I am trying to trace the origins of Charles Festorazzi who was born about 1808 in Italy. I believe he came from the north of Italy, around the Como area.
I would like to know exactly when he arrived in England. Was he with friends or family or did he arrive alone and why?
He married Charlotte Langridge on 26 Dec 1831 in Tonbridge, Kent and they had eleven children. (Well that's all I've found so far)
He died in Tunbridge Wells on 12 Dec 1886
He appears on all the census from 1841 - 1881.
On the census forms it always says he was born in Italy, so I cannot understand why he is called Charles and not Carlo. It's Charles on his marriage record, his death certificate and all his children's birth certificates after 1837.
I wondered if he was born in Italy to an Italian father and an English mother.
I can't speak Italian so can anyone point me in the right direction.
|
This post was deleted by the author on 14 Jun 2014 12:04PM GMT
|
Charles Festarozzi could not have been described as a photographer in 1829, or entered in a directory as such in 1830, for the simple reason the term did not exist. Daguerre published the first photo of a person in 1838, Fox-Talbot published his method in 1839 - his negative of the oriel window in Lacock Abbey, now in a museum, said to be the oldest camera negative in the world was made in 1835. Herschel was the first person to use the terms "photographer", "negative" and "positive" a few years later.
|
This charlatan has a proven track record of providing deliberately false information, and the OP has contacted me offboard to say that "it was complete rubbish. It was a mixture of the information I posted in my original question and complete fabrication. Just to be sure, I checked out everything he said and none of it checked out."
He should be drummed off Ancestry!
|
More than well said! Take a look at Sue Bird's last post on UK-Surrey-Frederick William Smith. A large number of posts from this person were removed by "an Administrator" - but so were all those pointing out what he was doing!! However Sue has persevered and has not only got a formal complaint in but has provided the address for others to do the same. She deserves all the support she can get. The men in white coats may well be needed but in the meantime Ancestry should show they live up to their claims and ban him/her. Did you see the unbelievable depths he/she sank to with George Harrington and the Chelsea Hospital query put by Brenda Turner? If not take a peek. My subscription renewal is due - do I - or do I?
|
Halpark, David, I kept screenshots of many threads, including Frederick William Smith. If anyone thinks they may find these useful, please get in touch. I may have found further information and would welcome your opinions. Could you send me a message? I`m not subscribed at the moment.
Many thanks Jacki
|
I have had an email from ancestry this morning asking 'how did they do' on dealing with my query.
Hmmm what to say!!!
|
Sue, Tell 'em "Marks out of 10 - minus 5". Have you looked at Frederick William Smith this morning g - there is now only one page of "correspondence" - there were at least five, I think on to six. It looks as though they think just removing all messages, including those drawing attention to the situation, will stop this. My suggestion - bit of a bind but if no one else will get rid of this infantile moron - keep an eye on any and every message he sends, four new ones already this morning, and politely tell the person making the query to keep clear of him.
|
Halpark
My reply to ancestry will be 'fitting' with the situation!!!
Like you, I'm now keeping an eye on his posts and making comments.
Regards
Sue
|
I can't see that Ancestry has done a thing! If action were water Ancestry would be declared a drought area.
Virtually all of his posts have now been deleted "by the author" ie not by the board administrator or by Ancestry. I think the Smith thread on the Surrey board has been sanitised by the board administrator rather than by Ancestry ie brushing the problem under the carpet
|