* 1901 census
1901 census
The 1901 census has the head of the household and his wife and then a daughter-in-law and a granddaughter. The problem is that I do not know to which of his sons the lady is or was married - how do I enter them? ~Advice please!
- DavidNewton
- Superstar
- Posts: 464
- Joined: 25 Mar 2014 11:46
- Family Historian: V7
Re: 1901 census
I confess that I do not use Ancestral Sources so my suggestion below may not be optimal.
Putting aside the problem of researching the family relationships my suggestion would be to create a new 'ghost' son for the head of the household, add the daughter-in-law as his wife and the granddaughter as his daughter. This will allow the entry of the census and then leaves you to do the necessary research to find which son it is and merge his record with the ghost.
David
Putting aside the problem of researching the family relationships my suggestion would be to create a new 'ghost' son for the head of the household, add the daughter-in-law as his wife and the granddaughter as his daughter. This will allow the entry of the census and then leaves you to do the necessary research to find which son it is and merge his record with the ghost.
David
- Jane
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8514
- Joined: 01 Nov 2002 15:00
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Somerset, England
- Contact:
Re: 1901 census
All I do is to create a record for a son called Tom Dick or Harry and add the wife and child, then when you prove which they are you can delete the place holder.
Jane
My Family History : My Photography "Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."
My Family History : My Photography "Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."
- ColeValleyGirl
- Megastar
- Posts: 5499
- Joined: 28 Dec 2005 22:02
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Cirencester, Gloucestershire
- Contact:
Re: 1901 census
I do the same as Jane, except I create an unnamed male as spouse of the daughter in law.
Helen Wright
ColeValleyGirl's family history
ColeValleyGirl's family history
- tatewise
- Megastar
- Posts: 28410
- Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
- Contact:
Re: 1901 census
It should be relatively easy to find the Marriage record that links the d-in-law with one of the sons, and the Birth record that links both of them to their daughter.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry
Re: 1901 census
Good evening "amateur",
I use the method advocated by Jane and Helen, using Helen's preference for an "unamed" or "unknown" male individual, who's name and other details can be added at a later date when they become available to you.
See attached example derived from my AS entries and displayed in the FH tree, for a woman who had 3 known husbands and an out of marriage liason that resulted in an "Illegitimate" child. The two known husbands have their names entered in full, as they appear on the Scottish marriage registers. The blank entry is for the "Illegitimate" child father and in FH, I have added the 'Marriage status' of "Never married" and in the accompanying 'Note', "Unknown". For the third marriage, I have similar information at present as you, in that the woman is recorded as the daughter-in-law and her child, the grandson, in a Census entry; so I have assumed that the surname of the husband is the same as the "Head" of the household, but the given name(s) is/are unknown. These amendments can be made either in directly in FH into the 3rd husbands record, or by using AS when the individuals of the family unit are recorded together in another single census entry, or a marriage certificate/register entry is available. N.B. The children for individuals/husbands 3 and 4 have not been added in my example diagram.
I hope this helps.
My regards, Bill
I use the method advocated by Jane and Helen, using Helen's preference for an "unamed" or "unknown" male individual, who's name and other details can be added at a later date when they become available to you.
See attached example derived from my AS entries and displayed in the FH tree, for a woman who had 3 known husbands and an out of marriage liason that resulted in an "Illegitimate" child. The two known husbands have their names entered in full, as they appear on the Scottish marriage registers. The blank entry is for the "Illegitimate" child father and in FH, I have added the 'Marriage status' of "Never married" and in the accompanying 'Note', "Unknown". For the third marriage, I have similar information at present as you, in that the woman is recorded as the daughter-in-law and her child, the grandson, in a Census entry; so I have assumed that the surname of the husband is the same as the "Head" of the household, but the given name(s) is/are unknown. These amendments can be made either in directly in FH into the 3rd husbands record, or by using AS when the individuals of the family unit are recorded together in another single census entry, or a marriage certificate/register entry is available. N.B. The children for individuals/husbands 3 and 4 have not been added in my example diagram.
I hope this helps.
My regards, Bill
- Attachments
-
- Example derived from my AS entries and displayed in the FH tree, for a woman who had 3 known husbands and an out of marriage liason that resulted in an "Illegitimate" child.
- AS_naming_examples.jpg (55.89 KiB) Viewed 10843 times
- jmurphy
- Megastar
- Posts: 715
- Joined: 05 Jun 2007 23:33
- Family Historian: V6.2
- Location: California, USA
- Contact:
Re: 1901 census
I dislike making 'placeholder' individuals where the intermediates are not known, so I connect grandchildren to grandparents and other reported relations as associated persons.
- AdrianBruce
- Megastar
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: 09 Aug 2003 21:02
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: South Cheshire
- Contact:
Re: 1901 census
I can understand a distaste for 'placeholder' individuals - however, I do use them - my excuse is that I work off diagrams 99% of the time and while I have altered my boxes to display associated individuals, I don't believe that there's a way to get them automatically drawn in the tree, linked to grandparents (in this case). Even if I insert a one box tree for the grandchild, there's no link drawn, the amended tree needs to be saved and - more to the point - I have to remember that I saved a Chart with the grandchild on.jmurphy wrote:I dislike making 'placeholder' individuals where the intermediates are not known, so I connect grandchildren to grandparents and other reported relations as associated persons.
So, pragmatically, I ignore my distaste for an invented person.
Adrian
- ColeValleyGirl
- Megastar
- Posts: 5499
- Joined: 28 Dec 2005 22:02
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Cirencester, Gloucestershire
- Contact:
Re: 1901 census
Same as Adrian -- fr me, a placeholder individual makes things more straightforward to visualise.
Helen Wright
ColeValleyGirl's family history
ColeValleyGirl's family history
- jmurphy
- Megastar
- Posts: 715
- Joined: 05 Jun 2007 23:33
- Family Historian: V6.2
- Location: California, USA
- Contact:
Re: 1901 census
Sure, I can see where if you work off diagrams most of the time, having a placeholder individual is preferable. We all have to do what works best for us.AdrianBruce wrote:I can understand a distaste for 'placeholder' individuals - however, I do use them - my excuse is that I work off diagrams 99% of the time and while I have altered my boxes to display associated individuals, I don't believe that there's a way to get them automatically drawn in the tree, linked to grandparents (in this case). Even if I insert a one box tree for the grandchild, there's no link drawn, the amended tree needs to be saved and - more to the point - I have to remember that I saved a Chart with the grandchild on.jmurphy wrote:I dislike making 'placeholder' individuals where the intermediates are not known, so I connect grandchildren to grandparents and other reported relations as associated persons.
So, pragmatically, I ignore my distaste for an invented person.
I'm just trying to find a way not to shoot myself in the foot when entering data when the information only comes from one source. For example -- I have an obituary where a group of bearers are named, and the obit says they were all nephews of the deceased. I know from other research that these men are all grandchildren. (This is early 20th century research where the individuals are easily identifiable and some if not all were known to the family.)
I am very glad I found this obit late enough in my research that I already recognized all those names as grandsons. Imagine the mess that would result if I had created a dummy brother of the deceased to hang all those sons onto, which I would have had to clean up afterwards.
Re: 1901 census
Aye jmurphy,
An alternative is to enter the unknown named brothers spouse as "Christina Hughes //". Christina being her given name, Hughes her married surname and // for where her maiden surname will be entered and her relationship to the head of the family is selected as "Daughter-in-Law" from the AS 'drop-down' list The bairn is then entered, with a link to her mother as "Annie /Hughes/" and will acquire her father, once the marriage has been verified. Christina's entry remains as "Christina Hughes //" until her birth registration or marriage details are located and entered.
"John Hughes, grandson" is however another problem if you are reliant on using the diagram/tree. The "ghost" father being required e.g. "? /Hughes/" for him to appear in the diagram/tree.
1891 Scots Census attached from which examples taken.
As is the way with AS and FH, the old "Horses for courses" saying applies. Happy to read of other peoples work arounds.
My regards, Bill
An alternative is to enter the unknown named brothers spouse as "Christina Hughes //". Christina being her given name, Hughes her married surname and // for where her maiden surname will be entered and her relationship to the head of the family is selected as "Daughter-in-Law" from the AS 'drop-down' list The bairn is then entered, with a link to her mother as "Annie /Hughes/" and will acquire her father, once the marriage has been verified. Christina's entry remains as "Christina Hughes //" until her birth registration or marriage details are located and entered.
"John Hughes, grandson" is however another problem if you are reliant on using the diagram/tree. The "ghost" father being required e.g. "? /Hughes/" for him to appear in the diagram/tree.
1891 Scots Census attached from which examples taken.
As is the way with AS and FH, the old "Horses for courses" saying applies. Happy to read of other peoples work arounds.
My regards, Bill
- Attachments
-
- 1891_Hughes_James_cns_AS_FH_example2.jpg (251.15 KiB) Viewed 10370 times
- jmurphy
- Megastar
- Posts: 715
- Joined: 05 Jun 2007 23:33
- Family Historian: V6.2
- Location: California, USA
- Contact:
Re: 1901 census
Bill --themoudie wrote:Aye jmurphy,
An alternative is to enter the unknown named brothers spouse as "Christina Hughes //". Christina being her given name, Hughes her married surname and // for where her maiden surname will be entered and her relationship to the head of the family is selected as "Daughter-in-Law" from the AS 'drop-down' list
It's my understanding that the // doesn't have to be at the end, so to leave a blank space for the maiden surname, you could use "Christina // Hughes".
Can one of the 'power users' confirm?
Re: 1901 census
Aye jmurphy,
That is my understanding as well and my use of the "/Surname_space/" format is just the way my discombobulated mind works.
Good health and my regards, Bill
That is my understanding as well and my use of the "/Surname_space/" format is just the way my discombobulated mind works.
Good health and my regards, Bill
- tatewise
- Megastar
- Posts: 28410
- Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
- Contact:
Re: 1901 census
I confirm that Christina // Hughes is perfectly valid.
It defines a forename Christina, blank surname between //, and a suffix Hughes.
It defines a forename Christina, blank surname between //, and a suffix Hughes.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history ~ tatewise ancestry