![]() ![]() Sadly both Arthur’s two previous marriages ended with the loss of his wives, both dying far too young. Moving onto marriages, there are numerous male and female ancestors, who married twice, but only one person, Arthur Gregson, who married 3 times. I am quite impressed to have 92 people born in the 1700s! That’s interesting and is a reflection of how much harder it is to get back into the 1700s. Was it something in the water?Ĩ56 (60%) of the births on my tree were in the 1800s, with 6% (92) born before 1800, with the remainder born after the 1900s. Henry William Goode lived from 1874 until 1976 and died aged 101 and his daughter-in-law, Winifred Hetty Goode (nee Ginger) lived until she was 100. The oldest two ancestors on my tree lived until 101 and 100 and were from the same family, which you would think is not unusual, but what is unusual, is that they are not blood related. The figures from my tree are consistent with the stats provided by the office for national statistics. ![]() These figures increased to around 45 and 50 years respectively by 1901 and life expectancy then rose dramatically until the mid- 1950s. The locations of death follows a similar pattern, with the addition of France and Belgium, sadly due to the losses during WW1.Īge also brings some interesting statistics, the average life expectancy for a male person on my tree is 55 and female 61 Life expectancy in England and Wales in the mid-19th century was around 40 years for males and 42 years for females. Those facts are also consistent enough with my DNA ethnicity estimate for me to be confident that they are representative of my overall tree. We never spread our wings very far did we? Globetrotters, we are most certainly not. Moving onto birthplaces, my tree percentage wise is made up of the following locations There are 427 different female first names with Elizabeth 44 and Mary 31, the most common, notable mentions also to, Mary Ann 18, Ann 18, and Eliza 17. It just shows how sometimes what we think we know, is different from what the facts tell us. I found John really surprising, I know it’s a common name, but I would have said Thomas or William would have been a lot higher. Moving onto first names, I have 418 different male first names, the most common is John with 62, followed by William 60 and Thomas 47. There are also 95 Wootton’s, 78 Keyes and 54 Day’s. There are 386 different surnames on my tree of which Chiddicks, not surprisingly is the most common, with 156 people. Of those 1675 people, 1224 are deceased, with 451 listed as living, which is misleading, because this really means I have 451 people listed without a death, which doesn’t mean necessarily, that they are still living. Those of you with advanced maths will tell me that those two numbers do not equal 1675, I also have 22 people listed with an unknown gender, so this immediately highlights something that I need to address. There are a total of 1675 people on my tree, 881 males and 772 females. So here is my family tree in number form. These wonderful software programmes give us some statistical analysis of our tree data, but genealogy site MyHeritage can take this a whole lot further, with their wonderful set of statistical tools.Ĭrunching the numbers certainly won’t help me to break down any brick walls, but it provides me with some interesting facts and figures about my family tree. I have been using Family Tree Maker for the last 20 years and there are a huge variety of charts and reports that you can create. Whatever software you use, there is usually a way of representing your family tree with some fancy charts. Thanks to the wonders of technology, we can now crunch these numbers from our family tree software programmes. A lot of our family tree is based on numbers, we are obsessed with them, birth dates, marriage dates, death dates and census returns. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |