* 1841 census showing children who were dead

Got general Family History research questions - this is the place
Post Reply
avatar
Sallion
Gold
Posts: 23
Joined: 05 May 2022 22:21
Family Historian: V7
Location: Oxford, UK

1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by Sallion » 23 May 2022 11:48

I've come across something a bit odd on the 1841 census for one of my ancestors. There are entries for two children aged 8 and 3 where I can find burial records from before 1841.
The one aged 8 was baptised on 13 Oct 1833 aged 2 months and buried on 25 Sep 1836 age 3 years. The one aged 3 was baptised on 25 Nov 1838 and buried on 30 Dec 1838 aged 11 weeks.
I cannot find any other baptism records for children of the same name so I am fairly certain these are the same children. Has anyone else come across something similar and if so how did you record this?

avatar
Gowermick
Megastar
Posts: 1325
Joined: 13 Oct 2015 07:22
Family Historian: V7
Location: Swansea

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by Gowermick » 23 May 2022 12:24

I’ve seen similar on the 1911 census, where every child has been listed by head, with some marked dead. I simply ignored the fact they were shown, or may have even made a note against the person, stating they were shown on 1911 census in error. I did not add the census fact to them.
Mike Loney

Website http://www.loney.tribalpages.com
http://www.mickloney.tribalpages.com

avatar
RS3100
Famous
Posts: 172
Joined: 05 Nov 2020 12:16
Family Historian: V7
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by RS3100 » 23 May 2022 16:33

I had similar on a 1911 census schedule. I assumed it happened because the father had to enter the number of children born in the marriage, and irrespective of the number still alive, perhaps assumed he had to name all those who were born, still alive or not. I amended the fact sentence to include note text, and referred to the fact that two of the children entered were apparently dead at the time in the appended note.

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 24386
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by tatewise » 23 May 2022 16:52

However, unlike 1911, in 1841 the people did not enter their own census details but they were compiled by an enumerator.
So misunderstanding the census instructions is not a valid explanation.
The enumerator should have only entered people present on the census night.
Perhaps the enumerator asked about children and how old they would be without checking they were still alive :!:
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

avatar
RS3100
Famous
Posts: 172
Joined: 05 Nov 2020 12:16
Family Historian: V7
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by RS3100 » 23 May 2022 19:36

tatewise wrote:
23 May 2022 16:52
However, unlike 1911, in 1841 the people did not enter their own census details but they were compiled by an enumerator.
Agreed Mike, but Sallion asked if anyone else had come across deceased people appearing in a census and how they recorded it. Mick and I both gave our opinions in answer to that question :)

avatar
Sallion
Gold
Posts: 23
Joined: 05 May 2022 22:21
Family Historian: V7
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by Sallion » 24 May 2022 10:14

Thanks for your replies. I've decided to revisit some areas of reasearch I did many years ago. I had already entered the census details but never bothered to go further with the siblings of my ancestor. There were from Bristol and at the time the parish records were not available on line.
I'm inclined to agree with Mike that they misunderstood the question about children and the enumerator didn't check. I've never seen this on the 1841 census for any other family but there's always a first and I never thought to check before.
I think I'll do the same as Gowermick and remove the Census fact from these children and replace with a note.
Must admit as a newbie to FH I'm loving the forums.

User avatar
davidf
Megastar
Posts: 593
Joined: 17 Jan 2009 19:14
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: UK

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by davidf » 24 May 2022 10:55

In reviewing some of my previous work, I am finding it useful to check all children born 1837 onwards against the GRO indices on https://www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/cert ... #LoginForm checking the mother's maiden name and then to use the same indices to do an exhaustive search for further children between each census for the couples concerned.

The GRO indices have the Mother's Maiden Surname right back to the beginning of registration and ages at Death (unlike FreeBMD or many subscription versions).

This helps to pick up "missing children" (born and died between censuses) and "replacement" children (useful if you are trying to use naming conventions to help assemble families).
David
Running FH 6.2.7. Under Wine on Linux (Lubuntu 18.04 LTS)

avatar
Sallion
Gold
Posts: 23
Joined: 05 May 2022 22:21
Family Historian: V7
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by Sallion » 24 May 2022 11:22

David, thanks for this. I did not know about the mother's maiden name on the GRO indices. That will make searching a lot easier. I've been using FreeBMD, Ancestry or FindMyPast for this none of which show the mother's maiden name. Another task to add to my to do list.

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 24386
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by tatewise » 24 May 2022 12:24

Also, the online GRO Index now includes Age on most Death Index entries back to 1837.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

avatar
Gowermick
Megastar
Posts: 1325
Joined: 13 Oct 2015 07:22
Family Historian: V7
Location: Swansea

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by Gowermick » 24 May 2022 15:17

Sallion wrote:
24 May 2022 11:22
I've been using FreeBMD, Ancestry or FindMyPast for this none of which show the mother's maiden name. Another task to add to my to do list.
Not strictly true. As far as FMP is concerned, they do show a lot more mothers maiden names than FreeBMD, who only show them from 1911. Furthermore, a lot of FMP death entries show the full date of birth, rather than just age or year, unlike GRO or FreeBMD.
I’m often swapping between the three.

BTW Showing birth date on the death record is very useful when you don’t know when someone was actually born, or have their birthdate but don’t know where and when they died. Quite often both deaths for husband and wife are recorded in same registration district or area, so finding the death of one, often leads to death of the other and you have their birthdate!! If you already have their birthdate, you can then confirm you have correct death.
Mike Loney

Website http://www.loney.tribalpages.com
http://www.mickloney.tribalpages.com

User avatar
AdrianBruce
Megastar
Posts: 1500
Joined: 09 Aug 2003 21:02
Family Historian: V7
Location: South Cheshire
Contact:

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by AdrianBruce » 24 May 2022 19:50

Gowermick wrote:
24 May 2022 15:17
... a lot of FMP death entries show the full date of birth, rather than just age or year, unlike GRO or FreeBMD. ...
Yes, it depends on the data that was captured and whether it went into the full format index. I think I worked out that there are several formats of death index over the years and this was one area where FamilySearch erred because they tried to push the later format indexes into earlier formats - to do this, they discarded information! :o

And remember that the later years of England & Wales Death Indexes on both Ancestry and FindMyPast are not taken from the GRO files but from newspapers, funeral directors, etc. Ancestry, for instance, has the GRO-based England & Wales, Civil Registration Death Index, 1916-2007 - this goes up to 2007 (no surprise there). This is supplemented by England and Wales, Death Index, 1989-2019. This is new data from 2008 onwards, collected from those sources, but also supplements the GRO data for 1989-2007. Either way, it only has about half of the data.

Sorry for diverting further away.
Adrian

avatar
sueherrington99
Platinum
Posts: 30
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 16:23
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Nottinghamshire

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by sueherrington99 » 25 May 2022 13:17

tatewise wrote:
23 May 2022 16:52
However, unlike 1911, in 1841 the people did not enter their own census details but they were compiled by an enumerator.
I'd always understood that household schedules were issued in every Census, but that up until 1911 they were routinely destroyed after details had been copied into the enumerator books (although I believe that a few household schedules have survived). Section 3 of this guide from the National Archives would seem to bear this out.
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/hel ... what-dates
Therefore it's quite possible that the instructions could have been misunderstood.
Sue
Sue Herrington
Researching Hall, Hemingway, Furnandiz, Rymer

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 24386
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V7
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by tatewise » 25 May 2022 13:40

Sue, that is the theory, but I imagine a large proportion of people, especially in 1841, were illiterate, so would need help from the enumerator to fill out the schedules.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry

avatar
Sallion
Gold
Posts: 23
Joined: 05 May 2022 22:21
Family Historian: V7
Location: Oxford, UK

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by Sallion » 25 May 2022 14:16

The mother of the family in question was almost certainly illiterate as she marked her marriage record. The father signed but again this may mean he just knew how to sign his name.
On another note checking the indices with the mother's maiden name I found that the birth certificate I have for my 2nd great-grandmother is in fact that for her older sister with the same name who died age 1. The next daughter was born in the next quarter after she died and given the same name. My certificate is from 1999 so I made this mistake fairly early on in my research back in the days where you had to go to Aldwych and look at the indices in those large books. That was a good workout for your biceps! Things are so much easier nowdays.

avatar
sueherrington99
Platinum
Posts: 30
Joined: 01 Mar 2010 16:23
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Nottinghamshire

Re: 1841 census showing children who were dead

Post by sueherrington99 » 25 May 2022 15:19

Mike, absolutely. My point was simply that I don't think we should assume that.
Sue Herrington
Researching Hall, Hemingway, Furnandiz, Rymer

Post Reply