Finding John Mann’s family: a case study

John Mann was born 26th December 1792 and baptised four days later at Norwich St Michael at Thorn. He is my 4x great uncle, but for years I knew nothing more about him. He seemed simply to have disappeared. Eventually, a set of military discharge papers came online via FindMyPast.1 Through them I learned something really exciting: My 4x great uncle John was at the Battle of Waterloo!

A close reading of the nine pages of his discharge papers provided the following information:

  • He enlisted with the Royal Horse Artillery in 1807, when he was fourteen (…so that’s where he went!)
  • He served at the Battle of Waterloo as a Driver (meaning he rode a horse, working as part of a team that pulled cannon, ammunition limbers, and wagons), after which he served in France as part of the Army of Occupation
  • All other service was in England and Ireland; no dates or locations were given
  • On 1st July 1820 he was promoted to the rank of Trumpeter
  • He was discharged on 30th September 1832 after treatment in the Royal Ordnance Hospital following a fit of palsy fourteen months earlier, in Dublin. 
  • There were testimonies from several high-ranking officers: John was held in high regard.
  • One tantalising piece of information was a comment from Lieutenant Colonel Whinyates, who stated that John had a large family and had ‘brought them up in a most creditable manner’.

Tantalising, of course, because I had absolutely no idea of any of their names, nor where they were born, nor even how many children there were. Since the discharge papers are dated 1832, these children were clearly all born before the introduction of Civil Births, Marriages and Deaths, and before the first name-rich decennial census in 1841. Clearly, the marriage, too would have taken place before these changes.

My research objective was to use all these clues to find John, his wife, and all his children

But where to start?
John Mann is a common Norfolk name.  The only search parameters I had were “John Mann” + “born Norwich 1792” with effectively a nationwide search. The search was further compromised by a tendency for modern transcribers to get this surname wildly wrong.  e.g. Although original spellings are always Mann or Man, I have seen it indexed as ‘Cooke’. 

One more document was on my radar. There was a John Mann of the right age with the right birthplace living in Leeds at the time of the 1851 Census. There was no evidence at all to confirm that this was my John Mann, and in fact my assumption was that it was not. John was the brother of my 3x great grandfather who had been a silk weaver in Norwich, migrated to Blubberhouses in Yorkshire for work, and eventually moved to the Leeds area for work at a large mill in Holbeck. It seemed too tidy that his brother John, having led quite a different life, would coincidentally have ended up living just a mile away in the same large northern industrial town, for no apparent reason. If I were to be able to accept this as my John Mann, definite corroborative evidence would be needed.

A stroke of luck: locating the 1841 Census entry
The eventual location of the 1841 Census entry for a John Mann and family in Leeds permitted further research. It had not previously been identified because it had been indexed on Ancestry.co.uk as “Marson”. This document was key: all later discoveries about John and his family flow from it.

John Mann (age 45, occupation: ‘M[ale] S[ervant] & Army P[ensioner]’) was living at Brick Street, Leeds, with Mary (45), Emma (15), William (15) and John (10).  William and Eliza Hallawell (both 20) were at the same property.  Birthplaces are significant: John senior’s birthplace was England or Wales but not Yorkshire, while John junior was born in Ireland: his age and birthplace fit with information on John senior’s Discharge Papers which indicate he was in Ireland prior to and until July 1831.  Everyone else was born in Yorkshire.2 

This was almost certainly the same couple previously identified in the 1851 Census: John Mann (58, occupation ‘Groom Pensioner’) and wife Mary (54), residing 21 Brick Street.  Therefore John, born Norwich, c.1793, now receiving a pension, had worked with horses in a military capacity.  Mary’s birthplace was Pontefract. Age discrepancies are explained by the 1841 census instruction to enumerators to round down the ages of people over fifteen years to the nearest five.

Information flowing from death records
Neither John nor Mary being located on the 1861 Census, both were found on the General Register Office (GRO) Death Index and local cemetery register (Beckett Street), and also a photograph of the headstone.  John, 58, died 17 September 1851, and was buried 21 September.  Still resident at Brick Street, the occupation recorded was ‘servant’.  Mary, dying 30 August 1857, was buried 2 September.  She was 62/63 and widowed.  Both were buried as Nonconformists.

The headstone image3 provided further useful information:

  • Son John died 17 June 1849, aged 18. This ties in with the 1830-31 birth in Ireland.
  • Grandson Arthur William Cudbartson died 4 September 1855
  • Walter Ernest Hallewell died 6 March 1857, aged 17 months.
  • Hallewell being the second surname at the family home in 1841, this suggests the Eliza Hallewell on that record is the oldest child of John and Mary, and that William Ernest is her son. It also suggests Cudbartson as the married name of daughter Emma. All new information from the headstone was verified by GRO Birth and Death Indexes. Both birth records indicate mothers’ maiden name of Mann.

These suspected marriages were then confirmed by parish register entries (online digital images of original documents).

  • Eliza married William Hallewell 18 July 1840 at Leeds
  • Emma married Charles Frederick Cudbartson 8 April 1849 at Leeds
  • Son William married Elizabeth Taylor 15 March 1847 at Rothwell

Pontefract: baptisms
Armed with marriage details we can now identify Eliza, Emma and William in the 1851 Census. (Online digital images of original documents.) This provides us with the actual birthplace for each, which of course is not available on the 1841 Census. The various entries indicate the birthplace for all as Pontefract, Yorkshire.

This new information regarding specific birthplaces facilitated location of baptisms:

  • Eliza: Eliza, 25 June 1820
  • Emma: 10 Nov 1822
  • William: 11 April 1824

All three baptisms took place at Pontefract St Giles/ St Mary. The marriage of John Mann and Mary Dawson is recorded at the same church on 6 September 1819. As noted above, Pontefract is also Mary’s birthplace.

Apart from son John who died 17 June 1849, aged 18, and is known to have been born in Ireland, only one more son has been identified as the child of John and Mary. A birth record for Alfred Robert Mann was located on the GRO Index. The mother’s maiden name of Dawson is correct. Alfred Robert died in August 1840, aged fourteen months. The ‘abode’ recorded on the burial record is Brick Street, which matches the 1841 and 1851 Censuses. The baptism and burial services at St Peter’s Wesleyan Chapel, are consistent with the move to Nonconformity, suggesting John and Mary’s own religious burial records may also be found here.

Detailed examination of the Pontefract registers reveals no further children for John and Mary there.  This might point to miscarriage, stillbirth, simply no pregnancy, or removal to Ireland, where son John was born, 1830-31.  Without a precise location, no attempt has yet been made to locate John’s or any other baptism/burial in Irish parish records.  Indeed, any such records may not have survived. If there were other children, their births would have predated the introduction of Civil Births, Marriages and Deaths; and given that the movements of John and his family are not fully known, finding all additional children could not be guaranteed. Certainly, no other children survived to adulthood.

Using the same records to develop John’s military timeline
The Pontefract baptism and marriage records outlined above also provide information about John’s Royal Horse Artillery career.  Not only do they suggest he was stationed there for the years the children were born; the register entries themselves record details of his progress within the Royal Horse Artillery.  Only Emily’s and William’s baptisms record John as Trumpeter.  This supports evidence on the Discharge Papers of his promotion on 1 July 1820, and that was six days after Eliza’s baptism. 

These records evidence that John was stationed in Pontefract from before September 1819 to some time after April 1824.  Wider examination of Pontefract baptism registers from 1818 to 1830 shows that between 1820-1825 forty-eight babies of fathers serving with the RHA were baptised. After this, baptisms reduce to just four in 1826-27, and then none.  This could point to mobilisation to Ireland circa 1827. 

Ongoing research
It is interesting that this research into John started with a little information on his military Discharge Papers – just enough clues to permit corroboration of, and following through on, the information on the Leeds Census documentation. That information, followed up with newspaper reports, military records and wider reading, then enabled the placement of John within a specific Troop during the years after Waterloo and before his discharge in 1832. What has not yet been possible is locating him within a definite Troop at Waterloo, although this has been narrowed down to two. Within the next year I plan to do more research focused on the Royal Horse Artillery troops to try to locate him at a specific place in Ireland, and also to try to find out more about the two troops at Waterloo. After that I would like to visit Waterloo. The circle would be completed if this information also helped me to locate a baptism for son John in Ireland and perhaps any other births of children at the same location.

However, for now, I’m happy to have achieved something that, initially, I didn’t think would be achievable. I have followed up on a single phrase on John’s discharge papers: that John had a large family and had ‘brought them up in a most creditable manner’, and I have tracked down him and all those children. One thing I wish I knew, and never will: did John and his brother Thomas (my 3x great grandfather) each know the other was in Leeds? I like to think they might, but both arrived there by complete coincidence and it’s entirely possible that they lived a mile or so apart for eight years without ever knowing the other was there.

This is the resulting family tree. Click for a better view.

  1. John Mann, Royal Hospital Chelsea: Soldiers Service Documents 1760-1854, Original data: The National Archives WO 97/1249/78. Source: www.findmypast.co.uk ↩︎
  2. John Marson [Mann], 1841 England Census. Original data: The National Archives, Class: HO107; Piece: 1347; Book: 2; Civil Parish: Leeds Town; Enumeration District: 24; Folio: 20; Page: 2. Source:  www.ancestry.co.uk ↩︎
  3. John Mann, Family burial plot, UK and Ireland Find A Grace Index entry with headstone photograph, https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/234824558/john-mann ↩︎

‘ThruLines’ and ‘Theory of Family Relativity’

For DNA testers who have attached a decent sized family tree to their test results, Ancestry and MyHeritage have tools that trawl through your matches to find common ancestors.

On Ancestry this tool is called ThruLines and it’s one of the three options on the main page when you enter the DNA part of your Ancestry site.  Click the green ‘Explore ThruLines’ tab, and you’ll find all your known direct ancestors up to and including 5xG grandparent.  Hover your curser over the ancestor to see if there are any matches and click on the ancestor to review the matches and decide for yourself if they are valid.

On MyHeritage the equivalent tool is called Theory of Family Relativity.  You’ll find them as they occur on your DNA match list, alongside those matches for whom ‘theories’ have been generated.  Just click the ‘Theory’ alert and review what’s being suggested.  Alternatively, you can use the filter bar at the top of your match list to see only matches for whom there is a ‘Theory’.  You’ll find it in the menu if you click on ‘All tree details’.

My Heritage filter bar for DNA matches

All you need to make use of these two tools is a well padded-out tree, and to have that tree linked to your DNA results.  You can have several sets of DNA results linked to the one tree and they will all work with ThruLines and Theories of Family Relativity.

In both cases – Ancestry and MyHeritage – the suggestions are based on your tree and your match’s tree.  They draw upon these and on other trees and records in their database to suggest how you may be related to your DNA matches through common ancestors. Hence although they will only show up if you and the other person are a DNA match, they are based on the genealogy, not the genetics.

These suggestions can be really helpful.  They are, however, ‘theories’, ‘suggestions’, ‘hints’.  We must review them and confirm (or otherwise) for ourselves. In this sense they are not dissimilar to the hints that pop up on our trees.

A ThruLines success!
Here’s a very recent (yesterday!) example from ThruLines that enabled me to break down a long-standing brick wall.  George Gamble is my 4xG grandfather.  He married my 4xG grandmother (Hannah) in 1790, when she was 20 years old.  I assumed he would be about the same age and was looking for a baptism between around 1760 and 1770.  When this ThruLine suggestion first popped up on my screen each of the two columns was headed by a different George Gamble – mine with an estimated birth year of 1765 and the one on the left with a birth year of 1749.  It didn’t make any sense, but I thought maybe the two Georges might be cousins, and this might lead me to my George’s father, so I clicked on the ‘other’ George.

That George was married to Susanna, but I noticed that they stopped having children in 1789 – the year before my George married Hannah.  Might Susanna have died in that year, perhaps in childbirth?  I checked for a burial for a Susanna Gamble, and there it was – about 14 weeks after the last birth – possibly milk fever?  I then checked all the occupation references for this other George.  He was a clothier – the same as my George.  The 1790 marriage entry for my 4xG grandparents refers to ‘George Gamble of this parish, clothier, and Hannah Brook of this parish, spinster’, but makes no reference to George’s own widowed marital status.  This was, however, undoubtedly the same person.  My 3xG grandmother Betty was from George’s second family, with Hannah; Phebe was from his first marriage to Susanna.  I amended George’s birth year to 1749, added in his first wife and children, and was able to take his line back another two generations.  Thrulines updates every 24 hours, and so today this new version of the chart has appeared: one George at the top of both lines, with a birth year of 1749.

Chart showing an example from Ancestry's ThruLines

The green entries on this ThruLines chart are significant.  My DNA match here has only fifteen people in her tree, and Ancestry’s system drew upon other trees to insert the connecting generations.

In the example above you’ll note that I didn’t just accept the suggestion.  I dug around, clarified, verified and decided for myself that this was a genuine connection.  In fact, being a ‘half 4th cousin 2x removed’, this match and I share very little DNA – only 8 centiMorgans.  With such a low match I would never have explored our connection without this nudge from Thrulines, and yet this chart enabled me to break down a decade-long brick wall.

Having said all that, in the interests of balance I will also say that the suggestions offered up by Thrulines and the Theory of Family Relativity are not always correct.

There are several reasons why this might be so.

‘Potential ancestors’ based on others’ trees may be wrong
As we have seen in the above example, if you or your match have a gap in your tree – for example if your line ends at a brick wall, or if your line goes back several generations further than your match’s, ThruLines actually fills in gaps. If these suggested ancestors are correct this can be a huge help, but they are not always correct.

One of my early posts on this blog was about the advantages and pitfalls of using public online trees.  A key point in that post was that just because it’s on someone else’s tree doesn’t make it right.  However, the way the algorithms work is that they go with the majority.  Your tree may be beautifully researched and documented and may be absolutely correct, but if six people have copied the wrong research it is that which will show up as the way to go.

Here’s an example.
In every census, my 3xG grandfather Joseph Groves gives an age consistent with a birth year of 1816 together with a birthplace of ‘London, Middlesex’. On his marriage certificate he gives his father’s name and occupation as ‘William Groves, gunsmith’.  However, there are no local ties to help me to navigate back to William, because as a young man Joseph leaves London, spends twenty years in the West Midlands and then relocates to Yorkshire.

An 1817 baptism record in Lambeth looked promising, and although the father’s name is Joseph rather than William it was worth following through.  However, this Joseph (the son) is still in London in 1841, by which time my Joseph has moved on to Staffordshire.  In any case, this part of London, south of the river, was referred to as ‘London, Surrey’, rather than Middlesex.  This is not my ancestor.

Despite this, and even though I have named my Joseph’s father as William, ThruLines persists in offering up Lambeth Joseph’s mother (Susannah) as my 4xG grandmother.  Note again, that because it’s a suggestion, Susannah’s thumbnail is green.  Clicking through and looking at the trees on which this suggestion is based I see a completely different family for Susannah and her son, Lambeth Joseph.  There is no doubt that this is not my Joseph and Susanna is not my 4xG grandmother.

Ancestry's ThruLines thumbnail example

You and your match may be distant cousins on more than one line
One of my DNA matches and I have two fairly close ancestral connections.  We are 4th cousins along my paternal grandmother’s line and 3rd cousins once removed along my paternal grandfather’s line.  I found the second link by accident when I was working on a third person we both link to.  There is no way ThruLines could have worked this out.  Its job is to trawl until it finds a match – one match.

This matters because we might look at other fairly close shared matches and assume that our match is along the same line.  It’s also particularly important if you start to use a chromosome browser – which I will cover in a future post.  Chromosome browsers enable you to use known segments as a basis for placing other unknown segments, so it really matters that you have attributed a segment to the right ancestors.  In this case, working with the chromosome browser, I have since been able to work out which segments shared with my double cousin belong to which line.

In case you think this is a rare scenario – it isn’t.  I have at least three more examples just like this in my tree.

You or your match may have made a mistake in your research We all make mistakes, and it’s important to be open to that possibility and to review if things aren’t looking right.

There may be an unknown misattributed parentage in one of your lines
Since the hints are based on trees rather than on analysis of segments the fact that two testers share DNA does nevertheless mean they are related elsewhere.

*****

I hope this little run through ThruLines and Theory of Family Relativity has demonstrated to you their obvious benefits.  All we have to remember is to use them as suggestions and to work through it and decide for ourselves if it’s real.

This video from Devon Noel Lee at Family History Fanatics might help to consolidate some of the above information for you.

*****

My posts about DNA are aimed at complete beginners and aim to provide information in manageable chunks, each post building on previous ones. Click [here] to read all of them in order, or to dip in and out as you wish. You’ll also find lots of resources and useful links