Blog

Thousands of new Manchester military records

Search for your ancestors in 74,000 new Manchester military records on findmypast.co.uk

This exciting release comprises two sets of records: Manchester City Battalions and Manchester Roll of Honour.

Manchester City Battalions

Search around 11,000 records of men who served with the so-called ‘Manchester Pals’ battalions: the 16th (Service) Battalion, The Manchester Regiment to the 23rd (Service) Battalion, The Manchester Regiment (inclusive).

Click to enlarge

The formation of the brigades was recorded in a collection of platoon photographs and lists. This set of records consists of an index of the names taken from these lists. Each name is linked to the platoon list in which it appears and to the corresponding platoon photograph.

One of the benefits of these fantastic records is the photographs they contain – the image above is a sample from the records. The photographs aren’t named so won’t tell you exactly which man is your ancestor, but they do provide a rare and compelling insight into the battalion he served with.

Search the Manchester City Battalions now

Manchester Roll of Honour

These records contain 63,000 names in a listing of Manchester companies and the men working for those companies who served in some capacity during WWI.

The Rolls of Honour list men who enlisted in the Army and Royal Navy and mostly relate to companies in and around Manchester. There is a significant number from Yorkshire, however, as well as a few from Cheshire and Derbyshire.

The information that the records tell you about your ancestors varies considerably. A small number of men are identified by last name only and many more only by last name and initials.

There are entries, however, which identify the ranks, service numbers and regiments of each man. A number of men are identified as killed or missing in action and a few are recorded as having been rejected as unfit for service. A very small number of rolls include photographs of the men named.

Search the Manchester Roll of Honour now

The Manchester and Lancashire Family History Society provided findmypast.co.uk with these records and the sample image used above, in association with the Federation of Family History Societies.

New Merchant Navy Seamen records launched

You can now search 359,000 records of Merchant Navy Seamen for the period 1835-1857 on findmypast.co.uk

We have made these 19th century Merchant Navy records available online for the first time, working in association with The National Archives.

From 1835, the central government started to monitor a potential reserve of sailors for the Royal Navy, which resulted in the creation of thousands of records that identify individual seamen.

The information the records hold about your ancestors can vary, but they usually include name, age, place of birth, physical description, ship names and dates of voyages.

This release follows the 20th century Merchant Navy Seamen records, published on findmypast.co.uk in September 2011. This means you can now search two centuries of records for your Merchant Navy Seamen ancestors, making it possible for you to trace their service over time.

Search the Merchant Navy Seamen records now

Ask the photo expert – mysterious Aunty Olive

Our photo expert, Jayne Shrimpton, analyses your family photos.

Corrinne Ryan sent us her photo and asked:

‘This mysterious photograph was in my grandmother’s photo album, along with the name ‘Aunty Olive’. That is all I know.

To date I have been unable to find an Aunty Olive, but if I could have some idea of her age, date of birth, place, status, and reason for the photograph… anything at all… I may find a starting place in my search to find out who she is.’

Click to enlarge

Jayne says:

‘This is a stunning photograph, a very clear and intimate portrait – fantastic from a fashion point of view! The high image quality suggests that it was taken in a professional photographer’s studio, although no photographer or studio details are visible here. If this is a card-mounted photograph, usually a studio name and address would be printed on the bottom and/or the back of the mount. Perhaps the original photograph bears these details: if so, the town or city named will confirm whereabouts the photograph was taken. The studio location is also likely to be where this ancestor lived at the time, as clients usually visited a photographer close to home.

Accurate dating is essential for positively identifying past family members represented in old photos and dating this portrait should help you to find out more about your enigmatic ‘Aunty Olive’. Here we only have the visual image to go on, but fortunately female photographs can usually be dated fairly closely from dress clues as ladies’ fashions changed regularly in the past and are generally recognisable as belonging to a specific era. Younger women in particular would have been keen to show off their most up-to-date garments, accessories and hairstyle in a photograph.

This young woman wears a very fine and formal dress made of perhaps a light woollen fabric, the bodice incorporating a central panel of silk satin and edged with sequins or similar dark, shimmering passementerie and delicate white lace at the cuffs and collar. The most prominent feature, however, is her sleeves, which demonstrate the full gigot or ‘leg-o’-mutton’ shape fashionable during the 1890s.

Jayne Shrimpton

With this distinctive style, the sleeve puff above the elbow gradually expanded during the early-1890s, reaching its greatest width in 1895 and 1896, before beginning to diminish and retreat higher up the arm. The extreme sleeve width of the mid-1890s sleeve was often accentuated by broad shoulder epaulettes, as we see here, although the fairly high placing of the puff on the arm here could possibly suggest a year or two later. To include all possible years, therefore, I would date this photograph to c.1895-98.

Evidently this young lady is wearing a very special and probably rather expensive outfit, while the floral spray or corsage on her bodice implies a festive occasion. In fact photographic evidence confirms that many formal studio portraits in family collections were taken to mark an important event in our ancestors’ lives. Here ‘Aunty Olive’ prominently displays rings on her ring finger, this deliberate pose usually signifying betrothal or marriage. Since women sometimes wore several rings at once, it can be difficult to single out an engagement or wedding ring, but I am fairly certain that this young lady has just become engaged, or possibly married.

This event may also be suggested by the heart-shaped locket and chain pinned to her bodice – possibly a love token from her fiancé or new husband. Hopefully the close time frame and the likely occasion will help you to identify this intriguing lady from your past.’

If you’d like to send your photo to Jayne Shrimpton, please register or opt to receive newsletters in My Account. Jayne only has time to analyse two photos each month, but if yours wasn’t chosen this time, you could be lucky next month!

Ask the photo expert – unidentified badges

Our photo expert, Jayne Shrimpton, analyses your family photos.

Claire Oliver sent us her photo and asked:

‘I was wondering whether you could tell me about this photograph, which was found, with many others, in my aunty’s attic after her death. We have no idea which family members they represent and when they were taken. This photograph just intrigues me as I’d love to know who the women are and what group or gathering they were forming. Of course you can’t tell me that, but I’d be interested to know roughly what year it was taken. I thought you’d know this by their rather stuffy outfits. 1920s is my untrained guess, because of some of their hats!’

Click to enlarge

Jayne says:

‘This scene, depicting forebears and their contemporaries ranked solemnly in rows and dressed up for a special event or outing represents a popular genre of old photographs. Taken outdoors, probably by a professional photographer hired for the occasion, your photographs shows a group of ladies who were almost certainly members of a club or organisation, although, as you pointed out, we can really only guess at what this was.

The only clue may be the small, bow-shaped badges that are pinned onto many of the ladies’ lapels, blouses and scarves, which must surely have symbolised their group and denoted membership. These badges aren’t immediately recognisable, however, so until they are identified I can only suggest that these ladies belonged to a church group or charitable organisation, the Women’s Institute or possibly a special interest society. Religious and social clubs of all kinds were very popular between the wars, when this was photograph was taken, and photographic evidence suggests that female-dominated societies, especially, enjoyed their outings!

Almost everyone here wears warm outdoor clothing so the season was cool, if not wintry. The ladies look well-dressed in their coats and smart accessories and they have the general appearance of a middle-class group. Hats were always worn outdoors in public before WWII and because female styles changed regularly, they usually offer an accurate date for a photograph.

Jayne Shrimpton

As you guessed, this sea of deep-crowned hats indicates a date in the 1920s, but we can narrow this down a little. The most modern hats here are, predictably, worn mainly by the younger ladies, their neat, small-brimmed cloche hats pulled well down over their foreheads confirming a year between 1925 and 1930. Similarly the shorter coats and dresses worn by some ladies are also typical of the second half of the decade, when fashionable hemlines rose dramatically from mid-low calf length to just below the knee.

Other fashionable features to note here are the bar shoes worn by several ladies in the front row – a predominantly 1920s style, although some older women wear more conservative laced boots, as well as longer skirts and old-fashioned hats with a wider brim and tall crown. Typically for this decade, coats are tailored with long lapels and there are many lush fur collars and stoles on view, these being much in vogue during the 1920s.

With a firm date range of c.1925-30 for this photo, hopefully you can now spot one or two of your family members here. Perhaps the building behind was the group’s usual meeting place and if it could be identified this might offer a clue as to the location and occasion. Meanwhile I wonder whether if by chance any findmypast.co.uk readers recognise the ladies’ badges?’

If you’d like to send your photo to Jayne Shrimpton, please register or opt to receive newsletters in My Account. Jayne only has time to analyse two photos each month, but if yours wasn’t chosen this time, you could be lucky next month!

Ask the expert – militia service record

Our resident military expert Paul Nixon, pictured below, breaks down your military brick walls.

From Bill:

‘My granddad, Pte Isaac Mirfield 9924 3rd btn West York’s Reg’t, was discharged as medically unfit in June 1917. I would like to know what battle would he have been engaged in prior to his discharge?’

Paul says:

‘Thanks for your query; let me try and answer it. Your grandfather’s service record notes that when he enlisted on 3 September 1914 he was already a time expired soldier who had served with the West Yorkshire Regiment. He was discharged from the 3rd (Special Reserve) Battalion on 22 August 1917 as a result of neurasthenia (shell-shock) which was occasioned by service overseas. His service record notes that he served overseas with the 2nd Battalion between 12 December 1914 and 9 January 1915, so you can narrow down, very precisely, the actions he would have been in.

The National Archives will have the battalion war diaries and you can either go there and request these or ask a researcher to access them for you. It is unlikely that your grandfather will be mentioned by name but some war diaries – and often those written in the early stages of the war – are incredibly detailed. Also try posting a query on the Great War forum which has some very knowledgeable members.

Incidentally, while Isaac stated on his WWI attestation papers that he had formerly served with the 2nd W Yorks Regiment, he had also served with the militia prior to that. Findmypast.co.uk has four pages of his militia service record in its British Army Service Records collection which shows that he enlisted with the 3rd (Militia) Bn of the West Yorkshire Regiment on 6 April 1894 (number 3409) and served just over three months before enlisting with the regular West Yorks Regiment on 21 July 1894.

When he joined, he was given the number 4173. Assuming he joined up for 12 years in total and did not extend his service, he would have been discharged in July 1906. He certainly served with his regiment during the Boer War, disembarking in South Africa on 16 September 1901, and later receiving the Queen’s South Africa Medal with clasps for TRANSVAAL, SOUTH AFRICA 1901 and SOUTH AFRICA 1902.

As well as receiving this medal, he would later receive the 1914/15 Star, British War Medal and Victory Medal and a silver war badge as result of his neurasthenia. Hope this helps.’

If you’d like to send your question to our experts, please register or opt to receive newsletters in My Account. Unfortunately our experts only have time to answer a few queries each month. If yours wasn’t answered this time, you could be lucky next month!

Ask the expert – crucial 1841 census return

Our resident expert Stephen Rigden, pictured below, answers your queries.

From Norman Martin:

‘Hi I have a problem with my breeze/Bullen ancestry. What I know:

Alfred Breeze Married Mary Ann Bullen at the Chapel of Pulham St. Mary Magdelen Norfolk on 9 October 1842. The bride’s father is given on the wedding certificate as Benjamin Bullen. His occupation is organ builder. The couple are both listed as living in Pulham St. Mary Magdelen at the time of the marriage. Witnesses were John Gowing and Maria Cann, who are both given as being of full age.

In the 1841 census, Alfred is living with his father William in Long Row Gissing Norfolk. His age is given as 19. I cannot be at all certain of Mary Ann Bullen. In 1841 there is a Mary Ann Bullen living in Hempnall with a Benjamin Bullen who is listed as a watch maker. Mary Ann is 22 and Benjamin is 37, barely old enough to be her father.

In the 1851 census, Alfred and Mary Ann are together living in Pulham St Mary Magdelen. Alfred’s age is given as 27, making his date of birth 1824. The census gives his place of birth as Aslacton Norfolk. Mary Ann’s age is given as 32, making her date of birth as 1819. She is listed as being born in Pulham St Mary Magdelen.

I believe that Alfred’s age is incorrect in the 1851 census as he was baptised on 28 September 1823 with his brother Louis and his sister Caroline. My problem is that I cannot find a birth registration for Mary Ann Bullen with a father named Benjamin. The only birth I can find in Pulham in that period for Mary Ann Bullen is a daughter of Joseph Bullen who was also a watch maker but is referred to as an organ builder in the 1851 census. Mary Ann’s birth date is 16 September 1817.

Joseph may well be the brother of Benjamin and in business together. There is still an example of a Bullen organ in a Norfolk Church, I believe. I would be grateful for any help in resolving Mary Ann.’

Stephen says:

‘Dear Norman

I have taken a look at the problematic situation described in your email. My opinion is that Mary Ann was the daughter of Joseph Bullen and that Benjamin Bullen was her brother.

A key document is the 1841 census, in particular, a census return for Pulham St Mary Magdalen with the following reference: series HO107, piece 758, book 25, folio 23, page 38. This shows Joseph Bullen, organ builder, as head of household with his wife Sophia and inferred children, including Benjamin. Ages are rounded, as is usual with the 1841 census, e.g., Joseph is recorded as 45 (which means aged 45 to 49 years) and Benjamin is 20 (i.e., aged 20 to 24 years = born circa 1817-1821). In 1841 Benjamin is a handicraftsman. Mary Ann is not in the family home.

I believe that the Mary Ann Bullen living with watchmaker Benjamin in 1841, if relevant at all, is part of something other than the usual parent and children nuclear household. The ages have not been rounded down: Benjamin 37, Mary Ann 22 and eldest minor John 8. Were Mary Ann the mother of John, she would have had to have had him aged 14. Were Mary Ann the daughter of Benjamin, then he would have had to have had her aged 15. Neither scenario is likely. It is true that this Mary Ann could be the second wife of this Benjamin, but we know this Benjamin is not the Benjamin who is the son of organ builder Joseph and we also know the true Mary Ann marries Alfred Breeze in the following year.

One possible explanation could be that this is indeed your Mary Ann unmarried and living with an uncle of the same name as her brother, i.e., watchmaker Benjamin would then be Joseph’s brother. Equally, however, this census return could refer to a completely unrelated family group. I would need to undertake further research to decide.

If Mary Ann was of full age at her 1842 marriage, she would have been at least 21 years of age, i.e., born before 1821. Her recorded age of 32 on the 1851 census would indicate a date of birth circa 1818/19. Assuming that you have done a thorough search of baptism records for Pulham parish, I would, therefore, accept your 1817 entry for Mary Ann as the correct one. Note that this would make her a year or two older than Benjamin, who was born circa 1819/20 according to the 1851 census. This would also suggest why she is not with the family in 1841.

If the above scenario is correct, then Joseph was the father of Mary Ann, while Benjamin was acting in loco parentis at the 1842 marriage of Mary Ann, or there was simply a clerical error at registration and his name was recorded instead of Joseph’s. I hope this helps a little.’

If you’d like to send your question to our experts, please register or opt to receive newsletters in My Account. Unfortunately our experts only have time to answer a few queries each month. If yours wasn’t answered this time, you could be lucky next month!

Ask the expert – grandfather mystery

Our resident expert Stephen Rigden, pictured below, answers your queries.

From Gail Lewis in Canada:

‘I am trying to find my grandfather and step-grandfather, both of whom appear to have left no records behind. I have found no records of my grandfather, Harry White, other than what is given on my mother’s 1924 birth certificate: his name, address (192 Marlborough Road, Cheetham), and his occupation (capcutter). I have no verifiable info beyond that – no birth, marriage or death certificates.

My step-grandfather is almost equally as mysterious. His name was Charles Harold Markey, although for the time he lived with my grandmother he used the surname ‘White’. Why? Charlie is rumoured to have been born in Nova Scotia, Canada, but again, no birth records, no marriage(s) can be found. Charlie lived with my grandmother, Doris Mary White, nee Overed (b. Billericay, Essex in 1901, d. Salford 1950) and my mother, Ethel Laurane White at 18 Dixon Street, Salford Lancs until about 1944, then at 35 Wellington Street East, Higher Broughton, Salford until his death in 1952.

At that time he was living with a lady named Marjory Sharman, with whom he had a child, Ian C. Sharman, just before his passing in 1952. Charlie was a typographer/compositor by trade, and also played baseball semi-professionally in England before and during the war under the name Charles Markey.

I’ve been looking for both of these gentlemen for seven years now, with the very meagre results above. Any insights you could offer would be very helpful. I have only recently found Ian, who never knew his father, and we would both like to know more about Charlie and the very mysterious Harry White.

Another interesting fact I should mention is that Doris gave up her first born daughter Irene, shortly after Irene was born in 1922, also in Salford, but she took Irene all the way to Hertford to do it. She then went on to have another child with Harry, my mother, whom she kept. Why? Seems like the more questions I find the answers to, the more crop up. My mother passed away in 2005, and was always very secretive about her family history, and always said she was an only child. I’m not sure if she ever knew about Irene or not. Can you help?’

Stephen says:

‘Dear Gail, thanks for your email. I must say straight up that your question cannot be easily answered. This should come as no surprise, given that you yourself have been pondering it for seven years. I do, however, have a few thoughts.

Firstly, the family background may hold some mystery prior to your grandmother Doris Mary’s involvement with the two men mentioned in your email. I took a quick look at the 1901 and 1911 censuses and other sources, and see that Doris was born in 1901 in Great Burstead, Essex to parents James William Overed and his wife Mary Pate Overed nee Steven, who had married in Chester back in 1897. James William was a farmer and then a vet and it seems that he practised in East Anglia from at least 1900 onwards. His wife Mary died in 1908 in Aylsham, Norfolk, and he died in 1952 in North Walsham, Norfolk.

On the face of it, despite the premature death of Mary, one would expect this to have been a stable, mildly privileged, middle class background – it is, therefore, somewhat surprising that Doris should have moved to metropolitan and industrial Manchester at some date before the age of 21 years. She would probably have been too young to have worked in munitions or some other aspect of the war effort in the Great War (although it is just possible that Harry White was a soldier and met Doris in East Anglia, and they moved to Lancashire). Possibly Doris was in higher education of some sort, or found a situation in Lancashire, perhaps via her late mother’s family as they seem to have been from the North-West (Cheshire and Denbighshire).

In any event, by the age of 21 she was in Lancashire, about 150 miles cross-country from her father in rural Norfolk – not an obvious move to make. It seems that she had two children illegitimately by the age of 23, the first of which was given up for fostering or otherwise taken into care – legal adoption in England & Wales did not commence until 1927. This would suggest that Doris did not have the means or support to bring up a child at that time; perhaps within two years she felt better placed to look after a child, or else unable to part with a child a second time. Her relationship with the cap-cutter Harry White must have lasted for a while; however, it would seem highly unlikely that they were ever married, or that Doris later married the print-worker Charles Markey.

When researching the fathers of illegitimate children, where they did not later marry the mothers, there is frequently insufficient information to make the type of systematic research which is normally possible when investigating a line of a family back in time. It is the marriage certificate that usually gives the detail which enables the next step back – it gives the age of the groom, and the name and occupation of his father, from which it is generally feasible to identify the right entry in the birth index.

With regard to Harry White, I think there may be no way forward using record sources alone – the name is too common and there are too many candidates. Posting a message on genealogical social networking sites may produce an answer in due course – if, that is, you have the great good fortune of your post being seen by a person researching the right cap-cutting Harry White of Greater Manchester. I would mention in passing that later this year we will be adding more records to our Manchester Collection, including electoral registers and rate books (we have already published Manchester school admission registers). It’s just possible that, with patience, you may find more information in these records which could give you one or two prime candidates for Harry White.

One would expect Charles Harold Markey to be more straightforward to research, as his name is more distinctive. The mooted Canadian Maritimes connection, however, adds a complication. There were thriving maritime and commercial links between Halifax (and other places in Nova Scotia) and Liverpool in Lancashire, and of course between the port of Liverpool and the sprawling industrial powerhouse of Manchester. It is not inconceivable, therefore, that Charles was from Nova Scotia (I did not find his birth in the available online indexes but these have a glaring gap from 1878-1907, the period we need, during which there was no civil registration in NS). Have you seen the 1917 marriage of a Charles H Starkey to Ellenor Blackett in Salford? This may be a coincidence, but equally you might want to obtain a copy of this marriage certificate just in case it is right and sheds light on Charles’s age in 1917 (about 20, if his recorded age at death is correct) and his father’s name and occupation – this could begin to push your research back on that line.

If you haven’t done so already, you might wish to search for wills for James William Overed, Doris Mary White and Charles Harold Markey. Perhaps Doris and Charles are more likely to have died intestate, and, while one might expect James to have written a will, probably it will not provide any information on Doris’s family. You never know, however, and it’s always best to check, even if only to eliminate this avenue of enquiry.

I cannot tell from your email whether you know what became of Irene after 1922/23. Irene may still be alive, and although her forename may have been changed, I wonder if you are aware that it is possible to search a certain search of the English & Welsh death indexes using a forename + exact date of birth combination. Enter the forename Irene, enter her year of birth and her birth date (both day and month) but leave the last name field blank. Select year range 1969 to 2006. This search will then return you all women named Irene who were born on that date and died within this time frame – this could catch your Irene if she died between the ages of 47 and 84 in England & Wales. Of course it is likely that you will get multiple candidates and, again, you would need to proceed by a painstaking process of elimination if you are to make headway using this approach.

I hope these thoughts are of some interest, and wish you success with your future research.’

If you’d like to send your question to our experts, please register or opt to receive newsletters in My Account. Unfortunately our experts only have time to answer a few queries each month. If yours wasn’t answered this time, you could be lucky next month!

January newsletter competition winner

We’re very pleased to announce the winner of our January newsletter competition, in which we asked you ‘What is the total number of London Docklands baptisms on findmypast.co.uk, following our latest release?’

Congratulations go to Susan Grant from Essex who wins a copy of ‘London at War’ by Alan Brooks.

Thanks to all of you who entered – see the next competition question in our February newsletter, coming very soon.

1891 Scottish census just published

Search for your ancestors in the 1891 Scottish census on findmypast.co.uk

The 1891 census recorded the population of Scotland at around 4,016,000. Anyone with Scottish ancestors will be keen to search these records for new details to add to their family tree.

As with the 1841-1881 Scottish censuses we’ve already published on findmypast.co.uk, we have freshly transcribed the 1891 census records to make it as easy as possible to find who you’re looking for.

We will soon publish the 1901 Scottish census on findmypast.co.uk, marking the completion of our project to bring you the 1841-1901 Scottish census collection.

The 1891 Scottish census could bring you crucial new information about your ancestors, so it’s well worth a search, even if you haven’t been able to find who you’re looking for in the earlier Scottish censuses.

The high quality of our transcriptions makes it easy to discover the crucial details about your ancestors’ lives. It is not possible to view the original census images on findmypast.co.uk, due to the licensing regulations of the General Register Office for Scotland.

Search the 1891 Scottish census now

Findmypast.co.uk records tell Charles Dickens' story

Today is Charles Dickens’ 200th birthday and to mark the occasion, we’ve been investigating the records on findmypast.co.uk to see what they can tell us about Dickens’ life.

We feel like we know Dickens a little bit better following our research – read on to find out what our records reveal about this extraordinary man.

Baptism

It seemed logical to start at the beginning, so our first stop was to search for Dickens’ baptism record. Dickens’ unusual middle name makes it easy to be sure that we’ve found the right man.

Dickens record shows that he was baptised in Portsea St Mary, Hampshire on 4 March 1812. We can also learn that Dickens’ parents are called John and Elizabeth:

Charles Dickens' baptism record - click to enlarge

Marriage

Fast-forwarding a few years, we discovered the record of Dickens’ marriage to Catherine Thomson Hogarth. The pair married in Chelsea, Middlesex on 2 April 1836:

Charles Dickens' marriage record - click to enlarge

Dickens and Catherine lived in Bloomsbury where they went on to have 10 children. Sadly, the couple separated in 1858 but never divorced; this wouldn’t have been a socially acceptable action for someone as well-known as Dickens.

Dickens in 1861

By 1861, Catherine and her son, Charles Jr, had moved out of the family home and Catherine’s sister, Georgina, was living with Dickens and the rest of the children. Georgina took Dickens’ side in his rift with Catherine and took over the running of the household.

In the same year that ‘Great Expectations’ was published, Dickens’ 1861 census return provides us with a glimpse into his life at this time. Dickens is described as ‘married’, giving away nothing of his separation from Catherine.

Dickens’ occupation is listed as ‘Author Novelist Essayist & Editor’ and Georgina is recorded as ‘Servant Housekeeper’:

Charles Dickens' 1861 census return - click to enlarge

Death

Next we found Dickens’ death record. He died on 9 June 1870 in North Aylesford, Kent – view the record here:

Charles Dickens' death record - click to enlarge

As well as this record, we unearthed a different record of Dickens’ death on findmypast.co.uk

Dickens was a shareholder in the Great Western Railway, which means that a record of his death appears in the GWR Shareholders Index.

The GWR recorded all transactions that related to shareholdings which changed hands due to an event other than a simple sale. The most common event recorded in the ledger was the death of the shareholder. When a shareholder died, their shares were passed to their beneficiaries and the executors handled the administration of the estate.

Displaying further evidence of his rift with his wife, Dickens’ record shows that his wife’s sister, Georgina, and friend, John Forster, were the executors. View this beautifully handwritten original document here:

Charles Dickens' Great Western Railway Shareholders Index record - click to enlarge

We hope you enjoyed discovering what the records on findmypast.co.uk reveal about Charles Dickens’ life.