Christmas 2011 Update
17 December 2011 - 5:56:11pm

Happy Christmas to all our readers, whether registered users of Charsley.org.uk or not. If you have an interest in our website, it is worth checking to see if this update has made a difference to your family tree! I hope the new Gedcom file will be up before Christmas, but I have failed to do it myself this time, as Nicholas has increased the security. Christmas is a good time to check what I think I know about your family and ancestors, and help by pointing out errors, or just things you find hard to believe!

I have at last completed my first review of the London Parish Records on Ancestry.co.uk. I am sure I have not yet found everything, but I did use my list of over 160 variant spellings. I am just not confident that it is exhaustive! I have also spent the last month checking individual records to see if they are as accurate and complete as I can make them. So far I am about one third of the way through this review, having got to Individual No 3000 of just over 9000! It has allowed me to weed out some of the duplicates, and also to use the power of the Ancestry website to find spouses from the early 19th century through to 1901. At that time the spouses name was not listed in the marriage register, and the only certain way was to buy a marriage certificate at about £7 each. This is not within my means, so an alternative approach is needed. The register page lists up to 4 couples, i.e. 4 husbands and 4 wives, but does not say who married whom! However, by searching the next census it is often possible to find the appropriate spouse, especially if one or other has an unusual Christian name. This has helped me to find quite a few additional families!

The results of this work can be seen in the table, where Total Trees counts trees of one or more persons, whereas the next line excludes single unrelated people. The next lines indicate the numbers of related people in each of the 8 largest trees.

--------------------------------April--------December----February-------December
--------------------------------2010--------2010-----------2011-----------2011
Total Individuals----------7702---------7500----------7668------------8136
Total Trees ----------------1908---------1838----------1896------------2066
Trees over 1 person----1156---------1131----------1147------------1246
Charsley ‎(Bucks)‎-----------913-----------912------------913-------------933
Charsley ‎(Middx)‎-----------606-----------603------------603-------------624
Cheesley ‎(Surrey)‎---------366-----------366------------366-------------366
Cheesley ‎(Wilts)‎-----------168-----------202------------168-------------168
Cheasley ‎(Middx)‎----------217-----------217------------217-------------273
Cheesley ‎(Wilts 2)‎--------144-----------161------------144-------------144
Cheasley ‎(Middx 2)‎-------112------------135-----------112-------------118
Cheasley ‎(N London)‎--------------------------------------------------------111

The 8 largest trees include all those with more than 100 individuals, but there are another 10 trees with between 30 and 82 people in them, so it would be good to see if I can link these. They are all Cheasley or Cheesley, but there are 2 unlinked Charsley trees ‎(30 and 29 members)‎ and both are in South Africa!

I still intend to see what further links I can forge in these trees, but it is quite a challenging task, with such a large database. At least my Rootsmagic program allows me to look at all the events in a particular location, and see if I have individuals entered as two separate people when they should be one!

One of my greatest difficulties is the variability of spelling of surnames in the 16th and 17th centuries. Often I find a single family where the surname is spelled 3 or 4 different ways at birth, marriage and baptism of the children. This is easy to spot if the first names are unique, but really hard when they are all Williams! Once again the advantage of using Rootsmagic is that you can enter alternative names ‎(although being an American program it calls the “alternate names”!)‎. Then you can get individuals listed by all their names, and comparing entries becomes a bit easier.

I do not really look forward to the dark evenings as winter approaches, but at least they give me a bit more time for this hobby, and the work on my allotment garden is easier to resist.

Phil Charsley
19 December 2011

Second update of 2011
10 July 2011 - 10:01:52pm

This is the first time I have managed to upload a new GEDCOM data file on my own! Well, almost on my own, as I did have telephone help from Nick. I have been working since the last update on the London Parish records, finding spelling of our registered surnames that are a little different. I think I am now about half way through these non-standard spellings, and have added several hundred entries. When I am complete, hopefully before the end of this year, I will start to try to make sense of them, and see if any fit into the families I already have.
Have a good summer one and all!

First Update of 2011
23 April 2011 - 9:32:13pm

I worked hard for the first couple of months of the year, taking advantage of the poor weather which did not tempt me outdoors, but did not quite get round to updating the site before I was forced to get out onto my allotment! However, I am taking the advantage of a couple of cooler days to make this update.

The first two months of the year were spent downloading images of London births, marriages and deaths from Parish Records indexed by Ancestry.co.uk. It was a mammoth task, and my rough count of new sources amounts to 294 for Charsley, 143 for Cheasley, 99 for Cheesley and 135 for other spellings. I still have not finished the “other spellings” but will soldier on!

The results of this work can be seen in the table, where Total Individuals counts trees of one or more persons, whereas the next line excludes single unrelated people. The next lines indicate the numbers of related people in each of the 7 largest trees.

------------------------------April-2010---December-2010----February-2011
Total-Individuals-----------7702--------------7500------------------7668
Total-Trees-----------------1908--------------1838------------------1896
Trees-over-1-person-----1156--------------1131------------------1147
Charsley-‎(Bucks)‎----------913---------------912--------------------913
Charsley-‎(Middx)‎----------606---------------603--------------------603
Cheesley-‎(Surrey)‎---------366--------------366--------------------366
Cheesley-‎(Wilts)‎-----------217--------------202--------------------168
Cheasley-‎(Middx)‎----------168--------------217--------------------217
Cheesley-‎(Wilts-2)‎---------144-------------161--------------------144
Cheasley-‎(Middx-2)‎--------112-------------135--------------------112
Some of the new records have given me links I did not have before, such as fathers on marriage records. Unfortunately the earliest marriage records do not list relatives, so for early records it is only baptisms that really help.

It is some time since I looked to see if I could link any of the trees, so I will make that a task for this year!

I hope to meet some of our Charsley users at the Charsley Family Meeting on 9th July, which has been organised through the Charsley Group on facebook. It is at the Duke of Devonshire Pub in Balham, London. Please either Join the group or email me for more information!


Phil Charsley
16 April 2011

3rd Update of 2010
17 December 2010 - 11:42:39am

There should be a new GEDCOM up on the site within a few days.

I started the year with good intentions, and managed my second update in April. However, the summer is never a good time for family history, what with work on my allotment, and visits to our holiday home in Norfolk, not to mention a week in Corfu!

This autumn I did manage to put some time in, and have completed a review of the National Probate Register on Ancestry.com. They have now put up the 1911 census, so I will start work on that next. I had used the index before, but did not pay to look at the entries, so I expect to find more useful information.

Progress on the database has continued, as shown by the following table, where Total Individuals counts trees of one or more persons, whereas the next line excludes single unrelated people. The next lines indicate the numbers of related people in each of the 7 largest trees.

------------------------------- July 09--------February 10---------December 10
Total Individuals-----------7331-------------7509------------------7500
Total Trees-----------------1890-------------1844------------------1838
Trees over 1 person-----1170-------------1136------------------1131
Charsley ‎(Bucks)‎------------892---------------912--------------------912
Charsley ‎(Middx)‎------------579---------------596--------------------603
Cheasley ‎(Surrey)‎----------360---------------366--------------------366
Cheesley ‎(Wilts)‎------------160---------------202--------------------202
Cheasley ‎(Middx)‎-----------148---------------161--------------------168
Cheesley ‎(Wilts 2)‎---------126---------------135--------------------161
Cheasley ‎(Middx)‎-----------107---------------111--------------------135

As you can see, the individuals increase from newly identified people, but fall as I remove duplicates. The total trees fall as I manage to link them, but there are still an awful lot of small trees and unlinked individuals. I suppose this is inevitable, as so many early records have either disappeared or not been indexed. Still I fight on.

Have a good Christmas one and all, and a happy and successful 2011!


Phil Charsley
17 Dec 2010

2nd Update for 2010
22 April 2010 - 5:39:52pm

As you may have noticed, the latest GEDCOM has been up since early April. It was made using Roots Magic Version 4, and this new version has allowed me to Geocode all the places in my database. I found quite a lot that were not recognised automatically, but they were fixed either using Wikipedia or Google or maps and a bit of common sense!
I have also completed my first pass of the London Parish Records form the London Metropolitan Archives now indexed on Ancestry.com. The next challenge is to review the unindexed records available prior to 1800! One of my correspondants has already supplied me with some data from a personal search, but this needs real dedication to seach entry by entry and page by page. It will go on my to-do list!
Currently i have set myself the task of reviewing all the emails I have had in the last year, to check that I have done the appropriate updates. This will probably take a month or two, so do not hold your breath!

Phil