Genealogy Chat

When the enumerator visited houses in Victorian times, he would ask the names of the people residing there. He would then write them AS SPOKEN onto his list. So to give an example. I have in my tree Georgiana Noble,she is shown as such on the 1861 census, however on the 1851 census she is shown as Georgihannah, and on later censuses as Georgina. If you have a family name Like Byng - you must therefore look for Bing ,Buying etc. In my case Nunn has shown up as Mann, Munn.Noon depending how the enumerator heard it. BEAR IN MIND the residents more often than not could not write their own name, and so could not check the spelling. Also if you have say Charles Hasted in 1871 he may be shown as Chas Hasted in 1881 and may be Charles Hastead in 1901, so try a few options it worked for me,especially when I found people on censuses either side, This may sound elementary - but if you find your family on the bottom of a census page ALWAYS check the top of the next page - the youngest ones may be there ! also stepchildren and other VISITING relatives, that you are looking for. Good luck Maurice ( Just passed the 1000 names mark - all related )

Well done

Thank you Lunar, By the way I have just found one of my relatives - in the kitchen making a cup of tea ! Cheers Maurice

Hill... Mill? Will? Nill? Bill? Slill? Hick? Hiu? Hirl? That's just how I could imagine a transcriber misreading the script. Christine

Interesting point here Christine, Wherever possible we must try to see the ORIGINAL handwritten image. In that way WE become the transcriber and so are responsible for our own errors. To further prove my earlier point , my Maternal Grandfather James Edward Hasted can be found (supposedly transcribed ) on the 1901 census for York as JOS ED HASTED age 28 Blacksmiths Laborer born Lambeth. So they could not even transcribe Laborer correctly (Labourer) let alone his name. That was from www(.)census(.) pro(.) gov(.) uk - The bees knees - or maybe the bees behind ! Further to this cast your mind back to 1851 , Did the enumerator use a pencil or a Quill pen ? Did he first make a house to house rough list and then re-write it later ? That being the case even the handwritten copies could already have been transcribed at least once. Maurice

The images we see are actually second or even third copies. The enumerator would collect up the forms or write them for people who were unable to and then return them to the office where another clerk would copy them out and analyse the material - thats why you often get cross marks or strange numbers added to the form. Lots and lots of chances for mistakes. One as we have already said, names and places would be written as they sounded - including regional accents - and can you imagine what a Norfolk rural accent or a scottish rural accent would sound like in Stepney! - and people who could not spell their home villages would probably be asked which city it was near (in this way you can end up with an ancestor coming from a small obscure village shown on the census from a large city). You can often tell a scribe back at the office was getting tired when you find an ancestor with the family's places of birth jumbled or someone with a completely wrong name and when you look up a few lines there is the name, having been copied twice by a guy who is watching the clock. Again, remember, that enumerators and copyists didnt know that their work would be under the close scrutiny that family researchers would be doing centuries later! so it wasnt that imperative to get the name exactly right if they couldnt read it very well from the enumerators handwriting. I am really quite in awe that they managed to get the majority right!

Also, I recently found my ancestors on a census transcribed with a completely different surname. The reason? When I looked at the actual image they had been given the same surname as the family in the house before them. So it may not be the enumerator who has made a mistake but the transcriber. I managed to find my rellie by searching just under first names and age/place of birth etc and looking at all images of matches. Otherwise I'd never have found them! Joanne

Joanne I have made full use of that way of searching.... If I hadn@t I would never have found my Puffett family as they had been 'mistranscibed' as Griffith.

Good thread. I too had a family I just could not find. I had been looking for ages, and when they were eventually located (for me, not by me) it turned out they had been given the same surname as the family next door, ie above them on the census return. So in the index they had one name, yet looking at the original image it is clearly their correct name that was written. Another common mistake - I was searching for an Elizabeth. Presumably the collector wrote a short form (Eliz'th), when collecting on census night. By the time it got transcribed it became Eligh. In a later census return her birth place is transcribed as Eat Malory, yet in others it is correctly written as East Molesey. It's always worth looking at 'the big picture' as they say.

One branch of my family had the habit of calling themselves by their second first name! EG My gran Frances Annie Slynn was entered as Annie Slynn. Slynn was also mistranscribed as Slym!! Gillian

In some cases you can find the surname and the first name transposed i.e. Martin George, instead of George Martin

The bummer (as far as I am concerned) is that once the enumerator or the transcriber starts to gets things wrong, he messes up big time. With anyone with the energy to compare this transcription with the original, only 'ill' in the surname is correct. Several of the Christian names are wrong, Hall should be Holt (and of course the given birthplaces differ in several cases from those given to the enumerator in 1891!) Arthur Rilley 3 Norfolk ... Of Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe Edith Rilley 10 Norfolk Hempstead Of Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe Edward Rilley 4 Norfolk ... Of Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe Emmie Rilley 32 Norfolk Reepham Of Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe Fred Rilley 8M Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe Of Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe Henry Rilley 5 Norfolk Bodham Of Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe James Rilley 9 Norfolk Hall Of Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe James Rilley 31 Norfolk ... Of Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe Blacksmith Engine Driver On Farm Janice Rilley 7 Norfolk Hall Of Norfolk Shouldham Thorpe Sidney Rilley 12 Norfolk Aylsham Of Norfolk Shouldham Oh, and I'm not impressed that the county was described as 'Of Norfolk' Searching for this little lot, I kept on wondering why I couldn't find them again on the 1901.

Interesting thread. My family name is TAZEY, on 1841 census listed as TYSEY and on various other BMD's & census these variations have been found: TEASEY/TOZER/TEASDALE/PHAYSAY/PHEESEY/TASCAY/FAIZEY/FEZY/TOZY/TACEY/TACY to name but a few... so be warned!!! I write every kind of variation down when searching now. Common mistakes in transcribing is T turned into F,S,P. Painstaking I know, if anyone has any tips on how to do this quicker please let me know. Anyone got above name interests please contact me Angie

Thats why there was a Miriam on my particular famly on the 1891 census, it should have read Mary Ann. VERY INTERESTING WELL SPOTTED MAURICE.

My gggrandfather Esau Avery is apparently married to Harry! As they had children, I can only assume that they were not pioneers of same sex marriage but that Mrs Avery's name is transcribed incorrectly. It's not Harriet, as it definitely ends in a 'y' - my guess is that it's Amy, and that she pronounced it with an H at the beginning (the opposite of 'Arry) Paul

Harry could be short for Harriet or Henrietta. I have also found the relationship to head of household was often a guess. Yesterday I found a relative of mine living with her daughter and son-in-law relationship grandmother and Elizabeth transcribed as Lizzie. No children present. Local parish records often latinize first names I have Francis for Frank and as for my Cavell's..

Maurice AS you mentioned Byng does this mean you have Byng ancestors like me? Pat

If I'm really struggling I try transposing forenames and surnames. Also just searching forenames on Ancestry comes up with forenames and no surnames - so it may be worth putting just a surname in the forename box and leaving surname box blank!! Oh joyous! Jill

Thank you Derek - I hope it helped you. The moral surely is - Search first on just the surname (unless Smith Jones or similar) If you get results -too many to look through - then add first christian name only . If still no luck try all christian names known to you ,first in order i.e. Robert Edward then try Edward Robert . If still no luck Then look in this case at Bob ,Ed, Rupert , ect. also try just initials R or E. As with your Mary Anne dialect may make that one sound like Miriam -exactly the same happened to me in my tree. Mary Anne however is normally the most common as Victorians tended to copy the names of Kings or Queens - Like wise if in Victorian times they heard Rupert they would almost certainly write Robert , as Rupert was a rare name until the bear came along ! Above all look at the Phonetics , say the name yourself trying to ape the dialect of the place you think they came from, Maurice

Patricia, I have to own up, I read your previous entry and used the name Byng as an example -bong. Sorry to disappoint you but no Byngs in my tree - yet! Maurice