Many thanks, Nivard.....I should have asked earlier!! Martin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nivard Ovington" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 9:55 PM Subject: Re: [LEI] 1901 Cosby > Hi Martin > > How about these ? > > 1901 England Census about John Hollinworth > Name: John Hollinworth > Age: 49 > Estimated Birth Year: abt 1852 > Relation: Head > Spouse's Name: Martha Hollinworth > Gender: Male > Where born: Leicestershire, England > > Civil parish: Cosby > Ecclesiastical parish: Cosby > Town: Cosby > County/Island: Leicestershire > Country: England > > Street Address: > > Occupation: > > Condition as to marriage: > > Education: > > Employment status: > > View image > > Registration district: Blaby > Sub-registration district: Enderby > ED, institution, or vessel: 4 > Neighbors: View others on page > Household schedule number: 110 > Piece: 2958 > Folio: 51 > Page Number: 19 > Household Members: > Name Age > John Hollinworth 49 > Martha Hollinworth 47 > Gertrude Hollinworth 21 > Sarah Ann Hollinworth 19 > Fanny S Hollinworth 17 > Emily S Hollinworth 13 > Annie C Hollinworth 11 > Susan M Hollinworth 9 > Edward Hollinworth 7 > > RG13; Piece: 2958; Folio: 51; Page: 19. > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > > >> My grandmother was a Holling(s)worth living in Cosby. They are all on the >> Census's except the 1901 >> and I have checked all the 16 tables in Cosby in Ancestry and they are >> not there. I have tried all >> the tricks that I know of, and they seem to have disappeared. I doubt >> that they would be out of >> Leicestershire as they are busy having children. >> They would have been:- >> John Holling(s)worth age 49 >> Martha : age 47 >> Clara Elizabeth: age 22 >> Gertrude Evelyn: age 21 >> Sarah Ann: age 19 >> Fanny Stokes: age 17 >> Emily Jane: age 13 >> Annie Charlotte: age 11 >> Susan Martha: age 8 >> Edward: age 7 >> There are two boys who have flown the nest and there were two children >> who died within two weeks. >> I have obviously checked all the children via Leicestershire and all >> Counties and Wales. >> They reappear in 1911. >> Nivard usually knows what might have happened, but how could 10 people >> in one family be missed? >> Any suggestions? >> Martin Olive > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi Martin How about these ? 1901 England Census about John Hollinworth Name: John Hollinworth Age: 49 Estimated Birth Year: abt 1852 Relation: Head Spouse's Name: Martha Hollinworth Gender: Male Where born: Leicestershire, England Civil parish: Cosby Ecclesiastical parish: Cosby Town: Cosby County/Island: Leicestershire Country: England Street Address: Occupation: Condition as to marriage: Education: Employment status: View image Registration district: Blaby Sub-registration district: Enderby ED, institution, or vessel: 4 Neighbors: View others on page Household schedule number: 110 Piece: 2958 Folio: 51 Page Number: 19 Household Members: Name Age John Hollinworth 49 Martha Hollinworth 47 Gertrude Hollinworth 21 Sarah Ann Hollinworth 19 Fanny S Hollinworth 17 Emily S Hollinworth 13 Annie C Hollinworth 11 Susan M Hollinworth 9 Edward Hollinworth 7 RG13; Piece: 2958; Folio: 51; Page: 19. Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > My grandmother was a Holling(s)worth living in Cosby. They are all on the Census's except the 1901 > and I have checked all the 16 tables in Cosby in Ancestry and they are not there. I have tried all > the tricks that I know of, and they seem to have disappeared. I doubt that they would be out of > Leicestershire as they are busy having children. > They would have been:- > John Holling(s)worth age 49 > Martha : age 47 > Clara Elizabeth: age 22 > Gertrude Evelyn: age 21 > Sarah Ann: age 19 > Fanny Stokes: age 17 > Emily Jane: age 13 > Annie Charlotte: age 11 > Susan Martha: age 8 > Edward: age 7 > There are two boys who have flown the nest and there were two children who died within two weeks. > I have obviously checked all the children via Leicestershire and all Counties and Wales. > They reappear in 1911. > Nivard usually knows what might have happened, but how could 10 people in one family be missed? > Any suggestions? > Martin Olive

My grandmother was a Holling(s)worth living in Cosby. They are all on the Census's except the 1901 and I have checked all the 16 tables in Cosby in Ancestry and they are not there. I have tried all the tricks that I know of, and they seem to have disappeared. I doubt that they would be out of Leicestershire as they are busy having children. They would have been:- John Holling(s)worth age 49 Martha : age 47 Clara Elizabeth: age 22 Gertrude Evelyn: age 21 Sarah Ann: age 19 Fanny Stokes: age 17 Emily Jane: age 13 Annie Charlotte: age 11 Susan Martha: age 8 Edward: age 7 There are two boys who have flown the nest and there were two children who died within two weeks. I have obviously checked all the children via Leicestershire and all Counties and Wales. They reappear in 1911. Nivard usually knows what might have happened, but how could 10 people in one family be missed? Any suggestions? Martin Olive

Hi John Not that it makes a huge difference to things, it just changes a level where errors could creep in In the UK a schedule was left with the householder to fill in and it was then collected on the day after the census, the enumerator took them home and transcribed them onto the pages we see today (unfortunately the household schedules were then destroyed) There is no doubt that the enumerators had to help some people to fill in the schedules where they could not get a family member of friend to do it for them but that was a small minority Unlike the USA and others where the enumerator called around and took the information verbally So its not so much how the local dialect sounded but how the householder wrote or spelled Even by 1911 (where what we see are the first in the householders handwriting) you can see how hard it was to read some peoples writing As I say it does not change things greatly I for one am most grateful for all and everyones efforts to transcribe, whether paid or voluntary, they have all helped me and countless others to further their research in a way that could only be dreamt of a few short years ago Having done a little myself I know only to well how hard a job it is, I often wonder how much is spot on where I cannot read it even armed with the transcript Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) Hi All I am also a transcriber (for FreeBMD & FreeCEN) so I can confirm that it is somewhat of a thankless task. The census taker was in the first instance writing down what was said to him by the head of house, so, assuming the head of house is speaking honestly/accurately (which is a big assumption), the first stumbling block is the local accent. My own ancestors include LOWETH frequently written as LOUTH. The second is the literacy of the census taker. Can he spell what he hears? The third is the comprehension of the census-taker. Why would he be aware of every occupation/ non-local location? The fourth is the taker's handwriting, not just in letters but also in numbers. It's surprising how similar 2's & 5's can look! To complicate matters further, the census checker often makes marks through the original written text. The fifth, and probably most important, is the guile of the transcriber in interpreting. I often back-check against previous Censuses or other records, but faced with pages to transcribe, it simply isn't possible to double-check every record. When I am doing my own research on my own family, I am of course examining each record I find with a fine tooth-comb. I wish it were possible to do the same for every record when I am transcribing, but then material would be published extremely slowly. In reality a great number of the records are transcribed accurately, but it tends to be only the imperfect minority we hear about as transcribers. Not meaning to whinge John Measures Ontario, Canada

Hi John I see my original small enquiry has sparked a lot of comment. Seeing your surname, I would like to ask where your Measures come from. My great grand mother was a Lucy Measures from Ashby de la Zouch. Before that the family came from Packington nearby. Some spread out into the district around what is now Coalville. Lucy's brother even went to London and became, according to oral history, a royal valet. He is actually on one census as a gentleman's valet and on the rest was a hairdresser. Geraldine -----Original Message----- From: John Measures Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 5:03 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [LEI] Occupations & transcription Message: 4 Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:01:54 -0400 From: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original My I am one of those transcribers that know nothing about the Names, occupation and towns/Counties with no knowledge of historical occupations and hardy any geography know how to boot. When I am transcribing I have open when needed the web page for British Occupations and a map of the village to see how the names of the streets are spelled if I can not figure out the Street name , but a few of the letters are readable due to some Vicar's hand writing and the Surname List for Lins and the 6 Alphabets Hand writing examples just in case this Chap from across the pond would make a mistake The Most Important thing was We write what we see and if we have problems we can always ask for help from other transcribers on the list Proud to be a Scriber for the RegREG Lin's Web In thanks for all the help I received in Searching for Private John CARTER Reg # 1729 1st Batt Leicestershire Regiment 11 May 1886-10 May 1898 Bill Stratton Cole Harbour NS Canada Hi All I am also a transcriber (for FreeBMD & FreeCEN) so I can confirm that it is somewhat of a thankless task. The census taker was in the first instance writing down what was said to him by the head of house, so, assuming the head of house is speaking honestly/accurately (which is a big assumption), the first stumbling block is the local accent. My own ancestors include LOWETH frequently written as LOUTH. The second is the literacy of the census taker. Can he spell what he hears? The third is the comprehension of the census-taker. Why would he be aware of every occupation/ non-local location? The fourth is the taker's handwriting, not just in letters but also in numbers. It's surprising how similar 2's & 5's can look! To complicate matters further, the census checker often makes marks through the original written text. The fifth, and probably most important, is the guile of the transcriber in interpreting. I often back-check against previous Censuses or other records, but faced with pages to transcribe, it simply isn't possible to double-check every record. When I am doing my own research on my own family, I am of course examining each record I find with a fine tooth-comb. I wish it were possible to do the same for every record when I am transcribing, but then material would be published extremely slowly. In reality a great number of the records are transcribed accurately, but it tends to be only the imperfect minority we hear about as transcribers. Not meaning to whinge John Measures Ontario, Canada ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

It's not just the census transcripts that have basic errors. Similar bizarre errors occur in the BMD indexes. A birth I've just entered into my tree was (according to Ancestry) in the registration district KERIDEN. A look at the image showed it to actually be MERIDEN. And this was from a 1968 computer printed index. And then there are the inexplicable 'assumed' counties chosen by Ancestry. Now that we have to choose the location from the list offered it is very easy to not find an event such as where the district=Oxford but the county= Derbyshire. Or the hundreds of instances with district=Reading and county=Hampshire (the offered list only has Reading, Berkshire). on 5 Mar 2012 15:30:56 -0000, [email protected] wrote: > Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:30:56 -0000 > From: "Brian Binns" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation > To: <[email protected]> > > Bill, I wasn't having a go at transcribers of Parish records. I was > highlighting the very basic mis-transcribing found on the censuses on the > Find My Past and Ancestry sites. I could write pages and pages of ones I > have found, most of which, as I have said, are so obviously wrong, but to > give some idea I have seen the following; > Town; Nottingham; County Northamptonshire > > Now that really is a basic mistake. > > Brian Binns

Hi Brian I didn't think you were knocking transcribers in general I am told the kind of specific problem you mention derives from the software they use to transcribe In the transcription process for certain fields they get a drop down list (for example Counties) It is all to easy for the transcriber to pick Nottingham and then Northamptonshire if they choose the wrong option from the drop down menu Having worked with database management over the years I can't quite understand why a corrective report cannot then be run to sort that but it does need human intervention as the error could be in the place OR the County and the numbers in these databases are so huge as to make individual checking out of the question financially Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > Bill, I wasn't having a go at transcribers of Parish records. I was > highlighting the very basic mis-transcribing found on the censuses on the > Find My Past and Ancestry sites. I could write pages and pages of ones I > have found, most of which, as I have said, are so obviously wrong, but to > give some idea I have seen the following; > Town; Nottingham; County Northamptonshire > > Now that really is a basic mistake. > > Brian Binns

Bill, I wasn't having a go at transcribers of Parish records. I was highlighting the very basic mis-transcribing found on the censuses on the Find My Past and Ancestry sites. I could write pages and pages of ones I have found, most of which, as I have said, are so obviously wrong, but to give some idea I have seen the following; Town; Nottingham; County Northamptonshire Now that really is a basic mistake. Brian Binns -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: 05 March 2012 13:02 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation My I am one of those transcribers that know nothing about the Names, occupation and towns/Counties with no knowledge of historical occupations and hardy any geography know how to boot. When I am transcribing I have open when needed the web page for British Occupations and a map of the village to see how the names of the streets are spelled if I can not figure out the Street name , but a few of the letters are readable due to some Vicar's hand writing and the Surname List for Lins and the 6 Alphabets Hand writing examples just in case this Chap from across the pond would make a mistake The Most Important thing was We write what we see and if we have problems we can always ask for help from other transcribers on the list Proud to be a Scriber for the RegREG Lin's Web In thanks for all the help I received in Searching for Private John CARTER Reg # 1729 1st Batt Leicestershire Regiment 11 May 1886-10 May 1898 Bill Stratton Cole Harbour NS Canada I'm wondering how many people from across the Pond are transcribers ? ----- Siteal Message ----- From: "Brian Binns" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 7:47 AM Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation > The problems with transcriptions on both Ancestry and Find my Past, with > names, occupations and towns/Counties, is that they were done by people > with > little or no knowledge of the UK and no experience in Family History. They > appear to have been totally unfamiliar with British surnames, with no > knowledge of historical occupations, and poor geography to boot. > > I continue to be totally amazed at the very poor level of > mis-transriptions > of entries that seems to us Brits as so obvious. It's bad enough having to > cope with errors from the enumerators without this additional hampering. > But > I suppose that even with these errors, it is still preferable to ploughing > through pages of censuses and searching. What it has done is developed in > family historians of longer standing a form of techniques to get round the > brick walls that poor transcriptions create. > > So ifor those that do get stuck keep posting your queries, there are many > on > here willing to help. > > Brian BInns > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4851 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4851 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4851 - Release Date: 03/04/12

I often see posts about how bad transcriptions are and certainly some could be better..however, and I have said it many times before, I would rather have a flawed transcription "now" rather than the unattainable perfect transcript sometime in the future The major problems have already been mentioned, handwriting, interpretation, local spelling, misinformation etc etc ad infinitum All will play a part in problems faced by the transcribers , I would heartily recommend anyone to try a page of the 1841 census say or a page from a 16th or 17th century Parish register , there are not many pages that do not raise a question or more on what is recorded therein You could spend years transcribing, checking and rechecking until you believe you have the perfect transcript but it will still contain errors and misinterpretations at the very least Thank goodness we have what we have and to coin another well worn saying, "Don't look a gift horse in the mouth" Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) PS Carolyn, we have also been brought up on Yogi Bear (and Boo boo :-) I suspect most know what you mean by "smarter than the average bear" > Hi. Brian, > The mis-transcriptions of which you speak are, unfortunately, a wider > problem. It is just as hard to decipher the US Census on this side of the > pond. We have identical problems. Requiring the transcription volunteers > to work only with their own country's records isn't the answer either, > because we have bad spellers, bad handwriting, and bad geographers, etc. in > both places! We family historians simply have to strive to be "smarter than > the average bear" (an American saying from a TV cartoon of the 60s), > persevere, and continue to help each other the best we can. I think this is > a great group of people to be working with on these problems! > --Carolyn in Minnesota, USA

Hi Brian Not one I have come across but it is quite an old occupation >From OED ============== bumbailiff, n. Forms: 16 bumbaylie, 16, 18 dial. bumbaily, 16 bumbayliff(e, 16- bumbailiff. Etymology: apparently < bum n.1 + bailiff n.: i.e. the bailiff that is close at the debtor's back, or that catches him in the rear. Compare the French equivalent pousse-cul , colloquially shortened to cul , precisely like the English bum n.1 A contemptuous synonym of bailiff n. 2 : 'A bailiff of the meanest kind; one that is employed in arrests' (Johnson). It was mentioned by the Bard a1616 Shakespeare Twelfth Night (1623) iii. iv. 174 Scout mee for him at the corner of the Orchard like a bum-Baylie. ============== Its not a very flattering description although you could say that is just a reflection of someone doing his job well Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) >I thought that I would pass on what is probably the most unusual occupation > I have found in the nearly 3,600 names I have accumulated in my > (multi-branched) Family Tree. > > A 2 x Great Grandfather of mine was William Parker, born Loughborough 1821. > His father, John Parker, was born in Nottingham, and was a Stockinger, who > had moved to Loughborough and married there. The whole family then moved > back to Nottingham prior to the 1841 census, before William snuck off to > Leicester Register Office to marry Hannah Campion in 1844, who was actually

Hi Mike Its simpler than that , we recognise a Charwoman in modern usage but Chairwoman & Charewoman mean the same thing but are archaic words in the English language that are no longer in use >From OED charwoman, n. Forms: 15 charr-, charre-, 16-17 charewoman, chairwoman, 17-18 charwoman. Etymology: < chare n.1 5, chare v.1 5 + woman n. chare | char, n.1 5. esp. An occasional turn of work, an odd job, esp. of household work; hence in pl. the household work of a domestic servant. The spellings chare- chair- have now gone out, though the pronunciation indicated by them is still frequent. Thesaurus » A woman hired by the day to do odd jobs of household work. So as I said previously its not a transcription error its just another spelling for what we know as Charwoman The word Chore comes from the same origin (see above chare | char, n.1) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > Hi Geraldine, > > This question crops up surprisingly often. If you search the Rootsweb > archives across all lists, you'll find various possibilities suggested, > including a maker of cane chairs and even a woman who carried sedan chairs ! > However, my vote goes to the view put forward by Rod Neep, the founder of > Archive CD Books, who said, on the Gloucester list on 31st March 1999, the > following: > > For some odd reason "chairwoman" seems to appear in a lot of census > transcripts rather than the real (or perhaps it is just the modern > variation?) word - charwoman - a woman who cleans the house and does general > chores. > > > Best wishes, > > Mike Gould > Leicestershire

That's why its ever so nice when the sites allow us to submit our own corrections. I know what the place and Names should be, so I can submit an "alternate" transcription. Its been very helpful with Ancestry, for example, where the transcriptions can be gibberish rather than even real mistakes. I submitted to them that my great-great-great grandfather was from Queniborough, not Qwaenysgor, and I've virtually "met" several researchers because of the correction I submitted. I'm with you Nivard, I like the imperfect transcriptions because we get them faster and in many cases, for less money than the old "100%" way. And some of them are cause for a good laugh. My own great-x5 grandfather was listed in the census as having the occupation "keeps bed down". I'd like to think the original census taker had a sense of humor about a retired old man, and the person who transcribed it must have had a laugh as well. Concetta On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Nivard Ovington <[email protected]> wrote: > > Having worked with database management over the years I can't quite > understand why a corrective > report cannot then be run to sort that but it does need human intervention > as the error could be in > the place OR the County and the numbers in these databases are so huge as > to make individual > checking out of the question financially > >

Hi Geraldine, We have actually compared notes some time ago. I am now a little further along. My family is solidly City of Leicester as far back as I can find (John Measures dob unknown, father of Mathew Measures who was b abt 1710).  I haven't been able to find a common link to the Packington/Ashby Measures, but I have to believe at some time prior to 1710, the lines join. Unfortunately for me, the only way of making progress further back than 1710 is to come to the UK, which I don't foresee in the near future. All the best John >________________________________ > From: Geraldine Bancroft <[email protected]> >To: John Measures <[email protected]>; [email protected] >Sent: Monday, March 5, 2012 12:50 PM >Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupations & transcription > >Hi John > >I see my original small enquiry has sparked a lot of comment. > >Seeing your surname, I would like to ask where your Measures come from.  My great grand mother was a Lucy Measures from Ashby de la Zouch.  Before that the family came from Packington nearby.  Some spread out into the district around what is now Coalville.  Lucy's brother even went to London and became, according to oral history, a royal valet.  He is actually on one census as a gentleman's valet and on the rest was a hairdresser. > >Geraldine > >-----Original Message----- From: John Measures >Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 5:03 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: [LEI] Occupations & transcription > >Message: 4 >Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:01:54 -0400 >From: <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation >To: <[email protected]> >Message-ID: <[email protected]> >Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; >  reply-type=original > >My > >I am one of those transcribers that know nothing about the Names, occupation >and towns/Counties with no knowledge of historical occupations and hardy any >geography know how to boot. >When I am transcribing I have open when needed the web page for British >Occupations and a map of the village to see how the names of the streets are >spelled if I can not figure  out the Street name , but a few of the letters >are readable due to some Vicar's hand writing and the Surname List for Lins >and the 6 Alphabets Hand writing  examples just in case this Chap from >across the pond would make a mistake >The Most Important thing was We write what we see and if we have problems we >can always ask for help from other transcribers on the list > > >Proud to be a Scriber for the RegREG Lin's Web >In thanks for all the help I received  in Searching for Private John CARTER >Reg # 1729 1st Batt Leicestershire Regiment  11  May 1886-10 May 1898 > >Bill Stratton >Cole Harbour NS Canada > > >Hi All > >I am also a transcriber (for FreeBMD & FreeCEN) so I can confirm that it is somewhat of a thankless task. The census taker was in the first instance writing down what was said to him by the head of house, so, assuming the head of house is speaking honestly/accurately (which is a big assumption), the first stumbling block is the local accent. My own ancestors include LOWETH frequently written as LOUTH. The second is the literacy of the census taker. Can he spell what he hears? The third is the comprehension of the census-taker. Why would he be aware of every occupation/ non-local location? The fourth is the taker's handwriting, not just in letters but also in numbers. It's surprising how similar 2's & 5's can look! To complicate matters further, the census checker often makes marks through the original written text. The fifth, and probably most important, is the guile of the transcriber in interpreting. > >I often back-check against previous Censuses or other records, but faced with pages to transcribe, it simply isn't possible to double-check every record. When I am doing my own research on my own family, I am of course examining each record I find with a fine tooth-comb. I wish it were possible to do the same for every record when I am transcribing, but then material would be published extremely slowly. > >In reality a great number of the records are transcribed accurately, but it tends to be only the imperfect minority we hear about as transcribers. > >Not meaning to whinge >John Measures >Ontario, Canada > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > >

Message: 4 Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 09:01:54 -0400 From: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation To: <[email protected]> Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";     reply-type=original My I am one of those transcribers that know nothing about the Names, occupation  and towns/Counties with no knowledge of historical occupations and hardy any  geography know how to boot. When I am transcribing I have open when needed the web page for British  Occupations and a map of the village to see how the names of the streets are  spelled if I can not figure  out the Street name , but a few of the letters  are readable due to some Vicar's hand writing and the Surname List for Lins  and the 6 Alphabets Hand writing  examples just in case this Chap from  across the pond would make a mistake The Most Important thing was We write what we see and if we have problems we  can always ask for help from other transcribers on the list Proud to be a Scriber for the RegREG Lin's Web In thanks for all the help I received  in Searching for Private John CARTER  Reg # 1729 1st Batt Leicestershire Regiment  11  May 1886-10 May 1898 Bill Stratton Cole Harbour NS Canada Hi All I am also a transcriber (for FreeBMD & FreeCEN) so I can confirm that it is somewhat of a thankless task. The census taker was in the first instance writing down what was said to him by the head of house, so, assuming the head of house is speaking honestly/accurately (which is a big assumption), the first stumbling block is the local accent. My own ancestors include LOWETH frequently written as LOUTH. The second is the literacy of the census taker. Can he spell what he hears? The third is the comprehension of the census-taker. Why would he be aware of every occupation/ non-local location? The fourth is the taker's handwriting, not just in letters but also in numbers. It's surprising how similar 2's & 5's can look! To complicate matters further, the census checker often makes marks through the original written text. The fifth, and probably most important, is the guile of the transcriber in interpreting. I often back-check against previous Censuses or other records, but faced with pages to transcribe, it simply isn't possible to double-check every record. When I am doing my own research on my own family, I am of course examining each record I find with a fine tooth-comb. I wish it were possible to do the same for every record when I am transcribing, but then material would be published extremely slowly. In reality a great number of the records are transcribed accurately, but it tends to be only the imperfect minority we hear about as transcribers. Not meaning to whinge John Measures Ontario, Canada

My I am one of those transcribers that know nothing about the Names, occupation and towns/Counties with no knowledge of historical occupations and hardy any geography know how to boot. When I am transcribing I have open when needed the web page for British Occupations and a map of the village to see how the names of the streets are spelled if I can not figure out the Street name , but a few of the letters are readable due to some Vicar's hand writing and the Surname List for Lins and the 6 Alphabets Hand writing examples just in case this Chap from across the pond would make a mistake The Most Important thing was We write what we see and if we have problems we can always ask for help from other transcribers on the list Proud to be a Scriber for the RegREG Lin's Web In thanks for all the help I received in Searching for Private John CARTER Reg # 1729 1st Batt Leicestershire Regiment 11 May 1886-10 May 1898 Bill Stratton Cole Harbour NS Canada I'm wondering how many people from across the Pond are transcribers ? ----- Siteal Message ----- From: "Brian Binns" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 7:47 AM Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation > The problems with transcriptions on both Ancestry and Find my Past, with > names, occupations and towns/Counties, is that they were done by people > with > little or no knowledge of the UK and no experience in Family History. They > appear to have been totally unfamiliar with British surnames, with no > knowledge of historical occupations, and poor geography to boot. > > I continue to be totally amazed at the very poor level of > mis-transriptions > of entries that seems to us Brits as so obvious. It's bad enough having to > cope with errors from the enumerators without this additional hampering. > But > I suppose that even with these errors, it is still preferable to ploughing > through pages of censuses and searching. What it has done is developed in > family historians of longer standing a form of techniques to get round the > brick walls that poor transcriptions create. > > So ifor those that do get stuck keep posting your queries, there are many > on > here willing to help. > > Brian BInns >

Hi. Brian, The mis-transcriptions of which you speak are, unfortunately, a wider problem. It is just as hard to decipher the US Census on this side of the pond. We have identical problems. Requiring the transcription volunteers to work only with their own country's records isn't the answer either, because we have bad spellers, bad handwriting, and bad geographers, etc. in both places! We family historians simply have to strive to be "smarter than the average bear" (an American saying from a TV cartoon of the 60s), persevere, and continue to help each other the best we can. I think this is a great group of people to be working with on these problems! --Carolyn in Minnesota, USA -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Binns Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 5:48 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation The problems with transcriptions on both Ancestry and Find my Past, with names, occupations and towns/Counties, is that they were done by people with little or no knowledge of the UK and no experience in Family History. They appear to have been totally unfamiliar with British surnames, with no knowledge of historical occupations, and poor geography to boot. I continue to be totally amazed at the very poor level of mis-transriptions of entries that seems to us Brits as so obvious. It's bad enough having to cope with errors from the enumerators without this additional hampering. But I suppose that even with these errors, it is still preferable to ploughing through pages of censuses and searching. What it has done is developed in family historians of longer standing a form of techniques to get round the brick walls that poor transcriptions create. So ifor those that do get stuck keep posting your queries, there are many on here willing to help. Brian BInns -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Gould Sent: 04 March 2012 11:13 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation Hi Geraldine, This question crops up surprisingly often. If you search the Rootsweb archives across all lists, you'll find various possibilities suggested, including a maker of cane chairs and even a woman who carried sedan chairs ! However, my vote goes to the view put forward by Rod Neep, the founder of Archive CD Books, who said, on the Gloucester list on 31st March 1999, the following: For some odd reason "chairwoman" seems to appear in a lot of census transcripts rather than the real (or perhaps it is just the modern variation?) word - charwoman - a woman who cleans the house and does general chores. Best wishes, Mike Gould Leicestershire -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Geraldine Bancroft Sent: 03 March 2012 17:10 To: [email protected] Subject: [LEI] Occupation Hi Listers Over the years I have come across an occupation, usually of widows, given as chairwoman & assumed this was a different spelling of charwoman or a transcription error if the original was not seen. Is this in fact correct? If not what is the difference? Why is this not included in the old occupations lists? I know this is a minor point but I felt the need to ask after coming across one again today and there is definitely an i in the word. Geraldine ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thanks Mike for letting me know I'm not the only one who has raised the question. From memory I seem to have found it more in Leics than elsewhere. Maybe our Leics ancestors were not so well heeled and the widows had to find some employment :-) Thanks also to Nivard - for your interest the recent occurrence which sparked the question is 1881 and the ref RG12 / 2512 no 56 and her next door neighbour no 57 - the occupation isn't transcribed here but I definitely see an i in both, complete with dot! Thanks Brian for the story about your ancestors occupations and Nottingham GOAL sorry GAOL - I was a student in Nottingham many years ago but didn't know that. I must tell my son to look at it - he works in Beeston. I am always adding corrections to Ancestry - I think we should get a discount on our subscriptions for improving their data! But it's much easier to read the names of places and local surnames if you know the area. I once had some correspondence with an American whose line joined mine way back and our common ancestor she thought was a lawyer. She was very disappointed when I told her he was a sawyer. Thanks for all your comments Geraldine -----Original Message----- From: Mike Gould Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 11:12 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation Hi Geraldine, This question crops up surprisingly often. If you search the Rootsweb archives across all lists, you'll find various possibilities suggested, including a maker of cane chairs and even a woman who carried sedan chairs ! However, my vote goes to the view put forward by Rod Neep, the founder of Archive CD Books, who said, on the Gloucester list on 31st March 1999, the following: For some odd reason "chairwoman" seems to appear in a lot of census transcripts rather than the real (or perhaps it is just the modern variation?) word - charwoman - a woman who cleans the house and does general chores. Best wishes, Mike Gould Leicestershire -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Geraldine Bancroft Sent: 03 March 2012 17:10 To: [email protected] Subject: [LEI] Occupation Hi Listers Over the years I have come across an occupation, usually of widows, given as chairwoman & assumed this was a different spelling of charwoman or a transcription error if the original was not seen. Is this in fact correct? If not what is the difference? Why is this not included in the old occupations lists? I know this is a minor point but I felt the need to ask after coming across one again today and there is definitely an i in the word. Geraldine ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I thought that I would pass on what is probably the most unusual occupation I have found in the nearly 3,600 names I have accumulated in my (multi-branched) Family Tree. A 2 x Great Grandfather of mine was William Parker, born Loughborough 1821. His father, John Parker, was born in Nottingham, and was a Stockinger, who had moved to Loughborough and married there. The whole family then moved back to Nottingham prior to the 1841 census, before William snuck off to Leicester Register Office to marry Hannah Campion in 1844, who was actually under the age of consent, but declared otherwise. She was from Loughborough too, and it was her nephew who later founded the Campion Cycle company in Nottingham, which I wrote about a few weeks ago. On their marriage certificate, William's father John was listed as a "Turn Key" at Nottingham County Gaol, certainly a major change of employment for a FWK. This isn't the unusual occupation though. That one appeared on the 1851 census when John was recorded as "Bum Bailiff." At first I thought that this was mistranscribed as it sounded very odd, but I looked it up on a list of occupations, and there it was. Bum Bailiff : An officer of the court who went to a convicted person's home or business premises and seized goods in lieu of payment of a fine, in default. Brian Binns PS if you're ever in Nottingham and looking around the older parts of the City, take a look at the old Courthouse and County Gaol on High Pavement, which is where this John Parker would have worked from. This is now a tourist attraction, "The Galleries of Justice". Just take a look at the front of the building where you will see the word "GAOL" in capitals, carved on a lintel. Look closer and you will see that the stonemason initially made a spelling error, and actually carved the word "GOAL". The letter O is now covered by the later carved A, and vice versa. So you see, when you make a typo on an email, it really isn't that serious, relatively speaking! _____ No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12

I agree totally with Brian's comments about the errors found in transcriptions.   It is always the best to work with the original data if you can, where you can use your own interpretation of near illegible writing.   In my experience, a name which is almost unreadable comes to light with my knowing the family names in the village.  A prime example comes to mind that of the Leicester Project which, contains so many errors.   It was transcribed in America by volunteers & only part of Leicestershire was put to disc.   I know it was intended to complete the Leicestershire Parish Records, but for whatever reason this did not happen.    If used with the errors in mind though, this disc can be a useful source.   If you have any doubt with the data you have collected do contact the Leicestershire List.   There are listers who have years of knowledge & experience & are willing to help, as I have found over the years.   June Fleetwood West Yorkshire         From: Brian Binns <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, 4 March 2012, 11:47 Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation The problems with transcriptions on both Ancestry and Find my Past, with names, occupations and towns/Counties, is that they were done by people with little or no knowledge of the UK and no experience in Family History. They appear to have been totally unfamiliar with British surnames, with no knowledge of historical occupations, and poor geography to boot. I continue to be totally amazed at the very poor level of mis-transriptions of entries that seems to us Brits as so obvious. It's bad enough having to cope with errors from the enumerators without this additional hampering. But I suppose that even with these errors, it is still preferable to ploughing through pages of censuses and searching. What it has done is developed in family historians of longer standing a form of techniques to get round the brick walls that poor transcriptions create. So ifor those that do get stuck keep posting your queries, there are many on here willing to help. Brian BInns -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Gould Sent: 04 March 2012 11:13 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation Hi Geraldine, This question crops up surprisingly often.  If you search the Rootsweb archives across all lists, you'll find various possibilities suggested, including a maker of cane chairs and even a woman who carried sedan chairs ! However, my vote goes to the view put forward by Rod Neep, the founder of Archive CD Books, who said, on the Gloucester list on 31st March 1999, the following: For some odd reason "chairwoman" seems to appear in a lot of census transcripts rather than the real (or perhaps it is just the modern variation?) word - charwoman - a woman who cleans the house and does general chores. Best wishes, Mike Gould Leicestershire -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Geraldine Bancroft Sent: 03 March 2012 17:10 To: [email protected] Subject: [LEI] Occupation Hi Listers Over the years I have come across an occupation, usually of widows, given as chairwoman & assumed this was a different spelling of charwoman or a transcription error if the original was not seen.  Is this in fact correct?  If not what is the difference?  Why is this not included in the old occupations lists?  I know this is a minor point but I felt the need to ask after coming across one again today and there is definitely an i in the word. Geraldine ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The problems with transcriptions on both Ancestry and Find my Past, with names, occupations and towns/Counties, is that they were done by people with little or no knowledge of the UK and no experience in Family History. They appear to have been totally unfamiliar with British surnames, with no knowledge of historical occupations, and poor geography to boot. I continue to be totally amazed at the very poor level of mis-transriptions of entries that seems to us Brits as so obvious. It's bad enough having to cope with errors from the enumerators without this additional hampering. But I suppose that even with these errors, it is still preferable to ploughing through pages of censuses and searching. What it has done is developed in family historians of longer standing a form of techniques to get round the brick walls that poor transcriptions create. So ifor those that do get stuck keep posting your queries, there are many on here willing to help. Brian BInns -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Gould Sent: 04 March 2012 11:13 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LEI] Occupation Hi Geraldine, This question crops up surprisingly often. If you search the Rootsweb archives across all lists, you'll find various possibilities suggested, including a maker of cane chairs and even a woman who carried sedan chairs ! However, my vote goes to the view put forward by Rod Neep, the founder of Archive CD Books, who said, on the Gloucester list on 31st March 1999, the following: For some odd reason "chairwoman" seems to appear in a lot of census transcripts rather than the real (or perhaps it is just the modern variation?) word - charwoman - a woman who cleans the house and does general chores. Best wishes, Mike Gould Leicestershire -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Geraldine Bancroft Sent: 03 March 2012 17:10 To: [email protected] Subject: [LEI] Occupation Hi Listers Over the years I have come across an occupation, usually of widows, given as chairwoman & assumed this was a different spelling of charwoman or a transcription error if the original was not seen. Is this in fact correct? If not what is the difference? Why is this not included in the old occupations lists? I know this is a minor point but I felt the need to ask after coming across one again today and there is definitely an i in the word. Geraldine ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12 ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4850 - Release Date: 03/04/12