Family multiplication

My grandfather McQuay grew up as one of six sons, although there was another who sadly died aged 12 days.  My great-grandfather was also one of six children, exceptionally in that family there was one girl amongst the boys.  Another generation back and there were six sons there too, as far as I can tell.

A question which has stared at me ever since I can remember is: How many descendants are there in my generation who carry on the name?  Or as the years have passed: How many descendants are there in the next generation who have the surname McQuay?

If each of my great-great-great-grandfather's six sons had six sons of their own and so on then I think the answer would be 46,656 descendants in the latest generation.  That's rather a large and unrealistic number!

We know that over the years there were deaths in infancy, some who reached adulthood but died without marrying, or who did have a spouse but no children, including those who died in wartime.  Not forgetting the obvious situation in which a daughter may become a wife and pass on their own genes but their husband's surname.  Also possible are remarriages after bereavement which create step-families and adoptions, so there can be informal or formal name changes, for this or other reasons. 

The only way to arrive at an answer to my question would involve tracing every child in every family then counting up the names in the youngest generation.  Well there's a challenge!  At the time of writing I've filled up as many branches as I can, although there are a few apparent dead-ends which may yet yield.  Right now, in the youngest generation in my tree, the number of descendants who have the surname McQuay is 12, yes twelve!

I am interested in tracing modern day distant relatives for many reasons, not just idle curiosity.  I live in hope that someone I discover now could have stories, photos, certificates, etc which have been handed down to them and could shed more light on our shared heritage.  That may just as easily be a descendant who has a different surname so all of the branches are equally important.  And maybe there will be enough mutual interest to call for a Meet Your Cousin reunion party!

Christmas

Births occur on every day.
Marriages are solemnised on a chosen day.
Deaths are somewhat seasonal.

For the people in my family tree file whose actual dates I have on record, there are no births on 25 December in any year, and no deaths, but four marriages.  Christmas is celebrated to remember the birth of of Jesus Christ, whom Christians believe is the Son of God.  Apparently, weddings on Christmas Day were not uncommon in the past - it seems the date was a practical choice.  During the 18th and 19th centuries Christmas Day and the following day, called Boxing Day, were often the only days of the year that a young working class couple were sure to get time off work.  (Although in Scotland Christmas Day was not a public holiday until 1958).  In the 1800s, most people worked six days a week and would not get paid when they did not work.

See "Here's Why There Used to be So Many Christmas Day Weddings", a Findmypast blog article.

Happy Anniversary, if it applies to you.

Merry Christmas, which is for everyone.

"Today in the town of David a Saviour has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord."  Luke chapter 2, verse 11.

"For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."  Isaiah chapter 9, verse 6.

McQuay name variants

The vast majority of records relating to my ancestors have the same spelling of the surname as I have inherited: M, c, capital Q, u, a, y.  When handwritten, the letter 'c' was traditionally raised up to the top of the capital 'M' and the cursive script produced a curly letter 'Q' - features which are unfamiliar in most modern fonts and documents of the digital age.

As we have seen from some of the records relating to my own great-grandfather, there have been instances of Maquay being written with a letter 'a' instead of a the letter 'c'.  I have also seen lower case letter 'q' and not surprisingly 'Mac' with an extra letter 'a' in the middle of the 'Mc'.

I remember being shocked to discover that some computer search tools did not match "McQuay" and "Mc Quay".  To get comprehensive results it was necessary to do additional searches with the "Mc" syllable as a separate word, then the same again with "Mac".  Even now some databases have "Quay" as the surname and "Mc" as a middle name or as a two word surname that does not appear in search results for "McQuay".

When someone has read an original document and transcribed (copied) the surname they may have introduced a variation which is really an error.  This can be because the original ink is very faint, or the handwriting is unclear.

• Typically the letter 'c' and a round, single-storey letter 'a' can be misread for one another, or can be copied out as 'o', 'e' or even 'r'.
• Depending on the presence, or absence, and shape of a flourish below the line, the letters 'q ' or 'y ' can be mistaken for an opentail 'g'.
• If there is more of a flourish than usual at the start of the letter 'u' then it may be transcribed as 'w' or confused with a cursive 'n'.
• Or a gesture at the end of the name can be mistaken for an extra letter, such as an 'e'.

Sometimes a variation is rare and easy to spot as one-off error.  It can be the case that a particular spelling appears in multiple records for a period of time but is in the minority compared to all the other places in which a person's name is recorded as expected.  I have also seen the surname written out somewhat phonetically, as it sounds: Mackway or McWhae.  If the name recorded corresponds to a real, more common surname then it is tricky to determine with confidence whether a particular record is related or unrelated.

The list below shows a range of the surname variations found on McQuay related records, transcriptions and indexes, so far:

McQuay Mcquay MacQuay Macquay Mc Quay Mc quay Mac Quay Mac quay

Maquay

McQueay MacQueay McQucay MacQucay
McQuaye MacQuaye
McQuary
McQua

MacGuay
Mcouay Macouay
Mcquag Maquag
Mequay
Meguay
Megnay
Marguay
Maguay
Magway
Magnay
Maqusy

McKway Mackway
McWhae MacWhae McWhac MacWhac McWhar
McWha MacWha
McWade MacWade

Quay

Stockwell (adoption)
Noblett (adoption)
Haigh (middle name and alternative surname)

Occupation across four generations

So far we have seen my great-grandfather referred to on official records as Albert Maquay, Albert McQuay and Albert William McQuay. In fact he is listed as William McQuay on the 1901 census one week before he signs his name Albert William McQuay to register his marriage.

So when there are variations for given name, surname, or both, what clues can we use to build the case that it is the same person?  It may be that there is a different name but the same address.  Or perhaps you come across a very unusual name for one person which acts as a marker for that family - I can share some shining examples of wonderfully helpful names.

One more typical link between records is the occupation.  Albert, his father, and grandfather have their jobs listed on census records, as well birth, marriage and death registrations for themselves and their children, although it is information included on the original documents and not visible in the name indexes.

An individual's occupation may vary over time but here we have a metal working theme which spans four generations across seventy years: Fender Maker, Machinist, Tool Maker, Toolmaker Journeyman, Engineer, Steel Turner, Turner, Iron Turner, Engineers Turner - Steel Tubes Manufacture, Iron Turner - Shipyard.

The chart below shows a thirty year period starting with the 1871 census and depicts records about Albert and his family members.  We see surname variants, first name swaps and vital events which match up to explain who appears and disappears between census years.

The occupation details can help to connect up records, piece together a timeline and link family members, despite name variations over time.  An enduring challenge that has faced me for decades is how to connect up a set of men for whom I have found no evidence of relationship although they share the same surname, location and a curious occupation.

Vital events

If you have been reading along, you will know the story so far about my great-grandfather McQuay:  He is Albert, or Albert William, possibly William or William Albert sometimes, but almost certainly not Harold after all.

• 1879 Mar 07 - birth - Albert Maquay
• 1901 Apr 07 - marriage - Albert William McQuay

As well as birth and marriage the other vital record is death, as in the widely used acronym BMD.  Depending on when and where the ancestor lived, there is also the possibility of looking them up in the decennial census.

• 1871 Apr 02 - census - Albert was not yet born
• 1881 Apr 03 - census - Albert was just 2 years old
• 1891 Apr 05 - census - Albert would have been 12 years old
• 1901 Mar 31 - census - one week before Albert's wedding day!

Finding Albert McQuay age 12 in 1891 was relatively straightforward and his father's name listed on the census matched the 1901 marriage certificate, Robert McQuay.  Hurrah!  However, there was an immediate red flag: Robert's wife was age 29 and son Albert was age 12, which would make her about 17 years old when Albert was born.  Furthermore, the five sons ranged in age from 3 to 18 years old and she could not have been the natural mother to the oldest, only 11 years younger than her.  A mistake in her age on the census page?

So on to the previous census, 1881.  Well, Robert McQuay, a widower, could be found with his eldest son age 8, but no son called Albert, age 2.  Instead with them was Robert's daughter age 6, his mother and brother.  So where was young Albert in 1881 and where was that daughter in 1891?  How recently was Robert widowed and were these family members living together permanently or short-term to help out at a difficult time?  Some questions could be answered, some could not.

"Ah!" I hear you say, "Search for Albert Maquay!"  Indeed, you have the answer and probably faster than I did at the time!  Albert Maquay is found in 1881 as grandson in the household of William and Elizabeth Mirrish, or does that old style handwriting read Murrish, or even Nurrish?  So, one grandmother is living together with her widowed son and no doubt looking after the two older children, aged 8 and 6, whilst the youngest child, aged 2, is being cared for by the other grandmother in her home a few miles away.

Now also in that household is an unmarried daughter with a different surname, Emily Taylor.  Although I have not mentioned it yet, on Albert's birth certificate his mother is named as Mary Maquay, formerly Taylor.  So on 1881 census night at least, Albert is with his aunt Emily, re-married grandmother and the only grandfather he ever knew, although he was not, in fact, a blood relation.  Another note to add is that the death registration for Mary Louisa Maquay, wife of Robert Maquay, records that she died on 20 Apr 1879.  Albert was six weeks old.

DIY or WYSIWYG

Early in my days of family research, a cousin on my father's side helpfully wrote to me with lots of information which he had gathered.  Actually, he was primarily interested in his own relations but was also covering his wife's McQuay side in addition.  He had lots of genealogy experience, lots of names and dates, with lots of assurance.

As I had done with details coming from the enthusiast cousin on my mother's side, I greedily absorbed the new particulars into my own records.  I was grateful for this short-cut and thankful that my cousin had been able to travel and consult sources which were out of my reach.

However, such information is second-hand and could be considered "WYSIWYG" - What You See Is What You Get.  If the aim for your family history hobby is to have names, dates and relationships all filled in then looking at the tree that someone else has constructed will be good enough.  On the other hand, if you want certainty that the data is right, and those people really are your actual ancestors rather than another family with a similar selection of names, then there is no substitute for examining the original sources "DIY" - Do It Yourself.

The family tree from my cousin named my great-grandfather as William Albert McQuay.  Other family members had said they thought it could have been Albert William and someone told me his name was Harold!  Well, I wanted to have a copy of the birth certificate, which would show his registered name, the place of birth, his parents' names, father's occupation and mother's maiden name, a key bridge linking back another generation.

So, I wrote a letter to the register office of the relevant district giving his details and payment for the certificate search, copy and send service.  The reply from the Superintendent Registrar said, "I have to advise you that I have traced an entry which may be the one you seek.  However, there are certain differences between the details you have given for the date of birth, forename and surname, and those shown in the entry. [...] Your cheque is returned herewith."  Not the right forename, or surname, or date of birth - a dead end?

The happy ending is that after a little more work I had in my hand a copy of the marriage certificate for Albert William McQuay, including his own signature, and the birth certificate for Albert Maquay with enough supporting evidence to have confidence that this was indeed a record for baby great-grandfather.  However, where he was toddling around age two at the time of the following census was still a mystery, to me at least.

Computerisation

Nowadays I have a fabulous piece of software which can draw out family trees and charts.  The functionality that I use most frequently is the ability to search through the index of individuals and navigate around the family relationships to arrive at someone in particular.  Looking back, with so much information tidy and accessible in one place, it can be easy to forget the roller coaster route of discovery.

Although my research notes are dated, I haven't written a diary or journal.  When stalled on one mystery I may side-track onto another puzzle and therefore be thinking about more than one branch of the family at a time.  Indeed, when looking at a new source of information, either in person or online, I will often search it for a range of information whilst I am there and record all the details.

Before the 1901 census data for England and Wales was was released and published I got ready to suck all possible relevant information from it.  I made a report of everyone in my family tree file whom I expected to be alive here at the time of that census.  The logic was to exclude all people in the family who had already died and all those who had not yet been born, then hope to find a 1901 census entry for everyone else.

My four grandparents were all born between 1904 and 1908, several years after the census to record those living at each address at midnight on Sunday 31 March 1901.  The bad news was that I had to wait for the 1911 census data to be released for their names to appear.  The good news was that all eight great-grandparents were sure to be in the 1901 census, either already married and starting their family or perhaps not yet married and still with their own parents.  In the first case I might discover my grandparent's siblings in the family home and in the latter scenario I could be looking at the household of my great-great-grandparents.  I was so excited!

Eventually, with some cross-checking to other sources and despite some name variations, I became reasonably sure that I had the right eight people pinned down, with none inexplicably missing.  Somewhat surprisingly, five of them were precisely 20 or 21 years old at the time of that census.  The exceptions were one 25 year old and two who were 36 and 37 years old, respectively.

The fact that most of these were young adults living at home with their families meant this census was a rich source of names and information for my hobby.  However, there were various questions raised and loose ends in view to keep me busy, never mind the essential step of getting all the households' details recorded on the computer and backed up onto floppy discs.

Miss, Mrs, Mrs

There is a double-sided glass locket in my jewellery box which contains a photograph of my mother as a young girl.  That is actually around the back, with the front showing a picture of her mother and aunt as small children.  What is more I have a portrait of their mother and she is wearing the locket.  On close inspection it is possible to see that it actually holds the same photo of her daughters that is still in my great-grandmother's locket now, more than 100 years later.

On the reverse of the portrait photograph, in the shaky handwriting of my grandmother in later life, is written "Frances Kate Gould my mother".  Alongside these objects I received stories such as: Frances came from a large family of about 21 children, she had been a school teacher, been married previously and had three children of whom one died young and was buried in the same place as his father.

So how did my great-grandfather come to marry a widow, become a step-father and have what might today be called a blended family?  My earliest notes from interviewing family members say that my great-grandmother was Mrs Gould, formerly Mrs Down, née Miss Moore.  He was Albert Edward Gould and his first wife was Judith Down.  So, my great-grandfather married Miss Down, who died after a few years, and then he married Mrs Down, who was a cousin by marriage.

Just how does one record that on a family tree?  Well if the two who died in the respective first marriages were cousins then their parents must have been siblings.  Since this Miss Down and Mr Down shared the same surname then we're looking for their fathers to have been brothers (although an unmarried sister could also have passed on the surname).  Miss Down and Mr Down shared the same grandparents.

A distant cousin passed on some personal and research details, "Frances Kate married John Parker Down ... but John died at only 35 ... How she met Albert Edward Gould is unknown ...".  He could tell me that Albert's first wife, Judith Amelia, died in childbirth age 32 and his second wife was known as as "Aunt France".  In exchange, we could tell him that the two couples used to visit together and this continued after Albert became a widower and when Frances became a widow a few months later.

Ancestor cousins made the history and modern cousins together unravelled that history.

Something old, something glued

The oldest original certificate passed down to me is for the marriage of one set of my great-grandparents nearly 115 years ago.  It has been folded to pocket size and become so thin along the folds that they have given way.  On the back you can see the glue of sticky labels and sticky tape has been used to hold the pieces together, but those repairs have also worn and torn.  Handling it is like putting a jigsaw puzzle together.

At the time of a birth or death registration the person themselves does not speak their name for the record.  However, for a marriage the wedding couple are providing their own names to be written down.  The front of the paper shows the groom and bride were John Dwyer and Alice Webb.  The condition of the certificate suggests that it was carried around for a long time, which perhaps indicates the personal value of the document or the relationship it documented.

He was born in 1875 in Upper Glanmire Road, City of Cork, Ireland, baptised the next day in St Patrick's Roman Catholic Church, Lower Glanmire Road and then the civil registration took place two weeks later.  Both the church register of baptisms and the copy of the civil registrar's book of births have clear handwriting and both show the name John James.

She, on the other hand, was born in late 1881 in an area of Hampshire in England which is now absorbed into Southampton.  As a baby she was registered as Mary Alice but baptised as Alice Mary then later recorded as either Alice, Alice M or Alice Mary on census records and in a newspaper report I've seen as well as for her marriage certificate and death registration.

Also passed down to me in the same bundle is a cemetery receipt for £2 15s.  It too is very well worn although not to the same extent as the marriage certificate.  I have visited the couple's shared grave and seen their family headstone, initially for him and subsequently also for her after the second burial seven years later.  The text reads "In Loving Memory Of My Beloved Husband John Dwyer ... Also Alice Mary Wife Of The Above John Dwyer ...".

Since the bride's surname changed when they married, one might summarise by saying that she began life as Mary Alice Webb and ended as Alice Mary Dwyer.  She is not the only one amongst her many siblings whose name evolved over the years, which has made tracing this family across the decades an absorbing challenge.  But that's what it's all about.

This says ... that says ...

Having an original document passed down through the generations can provide a firm foundation for the family historian.  That is assuming you can find it, read it, work out what it is telling you and resolve any inconsistencies.  In practice, considerable time and effort may be required to pull together multiple pieces of information from different sources.

For one set of my grandparents I have their wedding day certificate of marriage which shows the groom's father named as Charles Frederick Welch.  Meanwhile, a cousin has the family's Holy Bible which I understand contains an inscription for the Family Register of Frederick Charles Welch and Fanny Welch, née Tipton.  Well which was he? ... Charles Frederick or Frederick Charles?

It is clear from the registration of his birth that he was officially given the name Charles Frederick Joseph Welch.  However, it seems that as a child and on into his marriage he was known as Frederick.  For the records I have seen, the name Charles only reappears as his first name for the registration of his death and the certificate of his son's marriage which was a few months later.  Meanwhile, the headstone placed on his grave still refers to him as Frederick.

Why register your son's name as Charles Frederick Joseph and then call him Frederick?  Well it is worth noting from the birth certificate and census records that his father's name was Charles.  The baby was named after his father.  Perhaps the use of the name Frederick was just to avoid there being two people in the household who answered to the name of Charles!

As there was a census soon after his birth, we have evidence that the toddler was known as Frederick before he was two years old.  What we may never know is whether the family started out calling him Charles and then changed over, or whether they always intended to refer to him as Frederick and passing on his father's name was only ever meant to be ceremonial.

The underlying question for a genealogist is whether you want to build up a catalogue of names and dates found in official records or aim to become more of a social historian uncovering richer details of lives as they were lived.  The answer may influence which sources you go to consult, what details you seek to record and how much time you invest.  However, there's always the option to avoid going around in circles, back-tracking from dead-ends, and instead read a blog which spotlights hints, tips and interesting anecdotes.

Where it all began

As a child I was given the name McQuay and believed that everyone in the country with the name was related to me!  Any time we were away from our home town I searched telephone directories (this was pre-internet) and this seemed to confirm that it was indeed a rare surname.

With a strong desire to collect and organise information (which later defined my career), I questioned each of my relatives about their full name, date of birth, marriage, and their other family members.  Letters were posted to people whom I could not visit in person, with questions written out to explain the information I was requesting, spaces for their replies to be filled in and a stamped, self-addressed return envelope.

All the gathered facts were carefully recorded onto hand-drawn charts and trees.  Where necessary, multiple pages were joined by sticky tape to provide a large enough space for everyone.  One rather ambitious sheet of A4 paper was entitled "Total Ancestry Research" and had spaces labelled ready for myself, two parents, four grand-parents, eight great-grandparents, sixteen great-great-grandparents and thirty-two great-great-great-grandparents.

However, out of those sixty-three spaces on that chart, only six of them, tracking up the paternal line in each generation, would be expected to have my surname.  The choice before me was whether to concentrate on a One-Name Study for McQuay to try to link up everyone I could find with that name, or to travel back through time and attempt to learn about each one of my direct ancestors, with their range of surnames.

A cousin on my mother's side had traced our shared ancestors so I thankfully copied that information and all at once filled in half of the pedigree chart.  That left me looking at my father's side for an opportunity to do some research of my own.  His grandfather McQuay had married a woman with the surname Brown.  Prejudiced towards my lovely, rare surname I assumed that tracing the McQuay family members would be so much easier than the much more frequently occurring name Brown.  I was so wrong ... but we will return to the Brown family on another day.

My early notes state that my great-grandfather's name was "Albert William (Harold) McQuay".  Someone had mentioned to me that the names may possibly be in another order.  I did meticulously write up that comment in my notebook although not who told me.  However, inexperienced as I was, I did not understand that when parents give their child a name that is not the end of the story.