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
Where did they sleep at night?
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Tillot | Report | 16 Feb 2005 21:53 |
|
See below |
|||
|
Tillot | Report | 16 Feb 2005 21:57 |
|
I've always thought, if a child is listed on the census' as being with their grandparents, that they actually live with them full time. I don't suppose it does mean that though, could they just be visiting? I have found quite a few of mine that stay with their grandparents until they marry. Do you think this means they always lived with them? I have just found another one. She is living with grandparents, aged 6, (in 1871) and also again with them, aged 16 (in 1881) Her mother however, is living within the same village with younger children? What do you think? Was she just visiting everytime the census was taken? Sorry to ramble on! |
|||
|
Twinkle | Report | 16 Feb 2005 22:04 |
|
If they were visiting, they should have been listed as 'visitor' but that wasn't always the case. I have some where the visitors' biological relationship to the head is written in brackets. It depends what the enumerator asked and chose to record. It wasn't unusual for large families to send children to live with nearby relatives, if there wasn't enough space or food. Elderly grandparents would also benefit by having someone able-bodied to bring in money. |
|||
|
Peter | Report | 16 Feb 2005 22:05 |
|
It is only people in the house on the day of the Census so a viseter is counted if there even if living some were else. But with yours I would say that they did live in the house. and the reson is the size of the family home. If Mum and Dad were in a small Tythed cottage and had a large family then the best sollution was to ship them to the Grand perants. |
|||
|
Unknown | Report | 16 Feb 2005 22:07 |
|
Bearing in mind that the census just gives us a 1 night snapshot of a family every 10 years it is hard to come to a conclusion. I have an instance where the 2 younguns were the only ones listed as being at home on the census night. One could postulate any number of theories. It doesn't imply that they lived alone. I am sure you will find out though, Good hunting, Jim |
|||
|
Tillot | Report | 16 Feb 2005 22:14 |
|
Thanks for the replies. I can't help feel sorry for those children that were 'shipped' out to grandparents, away from their mothers. Saying that though, they probably had a better life, ate better etc. Thanks again :) |
|||
|
Maureen | Report | 16 Feb 2005 22:18 |
|
I also have children listed with their grandparents. In one case their mother had just had a new baby and was probably glad to get a bit of a rest! In another the mother had actually died in childbirth and it appears from census records that the child was being brought up by his grandparents. |
|||
|
An Olde Crone | Report | 17 Feb 2005 00:09 |
|
My mother, born in the early 1920s, lived in a one-up one down. The neighbours had a family of thirteen children and when I asked where on earth they all slept it appears that the four oldest lads slept in the house of an elderly childless neighbour - bit of pin money for her and a bit more room in the family home. Believe this was quite a common custom and did not signify that the parents didnt love/want them, it was purely to do with bedspace. Marjorie |
|||