It's easy to get so absorbed in the tracing and recording of individuals
that you miss the human stories that lay behind the facts.
Ellen Jane Razzell
My grandmother, Ellen Jane, had always been aware of being treated differently
from her younger brother and sister. On her wedding day someone told her why - the woman that she had believed
to be her mother was in fact her step mother. Ellen's own mother had died
when she was just a baby.
This photograph is of Ellen as a baby. For a long time
we believed that
the woman in the photograph was the baby's mother,
Helen Razzell (nee
Headington). But when we looked at
Ellen's birth and Helen's
death certificates, we
realised that Helen had died when Ellen was only 18 days old.
Robert Razzell registered his wife's death and his daughter's birth at the same time.
The next definite piece of information available is from the 1891 census (5
April 1891), some 15 months later. Robert Razzell was shown to be living with his
oldest brother Caleb, Caleb's wife, Ann, and daughter, Ann Elizabeth, aged
13. But no sign of baby Ellen. Where was she?
Eventually
I found Ellen some six miles away living with her uncle Alfred, his wife
Sarah Ann, and their three children Eleanor, Robert Alfred and Caleb John. I
wondered why Robert and Ellen were not together. Perhaps Caleb, the
eldest, was the only one with room to put Robert up, but was unable to
supply the wet-nurse needed for Ellen. Alfred was only a year older than
Robert and had a child about 3 years old. If his wife Sarah had looked after
Ellen since her mother died, then she would probably have been able to suckle Ellen
as well as her own child.
Robert Razzell married his second wife, Lizzie Hiller, 9 months later. So
perhaps Lizzie was the woman in the photograph?
Helen Headington
Census information for Ellen's mother Helen appears to show that she was
brought up entirely by her mother Sarah Headington (nee Cox). Sarah and
Harry Headington had at least one child before Helen - a daughter Jane. I've
so far been unable to trace Jane after the 1871 census.
The 1861 census showed that, as well as her own two girls, Sarah was looking
after a 'nurse child', Sarah Ann Piercey aged 4, born in Peckham. This
census showed Helen's name as 'Eleanor'.
The 1871 census, surprisingly, showed that Sarah Ann Piercey was still in
the household as a 'nurse child'. Her age was given as 12, and her
birthplace as Troy Town, Surrey. Helen would now have been about 17.
By the 1881 census, Helen was the head of the household, her mother having
died in 1879. Sarah A 'Pearcey', aged 22, was now described as a boarder.
On 18th March 1889 Helen married Robert Razzell. She gave birth to her
daughter Ellen on 12th December 1889 and died on 30th December 1889.
Sarah Ann Piercy
Sarah Ann was born 9th January 1858 (birth certificate). Her mother died 7 months later on 9th August 1858
(death certificate). I haven't
yet acquired a death certificate for her father, though it looks as though
he died later the same year, nor do I know why she was taken in by Sarah Headington. Whatever the reason, she
grew up with Helen Headington and appears to have lived with her until
leaving to marry Alfred Razzell in 1882. Yes, that Alfred - the older
brother of the Robert Razzell who was later to marry Helen.
Sarah Ann named her eldest child Eleanor, a variant of Helen, perhaps in
honour of her friend Helen Headington. Her second child was named Robert
Alfred - perhaps in honour of her brother-in-law Robert?
Sarah Ann and Alfred had a third child, Caleb John, a couple of years before
the fateful year of 1889 when Sarah Ann's friend and almost-sister married
Alfred's brother. Sarah Ann was the woman looking after Helen's baby at
the time of the 1891 census.
Is it possible that Sarah Ann is the woman holding baby Ellen in the
photograph? I believe it may well be.
I hope one day to find out more about her. I think my family owes her a
great deal.
I've now obtained the
marriage certificate of Sarah and Alfred. I was dismayed to find that
the name of Sarah's father was "Walter" rather than "Edward" as is shown on
the birth certificate I
already had. The marriage certificate was definitely for "my" Alfred. Did I
have the wrong Sarah's birth certificate?
I went back to the censuses to check her birthplace. The 1861 and 1881 censuses just gave 'Peckham, Surrey', but the 1871 census clearly showed 'Troy Town'.
The 1851 census only showed one family with a name like Piercy ("Percy"):
parents Edward and Sarah, children George, aged 3, and Walter, aged 2. The
birth certificate I had for Sarah Ann gave her address as 12 Troy Town, her
parents as Edward and Sarah. I couldn't find another entry in BMD for a
child of the right age and birthplace, so I am as sure as I can be that I
have the right birth certificate.
Okay - so, was this Sarah, who was brought up by Sarah
Headington alongside her own child Helen, the same Sarah who
married Alfred Razzell. The clincher for me here is the fact
that Helen Headington was one of the witnesses to the marriage
of Sarah Ann Piercy and Alfred Razzell.
So how come the name discrepancy for her father?
The only
explanation I can come up with is that, as it appears that Sarah
Ann was just a baby when she went to live with the Headingtons,
any knowledge of her parents would have been given to her by
Sarah Headington. Did Sarah Headington confuse the names of
father and son? Did she simply mis-remember? Was young Sarah
ever told that she had two brothers? Did she confuse the names?
I'll probably never know the answers, but this is a story that continues
to fascinate me.
