Find Ancestors

Can only help me here at all, i have possibly got my family on the 1871 Barnsley census at Netherfield which i previously thought must be another family. Having looked at it again, i now thing it is them but the names are totally wrong. I was looking for my Samuel and Hannah Raybould with son Ambrose. This has a Thomas and Hannah Raybould with son Amos! The ages and birth places for this Thomas and Hannah are what my Samuel and Hannah would be. The age and place of birth for this Amos is what my Ambrose would be. Also there is an Isiah Raybould with them on the 1872 aged 17. On my 1861 census for Samuel, Isiah is on there aged 7 so this matches! Just got out Ambrose's birth cert and it says born nether field. Should i just assume now that this is my family on the 1871 with some big errors on it or should i try and investigate further somehow? Thanks, Claire

in my limited experience yes................ my great grandma went from mary anne thurza on her birth to mary thurza on her marriage cert and it appears became mary annie theresa on 1901 census and someone who might be her fatjer is marlin on one census and martin on another!!!

I have found loads of pages with names spelt wrong. The guy who takes the census just writes what he hears most of the time. If he doesn't know how to spell, or can't be bothered (after a loooong days work), it usually goes down wrong. Some census pages just have initials, rather than names! lol

Thanks both, ive just looked at the census page that i was kinly sent and clearly says Thomas and Amos not Samuel and Ambrose. regards, claire

Any chance he was called Thomas Samuel (or Samuel Thomas)?

Im not sure Tracy, on all the other census i have he is Samuel, he is Samuel on Ambrose birth cert and his birth on IGI shows Samuel, ive got nothing else to indicate he could have been Thomas Samuel. Regards, Claire

this is a common occurance. For the Beckett's in my tree I have both Buckett and Beakett and for Francomb's I have Francome,Framcomb and even a James Fran Comb. Christian names also transcribed wrong. best wishes Hilary

I had a Thomas which should have been Jonas and a Ibram which should have been Abraham. Dont forget the census image we look at is actually a copy of the original enumerators forms. So I guess there is a good chance that the person copying them out could make a mistake.

Thanks for all your assistance, im pretty sure this is my family now. Best Regards, Claire

Householders completed schedules (or were helped). The schedules were then neatly(!) written into the enumeration booklets. There are possibilities for error before the indexers introduce even more. Examples I've found: Phoebe BOURITON for Phoebe Bounton (ink blot on page?) AMELIA NOTTRIDGE for Millicent Puttock (given daughter's surname) NINA WALL for Linda Lanning (enumerator made a complete pig's ear of his job) It's all part of life's rich tapestry B

Brenda, With those examples, especially the last two, im thinking i have my family even more now. At least he only got the christian names totally wrong, he just spelt the surname wrong. Thanks Claire

That is very odd Jackie, wonder if Thomas was Samuels middle name. This has to be my family, the ages of Ambrose/Amos are what it should be, the Isiah is the right age from what he was in 1861 and the ages of the parents are what they should be, the wifes name is right and so are the birth places. Cant believe i disregarded this family ages ago thinking it wasnt who i was looking for. Regards, Claire

I would definately go with it Claire. I have one census entry where two households are 'run into' each other and it looks as if the head of the household is the last of the previous one. Also had another where the list of kids ages has been moved down one row - then the last one given the age of the first! Trust your instinct - I have ordered several certificates just on instinct and they've been right! It wasn't till after I had got them I realised how 'lucky' I'd been. Anne

Claire, When I was searching for my grandmother on the 1891 census (Ethel Clark), I couldn't find her at all, but when I put another member of the family's name in I got the right family, but my grandmother had suddenly become Elizabeth Clark and her uncle who lived with them had changed from Chapman Clark to Charlotte Clark. Everyone else in the household was right, and even "Elizabeth" and "Charlotte's" other details, age, place of birth were right. Think the enumerator was having an off day. Kath. x

Thank you for all giving your findings/experiances, makes me realise that this is a common occurance. I will be going with instinct now, its even got the right address nearly, Nether Field in Barnsley, its on the address on the census and its on Ambrose birth cert. I am going to order Isiah's birth cert as well now to make sure his fathers name is down as Samuel and not Thomas. Regards to you all, Claire

Hi Clare, I had an odd example of this is sort of thing on the 1881 census. Couldn't find this family: Charles Swan Head apr 28 Mary Ann Swan Wife apr 25 Sarah Swan apr 3 They should have all been living in Church St, in the same street as his uncle, Henry Swan. Found this family but all with the surname Element!!?? Next door on one side were a family called Element, next door on the other side was Henry Swan. Decided it was them, and this was a transcription error. Next time I was at the Record Office, I made a point of checking the scanned pages, to verify that this is my Swan family. Imagine my surprise to see that the enumerator had 'dittoed' all the way down 2 families surnames, making them all the same. He had put Head against Charles, so it is obviously two separate families, but given them all the same surname!! It's definitely my Swan's, but so much for 'always verify your info with the originals'!!! Debbie

Hi Deborah, I bet that was a nightmare trying to find your family with that error. The enumerator made a right bodge of mine as well it seems. Ive been desperately searching this family on the 1861 and 71 for ages now with no luck and all this time i had them on the 1871 but thought it was another family!! Sue very kindly sent me the original ages ago so had another look at it yesterday and it definately says Thomas instead of Samuel and definately says Amos instead of Ambrose. Everything else though, the ages of them all, birth places and the son from 1861 all match. Its the son from 1861 that is doing it for me, Isiah, with a name like that, there cant be that many Isiah Raybould's around. Leigh (Missing Link) found them on the 1861 for me and it all fell into place. Regards, Claire