*1901 census

AS allows faster and more convenient creation of source records for Family Historian.
amateur
Gold
Posts: 10
Joined: 06 Feb 2012 09:51
Family Historian: V6.2

1901 census

Postby amateur » 29 May 2018 13:56

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!

User avatar
DavidNewton
Superstar
Posts: 410
Joined: 25 Mar 2014 11:46
Family Historian: V6

Re: 1901 census

Postby DavidNewton » 29 May 2018 14:59

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

User avatar
Jane
Site Admin
Posts: 7185
Joined: 01 Nov 2002 15:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Somerset, England
Contact:

Re: 1901 census

Postby Jane » 29 May 2018 15:01

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."

User avatar
ColeValleyGirl
Megastar
Posts: 688
Joined: 28 Dec 2005 22:02
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Cirencester, Gloucestershire
Contact:

Re: 1901 census

Postby ColeValleyGirl » 29 May 2018 15:44

I do the same as Jane, except I create an unnamed male as spouse of the daughter in law.

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 14128
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: 1901 census

Postby tatewise » 29 May 2018 19:19

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.

User avatar
themoudie
Diamond
Posts: 69
Joined: 30 Mar 2015 17:53
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Scotland

Re: 1901 census

Postby themoudie » 29 May 2018 23:32

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
Attachments
AS_naming_examples.jpg
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 1257 times

User avatar
jmurphy
Megastar
Posts: 664
Joined: 05 Jun 2007 23:33
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Re: 1901 census

Postby jmurphy » 02 Jun 2018 06:09

I dislike making 'placeholder' individuals where the intermediates are not known, so I connect grandchildren to grandparents and other reported relations as associated persons.

User avatar
AdrianBruce
Megastar
Posts: 691
Joined: 09 Aug 2003 21:02
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: South Cheshire
Contact:

Re: 1901 census

Postby AdrianBruce » 02 Jun 2018 12:00

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.

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.

So, pragmatically, I ignore my distaste for an invented person.
Adrian

User avatar
ColeValleyGirl
Megastar
Posts: 688
Joined: 28 Dec 2005 22:02
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Cirencester, Gloucestershire
Contact:

Re: 1901 census

Postby ColeValleyGirl » 02 Jun 2018 12:18

Same as Adrian -- fr me, a placeholder individual makes things more straightforward to visualise.

User avatar
jmurphy
Megastar
Posts: 664
Joined: 05 Jun 2007 23:33
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Re: 1901 census

Postby jmurphy » 14 Jun 2018 08:10

AdrianBruce wrote:
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.

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.

So, pragmatically, I ignore my distaste for an invented person.


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.

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.

User avatar
themoudie
Diamond
Posts: 69
Joined: 30 Mar 2015 17:53
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Scotland

Re: 1901 census

Postby themoudie » 14 Jun 2018 19:39

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
Attachments
1891_Hughes_James_cns_AS_FH_example2.jpg
1891_Hughes_James_cns_AS_FH_example2.jpg (251.15 KiB) Viewed 784 times

User avatar
jmurphy
Megastar
Posts: 664
Joined: 05 Jun 2007 23:33
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: California, USA
Contact:

Re: 1901 census

Postby jmurphy » 15 Jun 2018 06:29

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


Bill --

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?

User avatar
themoudie
Diamond
Posts: 69
Joined: 30 Mar 2015 17:53
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Scotland

Re: 1901 census

Postby themoudie » 15 Jun 2018 09:16

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

User avatar
tatewise
Megastar
Posts: 14128
Joined: 25 May 2010 11:00
Family Historian: V6.2
Location: Torbay, Devon, UK
Contact:

Re: 1901 census

Postby tatewise » 15 Jun 2018 10:18

I confirm that Christina // Hughes is perfectly valid.
It defines a forename Christina, blank surname between //, and a suffix Hughes.
Mike Tate ~ researching the Tate and Scott family history.


Return to “Ancestral Sources”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests