maiden name mystery?

[apowell]

Originally Posted by Olde Crone

This is far out but has happened in my tree.

Edward didn't name his father at marriage but that doesn't mean he didn't know who he was. Perhaps Sarah knew her grandfather was called Hunt and decided to use that as her official surname.

OC

Thank you.

It's interesting that her father, Edward Brookes, didn't know or didn't give his father's details.

Adrian

[apowell]

Originally Posted by HarrysMum

Have you found Sarah’s birth? does she have a place of birth on her census? I am useless at English geography. There are quite a few Sarah Brookes in Staffordshire around 1851.

Thank you.

You make a good point, and this could be an indicator that something doesn't add up with the two eldest children, Edward and Sarah.

Edward & Ann's maiden name was Haywood
Benjamin Brookes, 1839 West Bromwich Bur 1845
Mary Ann Brookes, 1841, m John Aston, 1859, West Bromwich
James Brookes 1843 Bur 1846?
Jane Brookes 1844 Bur 1844?
John Brookes 1849

I can't find the baptism records of the two eldest children.

According to census records:
Sarah Brookes, born abt 1852, West Bromwich
Edward Brookes, born abt 1855, Rowley Regis

Confusing

Regards
Adrian

[apowell]

Hi,

Sarah must have been using the surname Hunt regularly because before her marriage in 1869, she was a witness with Joseph Homer on his brother's marriage as Sarah Hunt, signed x

It can't have been an error with all the other evidence.

Very odd, and maybe she just chose a random surname/alias?

Regards
Adrian

[kiterunner]

Originally Posted by apowell

Thank you.

You make a good point, and this could be an indicator that something doesn't add up with the two eldest children, Edward and Sarah.

Edward & Ann's maiden name was Haywood
Benjamin Brookes, 1839 West Bromwich Bur 1845
Mary Ann Brookes, 1841, m John Aston, 1859, West Bromwich
James Brookes 1843 Bur 1846?
Jane Brookes 1844 Bur 1844?
John Brookes 1849

I can't find the baptism records of the two eldest children.

According to census records:
Sarah Brookes, born abt 1852, West Bromwich
Edward Brookes, born abt 1855, Rowley Regis

Confusing

Regards
Adrian

Aren't Sarah and Edward the youngest children?

[apowell]

Originally Posted by kiterunner

Aren't Sarah and Edward the youngest children?

Thank you

Yes, sorry, my mistake, they are the youngest

Adrian

[apowell]

Originally Posted by Katarzyna

Maybe a bit off the wall but could she possibly have been adopted?

The 1861 census
Sarah Brookes b 1853 West Bromwich?

https://www.findmypast.co.uk/transcr...56853&tab=this

There is this birth:
HUNT, SARAH JANE mmn POWELL
GRO Reference: 1853 M Quarter in WEST BROMWICH Volume 06B Page 582


Other Sarah Brookes in W Brom:

Name: Mother's Maiden Surname:
BROOKES, SARAH ANN LIGHTFOOT
GRO Reference: 1852 S Quarter in WEST BROMWICH Volume 06B Page 498
BROOKES, SARAH JANE -
GRO Reference: 1851 M Quarter in WEST BROMWICH Volume 18 Page 647
BROOKES, SARAH JANE WARD
GRO Reference: 1851 D Quarter in WEST BROMWICH Volume 18 Page 639

Thank you

It's possible that Sarah and maybe even Edward were a part of the extended family.

I was thinking the same

The 1861 census you linked is definitely my Sarah, so we have some connection with the Brookes family; however, I don't know how they link in

Adrian

[Olde Crone]

Surnames on census returns are less reliable than a primary source, in my experience. I have a whole family in 1851, all listed under the wife's maiden name (including her husband) even though they were definitely married. I came to the conclusion that the enumerator knew the house as belonging to the wife's family for generations and could not remember her married name by the time he got round to filling in the census returns.

What that waffle means is that the enumerator assumed her surname was Brookes. It didn't matter anyway, the census was a head count primarily and absolute accuracy about names and ages wasn't important.

OC

[kiterunner]

Edward jr's birth was registered Jul-Sep 1854 Dudley, vol 6c p 6, MMN Haywood.

[apowell]

Originally Posted by kiterunner

Edward jr's birth was registered Jul-Sep 1854 Dudley, vol 6c p 6, MMN Haywood.

Thank you for your help

It seems that Sarah must be Edward's & Ann's child because all the other siblings are baptised to them.

I did wonder if maybe Sarah had previously married a Hunt and he'd died, although she was young when she married Joseph Homer. The marriage entry stated she was a spinster, but maybe it was a mistake.

Adrian

[apowell]

Originally Posted by Olde Crone

Surnames on census returns are less reliable than a primary source, in my experience. I have a whole family in 1851, all listed under the wife's maiden name (including her husband) even though they were definitely married. I came to the conclusion that the enumerator knew the house as belonging to the wife's family for generations and could not remember her married name by the time he got round to filling in the census returns.

What that waffle means is that the enumerator assumed her surname was Brookes. It didn't matter anyway, the census was a head count primarily and absolute accuracy about names and ages wasn't important.

OC

Thank you for your help

It makes sense, and I'll just keep plugging away.

Adrian