You are here: Desborough > Surnames > Summerly > Frederick William Summerly (1874 - )

Desborough People
Frederick William Summerly


Notes about the page layout and content are at the end. Change the display type here:


   3139 1.0 Frederick William Summerlymale
2362 Father: William Summerley    b. 1853 at Desborough    d. 10 Mar 1940 at The Infirmary, Kettering, Northamptonshire
1058 Mother: Emma Nursey    b. about 1854 at Desborough    d. 13 Jan 1931 at 17 Havelock St, Desborough
Birth: 22 Mar 1874, at DesboroughContact

Married: Carrie Smith  1895BMD
b. about 1876, at Kettering, NorthamptonshireCensus

   177552.1 Edith Summerlyfemale
Birth: about 1896, at Kettering, NorthamptonshireCensus

   177562.2 Fred William Summerly   also known as William Summerlymale
Birth: about 1898, at Kettering, NorthamptonshireCensus

   177572.3 Nellie Summerlyfemale
Birth: about 1900, at Kettering, NorthamptonshireCensus

   177582.4 Elsie Summerlyfemale
Birth: about 1903, at Kettering, NorthamptonshireCensus

   177592.5 Arthur Summerlymale
Birth: about 1908, at Kettering, NorthamptonshireCensus



The numbers at the right of the page are unique reference numbers.

The source follows each piece of information. If the source is underlined a full citation will be shown when you hover over it. Click on any link to switch to that person's details page.

Estimated dates of birth (treat with caution - they could be decades out!)
:- where there is a marriage or children recorded, the date is estimated at 16-18 years before the earliest date;
:- where there is only a burial known, if the person or their spouse is described as "old", the birth is estimated at 50 years earlier; if they are described as "very old", the birth is estimated at 60 years earlier; if neither, the birth is estimated at 18 years earlier.

Estimated dates of death are given as a visual aid to point up whether or not they survived their spouse.

Before 1752 the calendar year started on 25th March; dates where the year appears as, eg: "1650/51" show the year as it would have been given at the time (in this example 1650), and the year by the modern calendar (1651). Jan-Mar dates before 1752 which don't show this "double-dating" are from secondary sources which haven't made clear which dating system has been used.

Source Codes

top of page