That what I told Katie the last time I wrote her.
Then complete silence.
Another reader who I had scared away with my obsessive writing?
I know most readers don’t have time to read comments, but this one is too good to be true not to share with you this early morning.
I’m very glad that I found you on Ancestry and on this wonderful blog!
My husband’s family trees named him as Frank – or since they knew he emigrated from Quebec, they assumed his full name had been François. Searching on either Frank Lupien or François Lupien with the approximate birthdate and known residence gave lousy results for most non-Census records. So that line stopped completely at that point.
Like others, I easily found “Frank” and the four children who survived past early childhood (including my husband’s great grandfather) in the same household in Bristol in the 1900 Census.
When I looked at the actual record image, I noticed that he and his wife Josephine had only been married for 8 years while the children ranged in age from 11-17, and that her listing said that 0 children had been born to her – so it was clear that the four children must have been born to “Frank” in a previous marriage. But there is no 1890 Census and none of the children from 1900 were old enough to have been alive in 1880, so I had to get very creative with my search parameters. Eventually I found Elmire (Brault) Lupien’s death record and that’s when things started to fall into place – every record I found seemed to add more evidence that the person called Frank Lupien in my husband’s family tree was actually Fanie Lupien.
This is the joy of genealogy; to find clues like this and make connections between them. All it takes is one “epiphany” to solve the puzzle!