Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Ancestry 1891...complete (or not)
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Twinkle | Report | 27 Mar 2005 12:54 |
|
I dare say that some pages will have been lost or damaged, but many people are missing on a census because they simply didn't fill it in. Just as people can be shown twice in different houses because they changed location during the evening, so it is possible to completely miss the enumerator altogether. We are also reliant on the enumerator doing his job properly and not giving up because his feet were sore. |
|||
|
Gordon | Report | 27 Mar 2005 00:55 |
|
Martin I totally agree. Ancestry, together with most other research sites, rely on third party sources for their information. It is probably the most widely used and extensive research database available in the UK at the moment, and I use this to good effect all the time. Although they have to show a reasonable return on their investment, it should be made clear to researchers, what is available and what isn't. However, isn't it the thrill of the chase that makes everything worthwhile! Regards Gordon |
|||
|
Martin | Report | 26 Mar 2005 21:30 |
|
It might not be all Ancestry's fault. If you ask at your local record office or the PRO then you will probably get the same answer. Some areas will be missing and some ancestors also seem to have managed to have avoided being included in the census. MB |
|||
Researching: |
|||
|
Gordon | Report | 26 Mar 2005 13:55 |
|
Apologies if thread has been brought up before. Having not been able to trace relatives on the 1891 Ancestry census, I e-mailed them to find out if the coverage was complete. Their reply was that it is incomplete and they are unable to say which areas are not covered, when updates are likely or when the whole project may be completed. I understood from GR members that 1891 was fully indexed, but apparently not. Looks like we'll just have to wait or get down to the local records office! Gordon |
|||