RootsChat.Com

General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: heywood on Saturday 28 July 07 10:20 BST (UK)

Title: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: heywood on Saturday 28 July 07 10:20 BST (UK)
Over the last few days a few of us have been frantically searching for a possible surname Jude and I came across the surname Ida in the same area.
Ha! ha! - we delvers and diggers might think-a possible mistranscription.

Thomas Benn - wife and children Ida.

The enumerator had written /do to ditto the rest of the family- transcriber thought they were the Ida family.   ;D

As if it isn't difficult enough.

cheers everyone
heywood

Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: cloggers child on Saturday 28 July 07 10:38 BST (UK)
Another reason why there were so many errors in the 1901 census.  the documents were sent to India and Pakistan to be transcribed. after it had been farmed out to the Prison Service for the prisoners to transcribe that is and they couldn't cope with it.

It is difficult enough for people who have lived here all their lives without they having to cope with a language they have never seen written down in those earlier times.   ie. accents, dialects and misinterpretations by enumerators who in some cases were barely more literate than the people they were taking the information from.
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: Lady Di on Sunday 29 July 07 09:00 BST (UK)
I have just found a new name to add to my tree. The family name is "DO" or "DOO" - rather unusual but can you imagine just how many transcription errors have occurred where they have written the surname as "DO" instead of using the original name (when "ditto" was written)

I agree, it's hard enough without the bad transcriptions  ::)


Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: patrish on Wednesday 01 August 07 22:05 BST (UK)
My own personal best blooper is Caroline transcribed a Pardon  :o
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: Cathymjp on Wednesday 08 August 07 18:41 BST (UK)
The latest one I have found is Clara transcribed as Orea.

Cathy  ;D
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: carol8353 on Friday 10 August 07 12:00 BST (UK)
My own personal best blooper is Caroline transcribed a Pardon  :o

Not only couldn't they read it properly,they obviously couldn't hear it either  ;D

Hence............pardon?

LOL

Carol
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: Bee on Sunday 12 August 07 13:20 BST (UK)
and if anyone is searching for a 50 year old policeman in Norfolk on the 1841 census called James Blanchflower, he is transcribed as James Blanch Howes ::)

Bee :)
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: Beth86 on Sunday 12 August 07 19:12 BST (UK)
There have been so many mis transcriptions in my hunt!

To name a few

Bruice and Brice instead of Bruce
Bacol instead of Jacob
Rollay and Roly instead of Foley

Still got a long road ahead of me!
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: Stumped! on Sunday 12 August 07 19:43 BST (UK)
I've just found a few people on the 1851 born in Thry, Shropshire. I think it should be Shrewsbury. HO107/1992/470/14
Peter
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: scruffypup on Monday 13 August 07 17:34 BST (UK)
Hi guys

No wonder my hair is starting to fall out searching for the Bonallie family;D  All these mis transcriptions around, I've had the DO problem,and I've come across Bonello, Boneller, Bonella to name but a few and thats before Sunderland BMD get round to sorting out births and deaths as well as marriages.  I found my 3 x great grandfather in 1841 living with his father in Scotland who was William Bonellie, instead of showing Alexander Bonallie on the same page same address I found a N K (not known, male for the right age) and figured out that's why I'd never found him, he moved to Sunderland shortly afterwards but as he was at sea in 1851 and 1871 he is missing again from the census.

All good stuff this family history searching isn't it :'(

Yours Julie
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: forthefamily on Monday 13 August 07 18:10 BST (UK)
When I was looking for the name Tate/Tait name I found Sale, Tale, Fate, and on and on...  :P

Then I thought that I had found new relatives I didn't know about but it turned out to be the people in the next house. They had been included in my family's census recap by the transcriber on Ancestry. So if anyone is looking for Woolley or Woosley in 1891 in Liverpool I know where they are.

Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: rubyrose on Monday 13 August 07 18:11 BST (UK)
How about this one, searching today for a relative in Thornaby on Tees, I came across someone born in 'Thom to be Beans' - mistranscribed from Thornton Le Beans. Sounds like a cruel and unusual torture!

Ruby
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: ccr on Tuesday 14 August 07 01:37 BST (UK)
I think the best ones are in the Scottish Census  transcripts wher I have several brilliant ancestors who were Doctors age 3 and 5.  Transcriber obviously thought that was what Dr stood for
Chris.
In case you are wondering ---of course it's the short form for duaghter on sme enumerators script!
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: g a r on Tuesday 14 August 07 05:05 BST (UK)
not a mistranscription but a howler for me

1841

Dr Perfect

Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: Paul Caswell on Sunday 19 August 07 14:06 BST (UK)
Then there's the slight blemishes that contribute to the mistake. This is my third gt grandfather John Turner. He has been transcribed as John Seviner.

Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: crystal lady on Sunday 19 August 07 14:35 BST (UK)
My best one to date happened today.  I've spent weeks trying to find ggfather William and today have finally been lucky and found him mis-transcribed as Warwick, the original census clearly shows Wm - shortened form of William.  Oh well, it keeps our little grey cells active!!
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: Lydart on Sunday 19 August 07 17:55 BST (UK)
My best (or worst !) to date was Friggle ... (don't look it up in the online dictionary, PLEASE !) ... and I discovered with the aid of a RootsChatter that it should have been Triggle (alternately Trygel)
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: aghadowey on Sunday 19 August 07 18:14 BST (UK)
Just finished Ancestry 3 dau free offer and got loads of new information but some of it was not easily found, even when I already had name, birthdates & places of people I was searching for. My great-grandmother was FELD and couldn't find some of her brothers and nephews, even tried Field, but eventually found them under Filt, Fred, etc.
All quite clearly written. Ended up searching for lots of people with first name, birthplace and approx. date.
Found one nephew with wife and daughter 3 times in 1930 census (wonder if that's a record?) and one brother and family I cannot locate in 1930 even though I know where they lived.
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: forthefamily on Sunday 19 August 07 18:23 BST (UK)
Actually, I find Ancestry to be hilarious sometimes. I was looking for someone and I came upon a man called James and his relationship to the head of household was given as "sister"? So I took a look and he was a "visitor".

And, yes I have found one person (a child) who was on the census twice but in different places. Once as a visitor (grandparents house) and again as a daughter. I guess her parents included her as being part of the household even when she wasn't there.
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: aghadowey on Sunday 19 August 07 19:22 BST (UK)
And, yes I have found one person (a child) who was on the census twice but in different places. Once as a visitor (grandparents house) and again as a daughter. I guess her parents included her as being part of the household even when she wasn't there.
My grandmother was also listed twice in 1900 census with parents and again with her grandparents but her cousin 3 times in one census was a surprise.
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: MaureeninNY on Sunday 19 August 07 19:32 BST (UK)
 This one isn't even funny.
1861 Ancestry
Maria LAWSON age 45
Civil Parish:
Leicester St Margaret
Birthplace is given as:
Ermey Barracks On Jew Miles Gran Wales The Batting Water For Was Fought
RG9/ 2291  11  16
 The image is fairly clear-(although I'm a bit hazy on the first word)-? barracks a few miles from where the Battle of Waterloo was fought

Maureen
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: forthefamily on Sunday 19 August 07 20:10 BST (UK)
Maureen. I had a look. That is ridiculous. Do you think the first word might be "enemy"? Wasn't the battle of Waterloo fought in Belgium?
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: MaureeninNY on Sunday 19 August 07 21:34 BST (UK)
Yes,I do think it says enemy. Just didn't want to add insult to injury in case I was wrong. :)
 That woman seemed so proud of where she was born- and to have it mangled like that :(

Maureen
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: mshrmh on Sunday 19 August 07 21:41 BST (UK)
Not really a mistranscription in the conventional sense, but last week using the 3day free trial (thank you to those who posted the details) I kept coming across MacClesfield (the Cheshire town must have Scottish links at Ancestry). Also Wincle (also in Cheshire) came out as Winkle on one.
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: AnneMc on Sunday 19 August 07 22:03 BST (UK)
Hi;

Spent the last couple of days trying to find the family of William and Annie Elizabeth Parker living in Wombwell, Yks on the 1901 census... Finally just before supper I finally found them.. With the surname of NURKER.  Check the census page and it is clearly written as Parker.. Also there daughter Ada was listed as age 2 on the index put when you look at the page is shows age 20.


Cheers
Anne
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: eagleye on Sunday 19 August 07 22:19 BST (UK)
Crikey!!

All my census info has been found on Ancestry by you stars on Rootschat, I've never seen the original images!  Makes me wonder how many mistranscriptions there are from image to entry! 

Missed the 3 day free trial so can't now check.  Blast it!
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: BettyofKent on Sunday 19 August 07 22:31 BST (UK)
The 3 days free is still on. I've had mine, so sent the link to my OH's laptop, signed up in his name & I've just started another 3 days. Bang goes another week of not getting anything done away from the computer ;D

Betty



Missed the 3 day free trial so can't now check.  Blast it!
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: eagleye on Sunday 19 August 07 22:35 BST (UK)
Wow, thanks Betty.  Off to check it all right now!
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: Lancsliz on Friday 31 August 07 19:43 BST (UK)
I was looking through the census for the Chapman family when just by chance I saw Anny Chapman - Boy! but when I looked at the original it was the person I was looking for Harry.
I also have the Beaumont surname in my tree called Beamont, I always check the original now just to be sure. :)
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: Jean McGurn on Saturday 01 September 07 08:24 BST (UK)
I think one of the commonest mistakes made by transcribers is the old fashioned way the letter r is written as when joined up with other letters will look like the letter n.

I have  recollections of when I was a child in the late 1940's using a lined writing book. It had lines on it that looked a bit like music lines.

I was made to spend hours practising writing the letters of the alphabet  and the letter r that was used in the 19c was exactly like the one shown on Pauls census example.

Jean

 
Title: Re: another Ancestry transcription cracker!
Post by: lesleyhannah on Saturday 01 September 07 09:03 BST (UK)
I think the message that's coming across is that there's no substitute for local knowledge!

My favourite enumerator's mistake was to put  the birthplace of my Northants family as St Joyles. Their accent probably made St Giles sound like that - and presumably the enumerator wasn't from that area.  But if the enumerators on the spot couldn't get it right, how on earth can people on the other side of the world manage?

As a matter of interest, who is transcribing the 1911 census?