Page 299 - Just another English family (Sep 2019)

It was a major surprise when, some time later, a third possibility emerged. In short, it emerged that the Ancestry.com search engine was seriously deficient. That possibility had not occurred to me. Like much research, serendipity played a part. An offer by a newspaper (The Independent) got me interested in developing the family tree further. I used this to search the 1841 census but by this time the other search engine – 1837online.com also had the 1841 Census on offer. Having some spare units I searched the 1837online.com database and was surprised to find 50 Soothills listed on the person search – nearly double the 26 names listed by the Ancestry.com search. In fact, a further surprise was in store. In brief, I had expected that the 1837online search would have found an additional 24 Soothill names.
When I attempted a consolidation of the two lists, I found it was a bit more complicated than that.
The 1851 Census tells more, but while focusing on heads of households feeds into the outcry that family history is simply patriarchal history, there is little choice. ‘Heads of households’ are the talismen, the identifiers and, essentially, the pivots of any family. The status of a family is largely defined by the fortunes of the head of the household. In fact, a focus on other members of the household as a start would misrepresent the poser balance in Victorian households and, indeed, most other households. The danger, of course, is in not going beyond the stories of the heads of household. By trying to find out where ever body fits in the Soothill family tree, the claim is made that this is not simply a patriarchal history, but certainly patriarchy will be its start.
Eight families ‘capture’ 53 of the 55 Soothills identified in the 1841 Census and there are some possible links between these distinct households. David (c.1775) and Joseph (c.1776) are clearly of a different generation to the other heads of households. They could well be brothers, for children in a family followed quickly in those days. John (c.1791), born around 15 years later, could be another brother
295