Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reconciling conflicting data

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Reconciling conflicting data

    I'm researching one of my husband's ancestors in Connecticut and I'm finding conflicting data on the census reports. He's listed as being born in England on two census records and as being born in Connecticut on two others. His wife is also listed as being born in both England and Connecticut on different census records. One record shows his wife & her parents as being born in Connecticut, but his wife's brother has parents born in England. One of his daughters is listed as a son on one census record (the age is the same and the names are similar, but the gender is different). There doesn't appear to be anyone else in the area with the same name, so these census records all seem to be for the same guy. If you're trying to do your research accurately, how do you reconcile these differences? And how do you figure out where the truth lies?

  • #2
    Hi kasue and welcome to FTF.

    Census records are the weakest of information because they are not primary source records and they are not secondary source either!

    Census forms were supposed to be filled in by the householder. Maybe they couldn't read or write and got someone else to fill in the form, or the enumerator completed it for them when he collected the form.

    The enumerator then copied the household forms into a ledger and the original forms were destroyed. There are many instances of someone other than the enumerator copying the forms into the ledger - it is apparent by the change in handwriting. I suspect older members of the enumerator's family were roped in to help. Many copying mistakes occurred in this process.

    Also remember that the census were not taken for the purpose of accurately recording facts about individuals, they were taken for statistical purposes only, and a correcting factor of (I think) 5% inaccuracy was allowed.

    Another point - many people were suspicious of the purpose of census taking and deliberately lied about things.

    The only way to get at the truth is to get primary source documents, in your case, birth marriage and death certificates. All the rest can be put down to clerical error.

    OC

    Comment


    • #3
      I tend to think that the earlier the census the more likely the birthplace is to be correct, but OC is right, you do need birth or baptism information to confirm birthplace.
      ~ with love from Little Nell~
      Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

      Comment


      • #4
        [QUOTE=Olde Crone Holden;1892168]Hi kasue and welcome to FTF.

        Census records are the weakest of information because they are not primary source records and they are not secondary source either!

        Census forms were supposed to be filled in by the householder. Maybe they couldn't read or write and got someone else to fill in the form, or the enumerator completed it for them when he collected the form.

        The enumerator then copied the household forms into a ledger and the original forms were destroyed. There are many instances of someone other than the enumerator copying the forms into the ledger - it is apparent by the change in handwriting. I suspect older members of the enumerator's family were roped in to help. Many copying mistakes occurred in this process.

        Also remember that the census were not taken for the purpose of accurately recording facts about individuals, they were taken for statistical purposes only, and a correcting factor of (I think) 5% inaccuracy was allowed.

        Another point - many people were suspicious of the purpose of census taking and deliberately lied about things.

        The only way to get at the truth is to get primary source documents, in your case, birth marriage and death certificates. All the rest can be put down to clerical error.



        Thanks for the response. I didn't realize that census data wasn't considered a primary source. So far I've been using it primarily to identify family relationships, but I've found so many inconsistencies that I haven't wanted to copy the information to my family files. If primary source records aren't available online, how do I get access to them? Are they available through the Mormon records? If so, can I access them online or do I need to go through one of the Family History Centers? Can you request copies of birth certificates of long-dead ancestors? But you can't request birth records without exact birth dates, can you? And if you don't know the exact birth date, how do you go about finding it?

        Sue

        Comment


        • #5
          Certificates are available for all events except very recent ones.(For which you need to provide an exact date. This is supposed to prevent identity theft!)

          You only need the GRO reference number to order and this can be found in the GRO indexes. Most people look at Freebmd, which is free, lol, and can be found here:



          If you would like to put up the name of an ancestor, we will talk you through finding the index reference number. Please note, we do not allow the names of living people on this site, so start with someone you know to be dead!

          (We CAN help with the living ones, but this is normally done by private message, not on the open board).

          Certificates cost £7 if you order them from the official GRO site. Other rogue sites charge much more than this, don't get sucked in.

          OC
          Last edited by Olde Crone Holden; 08-11-09, 22:38. Reason: incorrect url

          Comment


          • #6
            Hi Kasue - have you found naturalisation info for them?
            I'm not sure what time frames you are looking at...they could have come through Ellis Island for example...One-Step Webpages by Stephen P. Morse

            Comment


            • #7
              kasue are you in the u.s.? if so, i think you have to contact the relevant town centre for certificates.

              Comment


              • #8
                DURH - just realised we are talking of two countries here, sorry. My post above applies only to English and Welsh events.

                OC

                Comment


                • #9
                  I'm not sure how reliable this info is, but a quick skim suggests it's plausible:
                  Connecticut Vital Record Descriptions

                  Christine
                  Researching: BENNETT (Leics/Birmingham-ish) - incl. Leonard BENNETT in Detroit & Florida ; WARR/WOR, STRATFORD & GARDNER/GARNAR (Oxon); CHRISTMAS, RUSSELL, PAFOOT/PAFFORD (Hants); BIGWOOD, HAYLER/HAILOR (Sussex); LANCASTER (Beds, Berks, Wilts) - plus - COCKS (Spitalfields, Liverpool, Plymouth); RUSE/ROWSE, TREMEER, WADLIN(G)/WADLETON (Devonport, E Cornwall); GOULD (S Devon); CHAPMAN, HALL/HOLE, HORN (N Devon); BARRON, SCANTLEBURY (Mevagissey)...

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X