Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is said

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

  • What is said

    We were having trouble finding a family on one of the censuses, we had in fact picked him up, but the place he was born was wrong and his wifes name was wrong, so it was discounted.
    The address where he was living eventually clinched it.

    So why was his place of birth given incorrectly.
    I imagine the Enumerator going to the house, where the man and his family lived, and saying something like "and where was Father born" The man of the house said Dudley, which is where his own father was born.

    The same Enumerator having been told the wifes name was Mary Ann, had written it down as Marion, well I suppose it can sound similar.
    ~Val~

  • #2
    Sounds feasible to me Val, especially with different accents.
    Lynne

    Searching for Ford, Duffy, (Manchester and Ireland) Cree (Manchester, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire), Owen (Manchester), Humphreys (Manchester and Ireland), Egerton (Manchester and Cheshire), Cresswell (Manchester).

    Comment


    • #3
      I've also come across this sort of error. I'll definately go with the accents. Strange, when I first went to live in Dudley, I found the accent very difficult to get to grips with. I certainly didn't catch half of what was said. Perhaps too, folk sometimes had reason to hide information from the authorities. Much easier in an expanding area of population than in a village.

      Ayse

      Comment


      • #4
        I had some folks from OH's tree who were living well away from home at the census time. Their PoB was given as "Demport". Anyone who's been thee will know that that is how "Devonport" sounds when spoken by a Devonport - or Plymouth - person, using their regional accent.

        I have one of my own ancestors who was given her son-in-laws' surname... at least that's the only thing that seems to make sense. I suspect that the enumerator was just told that she was "mother", without anyone thinking to point out just whose mother she was!

        Christine
        Last edited by Christine in Herts; 28-03-10, 20:40.
        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


        • #5
          According to the 1901 census, great-granny was born in Dublin. That's strange, said my uncle, when I told him; I thought she came from the north, said he.

          On the 1911 census, great-grandad wrote that she was born in Fermanagh.

          So, perhaps in 1901, she was asked where did you come from? and it was thought they were being asked where did she come from in Ireland to England (bad grammar, sorry!); and she probably travelled across from Dublin :-)

          As you typed ... what is said ... :-)
          Joy

          Comment


          • #6
            Remember the enumerator left the forms to be completed, and collected them a few days later. People were expected to have them completed by then, and I doubt if many were completed by the enumerators, they wouldn't have had the time. The enumerators then copied the content of the forms into a summary book, which is what we see for the pre-1911 censuses.

            People who were unable to write would mostly have found someone else to help them fill in the form, an older child, a neighbour perhaps, the vicar .... so there would still have been the possibilty of mishearing or misunderstanding. Then the problem would have been compounded if the enumerator transcribed it wrongly because of unclear writing on the form. Then some of the enumerators did not write very clearly themselves ..... soooo much room for error!

            Comment


            • #7
              These days the census forms are left with people to fill in, but I don't think that was the case back in the old days. I'm sure I remember having an enumerator sitting asking the questions
              ~Val~

              Comment


              • #8
                No, there were always individual forms for each household. The forms were not retained for any of the censuses before 1911, though, which is why we only have the summary books. 1911 is the first census where the household forms have been kept - not the first where they were used.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I am also sure that some of the enumerators filled in the books column by column,downwards, rather than line by line, as I have several instances of slippage, lol, where ages have slipped down a line, or birth places or whatever.

                  And of course, those pages where everyone was born in the same place, dittoed down the page....

                  OC

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Details from Ancestry (although I have read this elsewhere, probably in the book "Making Sense of the Census"):

                    The 1851 Census for England was taken on the night of 30 March 1851. The following information was requested: .... (snip)

                    .... Enumeration forms were distributed to all households a couple of days before census night and the complete forms were collected the next day. All responses were to reflect the individual's status as of 30 March 1851 for all individuals who had spent the night in the house. People who were traveling or living abroad were enumerated at the location where they spent the night on census night. All of the details from the individual forms were later sorted and copied into enumerators' books, which are the records we can view images of today. The original householders schedules from 1841 to 1901 were destroyed.
                    If anyone recalls giving details directly to the enumerator (not in 1851 obviously, lol) it may be that no one had remembered to complete the form before he came to collect it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I agree with Blackberry, but, even if the people had to complete them themselves, or have them completed by someone who could write, then still it could be that the birth place was chanegd because of the enumerator who had to copy the original completed form on a sheet (like we see them now). The 1911 census is the only one of which the original forms remain.

                      That said, Mary Ann and Marion could well be down to another who wrote it down as he heard it, but birth places could be written down as parishes without counties and could be changed to a certain place by the enumerator who assumed it was that place. I have a relative who noted 'St Luke's Surrey' as her birth place in 1911, but she was registered in Finsbury, Hoxton, Camberwell in other censuses. Indeed, there is St Luke Old Street in Finsbury and a number of other St Lukes both in Surrey (like she says) and Middlesex (like the others assumed). The question is which one it is and whether she knew where Surrey ended and Middlesex began.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        i have an instance where my family is marshall, and head of house is james. well, its should read john, and the surname is supposed to be morton. i know i have the rite family, coz, the wife is b.1840 in chichester, and her name was marion.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I've just found a marriage (Scottish, pre-civil registration) where someone has altered the surname in the register in 2 places, and it was the altered version that got transcribed.
                          Uncle John - Passed away March 2020

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X