e-archives

[Manila Jack]

Thanks Barbara,

I do have an annual subscription to Findmypast. Never thought of looking at county records yet. Too many ancestors jostling me for priority!

[BarbaraW]

I know they all keep pulling on your coat tails "Find Me!!"

[Manila Jack]

So true, Barbara. Sometimes you follow up a hunch then you think: "How did I know that?" Guidance from above?

[BarbaraW]

It just happened to me today!!! I was trying to tie up some loose ends with a brother of my nan, his name Thomas Pritchard single and 24 years old in 1911. I found more than a few possible marriages in Liverpool but one kept niggling at me, a marriage to Grace Pitchforth, so I went to the 1939 Register and found them and whilst he had the right birthday the year was 3 years out so I looked up a few more likelys in 1939 but this one seemed "familiar" to me, so I did a little un-connected tree on my main tree but first of all I searched on my tree expecting to see her name but nada. I did a little bit more of a tree for her hoping to see some connection but couldn't find anything so it went on the back burner simmering away with all the other pots.

That was on Friday last week. This morning I decided I needed to look at my nan's marriage certificate for something not related to her but instead to my grand-dad that I couldn't quite remember. And guess who their marriage witnesses were, yep Thomas Pritchard and Grace Pitchforth!!

Guidance from above, divine intervention, a not quite forgotten memory or even a hunch? Who knows but I LOVE it when that happens. Made my day

[Manila Jack]

Well done Barbara!

[MaryA]

Just the very reason why when we ask for details from a marriage certificate it annoys me when people leave out these details and you end up having to ask for them again. Yes it's surprising how useful those couple of names can be.

[BarbaraW]

Thank you Jack it was a good day

Yes Mary sometimes witnesses have no relevance but at other times they can give you a jackpot moment.

I am transcribing for FreeReg at the minute, marriages at St Peter's in the WW1 years and we have to put the witness names and you can see how important some of them are going to be for researchers. It's been interesting, so many young widows re-marrying and so many local girls marrying Yanks and other foreign servicemen and sailors you can get quite a romance story going on in your mind just keying it all in.

[Manila Jack]

Yes. Witness names can be very informative and intriguing. My great great great grandmother, Ann Hurst, was born St Peter's, Thanet, 1785. A witness to her marriage in 1813, was an E C Norwood. The Thanet Norwoods were related to the Hursts. On the opposite page of the same birth register for 1785 is an Elizabeth Chudleigh Norwood. Now, if you Google Elizabeth Chudleigh you discover quite a scandal in Georgian England. So the question is then raised, why did ancestral cousins give their daughter a name associated with such a person? I haven't found a link between any of my Kent ancestral families and the name Chudleigh. The Sun on Sunday would be paying a fortune for the story should it have happened today.

[BarbaraW]

Wow that is so interesting, fingers crossed you find a link to your family

She was like those celebrities of today who carry on in the same manner!!

[MaryA]

Ah ha!!! more scangal, lovely !!!