Another point to remember is that the census takers could write, but the actual level of writing could be in doubt, the occupants themselves could be totally illiterate, and have now idea how their name had been written, or even how it was spelt. My husbands surname of Simpkins, is found a Simkins, Simkin, Simpkin. Simpkins, Sympkin, etc. My BIL said no they could not be our ancestors as our name has a p and a s, until I explained to him the literacy levels in the past. Kay -----Original Message----- From: suffolk-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:suffolk-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of suffolk-request@rootsweb.com Sent: 07 February 2011 09:01 To: suffolk@rootsweb.com Subject: SUFFOLK Digest, Vol 6, Issue 38 Today's Topics: 1. Census errors (John Laflin) 2. Re: Census errors (Nivard Ovington) 3. Re: Census errors (Nivard Ovington) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 16:54:52 -0000 From: "John Laflin" <John@Laflin.force9.co.uk> Subject: [SFK-UK] Census errors To: <SUFFOLK-L@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <EFBD77BE2BB147D6990047B1496A87AC@sl18n94696ucbp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Recent comments on this refer to errors by the Ancestry transcribers. It is important to remember they were not transcribed, but produced by OCR. It is not easy for this software to correctly interpret the 'flowery' Victorian handwriting and of course impossible to make judgments and interpretations on what is written. Hence with my own name. Quite frequently in the original entry, the horizontal stoke across the middle vertical stoke of the letter 'f' extends and cuts across into the vertical stoke of the letter 'l'. Now whereas a human subscriber would recognise this and see an 'l', to the OCR software the 'l' has become a 't'. Hence the name in Ancestry is not Laflin, but Laftin. This occurs quite frequently as a quickly written 'a' can be taken as an 'o' making the entry Loflin' and a flowery L with stokes at the top and bottom turn the Ancestry entry into Saflin. To my knowledge only the 1851 and 1881 census returns have human transcriptions by FHS's and the LDS and are therefore much more reliable. It is also clear the Ancestry and Find my Past use different OCR software, as an 'error' on one can be correctly interpreted on the other. John Laflin ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 17:15:20 -0000 From: "Nivard Ovington" <ovington1@sky.com> Subject: Re: [SFK-UK] Census errors To: <suffolk@rootsweb.com>, <SUFFOLK-L@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <78D59E8622CD416597F4C1DF1E464DC6@claireac3e9bca> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Hi John The census were transcribed by humans for both Ancestry and FMP Many other directories and printed sources were OCRd but the census were not as the OCR software is still not available that could make sense of the many different styles of handwriting This came as a reply to may enquiry to Ancestry some years back And yes FMP and Ancestry use different transcriptions The most widely used transcript is the 1881 which is still used by many even though they have their own images Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > Recent comments on this refer to errors by the Ancestry transcribers. It is > important to remember they were not transcribed, but produced by OCR. It is > not easy for this software to correctly interpret the 'flowery' Victorian > handwriting and of course impossible to make judgments and interpretations > on what is written. > > Hence with my own name. Quite frequently in the original entry, the > horizontal stoke across the middle vertical stoke of the letter 'f' extends > and cuts across into the vertical stoke of the letter 'l'. Now whereas a > human subscriber would recognise this and see an 'l', to the OCR software > the 'l' has become a 't'. Hence the name in Ancestry is not Laflin, but > Laftin. This occurs quite frequently as a quickly written 'a' can be taken > as an 'o' making the entry Loflin' and a flowery L with stokes at the top > and bottom turn the Ancestry entry into Saflin. > > To my knowledge only the 1851 and 1881 census returns have human > transcriptions by FHS's and the LDS and are therefore much more reliable. > > It is also clear the Ancestry and Find my Past use different OCR software, > as an 'error' on one can be correctly interpreted on the other. > > John Laflin ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 17:15:20 -0000 From: "Nivard Ovington" <ovington1@sky.com> Subject: Re: [SFK-UK] Census errors To: <suffolk@rootsweb.com>, <SUFFOLK-L@rootsweb.com> Message-ID: <78D59E8622CD416597F4C1DF1E464DC6@claireac3e9bca> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Hi John The census were transcribed by humans for both Ancestry and FMP Many other directories and printed sources were OCRd but the census were not as the OCR software is still not available that could make sense of the many different styles of handwriting This came as a reply to may enquiry to Ancestry some years back And yes FMP and Ancestry use different transcriptions The most widely used transcript is the 1881 which is still used by many even though they have their own images Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > Recent comments on this refer to errors by the Ancestry transcribers. It is > important to remember they were not transcribed, but produced by OCR. It is > not easy for this software to correctly interpret the 'flowery' Victorian > handwriting and of course impossible to make judgments and interpretations > on what is written. > > Hence with my own name. Quite frequently in the original entry, the > horizontal stoke across the middle vertical stoke of the letter 'f' extends > and cuts across into the vertical stoke of the letter 'l'. Now whereas a > human subscriber would recognise this and see an 'l', to the OCR software > the 'l' has become a 't'. Hence the name in Ancestry is not Laflin, but > Laftin. This occurs quite frequently as a quickly written 'a' can be taken > as an 'o' making the entry Loflin' and a flowery L with stokes at the top > and bottom turn the Ancestry entry into Saflin. > > To my knowledge only the 1851 and 1881 census returns have human > transcriptions by FHS's and the LDS and are therefore much more reliable. > > It is also clear the Ancestry and Find my Past use different OCR software, > as an 'error' on one can be correctly interpreted on the other. > > John Laflin ------------------------------ To contact the SUFFOLK list administrator, send an email to SUFFOLK-admin@rootsweb.com. To post a message to the SUFFOLK mailing list, send an email to SUFFOLK@rootsweb.com. __________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SUFFOLK-request@rootsweb.com with the word "unsubscribe" without the quotes in the subject and the body of the email with no additional text. End of SUFFOLK Digest, Vol 6, Issue 38 **************************************

I recently found an ancestor's name written as Wyllym Brygges in parish records written in the 1500s. Suddenly there were no more events for our Brygges family. However there was a William and Mary having children whose names looked familir, but their name was written as Bridges. But they all checked out with a Will we have at home. I then rechecked the PRs and there had been a change of incumbent - all the entries following the arrival of the new Reverend gentleman were written as Bridges. Pat ... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Simpkins FH" <simpkinsfh@googlemail.com> To: <suffolk@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, February 07, 2011 10:29 AM Subject: Re: [SFK-UK] SUFFOLK Digest, Vol 6, Issue 38 > Another point to remember is that the census takers could write, but the > actual level of writing could be in doubt, the occupants themselves could > be > totally illiterate, and have now idea how their name had been written, or > even how it was spelt. > > My husbands surname of Simpkins, is found a Simkins, Simkin, Simpkin. > Simpkins, Sympkin, etc. My BIL said no they could not be our ancestors > as > our name has a p and a s, until I explained to him the literacy levels in > the past. > > Kay >