Genealogy Chat

Just a thought - did you get the original image for the household, or are you relying on the transcription? I have already found one household where the transcriber has copied the same surname down for every resident, even though on the actual image the names are clearly different. Therefore, if you only have the transcription I would suggest that you also get the image in this case.

good luck Maisy - let us know if you find them AGAIN (hopefully happily married with their husbands) lol

Maisy, just a thought but I'm sure I read somewhere that couples had to state how many children they had & how many had survived infancy. This led to some confusion where the person who completed the form named deceased children & gave their age as it would have been if they had survived.
Perhaps your female relatives were the subject of similar confusion, suggest that if you do know their married name you search for them under that name also

Secret Red Squirrel - that's a good point, perhaps they did just put them down as their children. I'm going to have another look and see if I might find them living elsewhere.

Thanks for replying

Maisy

It's a bit strange that both are married but are staying at their parents without their husbands & their maiden names are listed. (Not impossible just strange)

My Scottish ancestors were living with their husbands and were listed as their wives even though they still had their maiden names. They were definitely married (as per marriage certs etc) This was useful as you were given their maiden names.

In your case, it would have been easier to have been listed under their married names if they were staying with their parents. However, I'm just wondering whether the head of the household listed them because they were his children but perhaps they weren't in the household that night. Perhaps his daughters were living with their husbands elsewhere on census night. I know it's a long shot but you never know.

One of my English ancestors listed his son Edmund even though he had died several years before. His name was crossed out however, it was a vital clue as I never knew he existed.

All the best of luck.

Please don't confuse matters, I'm confused enough wondering whether they are connected to my family or not!

All the children that are listed on the 1911 census are also on the 1901 . The sons never married but according to the census these daughters are. I know one married the lodger from the 1901 but I guess I'll need to check and see if I can find the other one.

Thanks for your replies.

Maisy

They could have married cousins who had the same name as themselves.

Kath. x

I was hoping that I might find the names of their husbands but it hasn't helped much at all.

It has happened a few times with my Scottish ancestors - it seemed quite a common practice as it happened on several branches. However, it has never happened with my English relatives so far.

I've found a family on the census and there are 2 daughters who are married but still have their maiden names. Any ideas why this might be?

Thanks
Maisy