1939 Register question

[Andy J2022]

It wasn't a census in 1939 - it was the 1939 National Register.

If we are being pedantic, it was a census, in the sense that a census is a government mandated count of the population. Arguably it provides more information than the 1841 census. However I would agree that it needs to be distinguished from the decennial counts we normally associate with the word census when discussing such matters among genealogists/family historians since we like to be punctilious when citing our sources

[KGarrad]

The National Archives themselves have this to say:

While the 1939 Register is not a census, it is arranged along similar lines and includes similar, if less detailed, information. It does, however, show exact dates of birth where census returns simply give a person’s age.

Taken from: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/ (point 3)

[Guy Etchells]

It wasn't a census in 1939 - it was the 1939 National Register.

If we are being pedantic, it was a census, in the sense that a census is a government mandated count of the population. Arguably it provides more information than the 1841 census. However I would agree that it needs to be distinguished from the decennial counts we normally associate with the word census when discussing such matters among genealogists/family historians since we like to be punctilious when citing our sources

No if we are being pedantic it is not a census as it was taken under seperate legislation i.e. The 1939 National Registration Act rather than under the Census Act 1920 (the act that covers all census taken after 1920.)
Cheers
Guy
PS see
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~framland/genealogy/acts/1920%20Census%20Act.htm
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~framland/genealogy/acts/1939%20Registration.htm

[Guy Etchells]

Deleted

[J.R.Ellam]

It is a register and not a census it does not give relationships or place of birth, even the 1841 census indicated if they are born in the County.

John

[Jebber]

It was not a count of the population because, except with a few exceptions, it did not include members of the armed forces.

[Jon_ni]

It was not a count of the population because, except with a few exceptions, it did not include members of the armed forces

Members of the Armed forces were in fact 'enumerated' but in a separate Register held by the MOD.
"There are two supplemental paper registers which are not available to the public. One covers those on duty in the armed forces, for example soldiers at an army barracks. The other covers those born after 29th September 1939 and before the paper register ended in 1951."
https://www.whitehousefhc.org/1939%20REGISTER%20160402.doc
The National Archives say "Registration of members of the armed forces was dealt with by the military authorities, so the 1939 Register does not include service personnel in military, naval and air force establishments."

So if applying the criteria of "The census is a head count of everyone in the country on a given day." it may well tick that box, although we cannot see those names. Many by 29 Sep 1939 were already abroad serving but only the 1911 and 1921 had enumerated those serving overseas in the Army. When you think about it as it served as the basis of the 1948 National Health Service (NHS) Register all those men + nurses etc had to have then or be allocated later a code number too.
https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/census-records/