Family Historian User Group

Another tip to find the other household members.

Once you've found a person in the correct household:
Note the name of the person you've found USE NAME AS DISPLAYED, not what it should be
Note the 'Parish' and 'Registration District'

Click on 'Advanced Search' at the bottom of the page

On the 'Advanced Search' form
Clear out the name completely
Clear out the date of birth

Fill in 'Parish' and 'Registration District'

Go the bottom of the form and fill in 'Other Household Member' using the name as shown on your original search results.

Untick the 'Name Variants' for both names.

Now Search

This should hopefully show you everyone in that household (excluding the one you entered as 'Other Household Member'

Dave Simpson

Thanks for the tip. I did that, but I didn't get back quite what I was expecting. As well as the two other members of the household, it brought up 22 other people (that presumably matched the search criteria). It didn't bring up people in the same house but on a different schedule, though (I didn't expect it to, since the person is not in their household, technically).

Hi

I think that all of the entries returned have a Louisa on their page.
If you look at the image below you will see that I have sorted out each of the families.
Apart from the family headed by Ellen Davies I have resolved all the Louisas. In this case I would re-try the process using a different family member to see if that reduced the results.

Ah yes, that's clever! Thank you.

You have my family correct - the first column - although Frances is mis-transcribed on FMP - it should be Louisa as well!

Thank you Dave aka quarlton, that's a very helpful tip and will save a lot of money!

You're welcome.
So far I've managed to locate nearly 400 relatives, and 90 of them I didn't have before

Yes, I've made a lot of discoveries today too, although nowhere near 400! You must have been busy!

One of the benefits of being retired

Indeed - and dull wet winter days that demand staying indoors.

A note of caution though - with careful cross-referencing I can see how you create household lists, but that’s a long way from demonstrating that they are relatives.

Useful for identifying which known family members were probably present on census night, but a lot more work would be required to establish family links for new names.

I would suggest that you have 90 names to investigate further, not 90 new relatives. How do you know for sure that the starting person was correct if all you have is the index entry? It’s just somebody with the same name born at about the right time. If they are in the same household as other known people with consistent birth dates, that helps build confidence, but how do you distinguish between the right person having new relatives and it being the wrong family all along?

Mark

I am not suggesting that because a group of people are in a household list they should automatically be added to a family.

The household list merely serves as a starting point to verify their relationship, if any. This is no different from any other census. The only piece of real information that we are missing is the Relation to Head, and there are plenty of examples where that is inaccurate in the census.

What I demonstrated above was simply a worked example of how to take the FMP list and break it into households - personally I just note the single household that I am interested in.

Having established that I have found what I believe to be the household that I was looking for, based on the available information, the other members of the household must then be investigated.

My 90 new relatives are the result of investigating the unknown people in a household and establishing their connection.

For example if a couple have 5 entries that lend themselves to being their children, I then research them as normal using the GRO to establish that the parents did in fact have the children listed. Then if there are censuses which I have not found the parents in (not everyone in my tree has been fully explored) I search for the family there and try and establish the connection.

If this cannot be established then they obviously are not added to my tree.

The verification process is no different from using any other census other census, or the 1939 National Register which also does not give Relation to Head.

Most of the new people have been children that I hadn't previously been aware of.

Dave Simpson

Dave Simpson,
You sir are a scholar and a gent. Thanks muchly. A medal is being struck for you at this very moment.

Thanks Dave - looks like you’ve got most of the bases covered. If you haven’t already trawled the GRO birth indexes for a couple’s children, a new census will generate a lot of new leads very quickly.

I’m influenced by my own researches, which often take me to either the big city or small villages, where duplicated names and ages can be a real issue without more evidence to link family groups together.

I’m probably also envious that you’ve been able to do that much new research in the few days since the census was published...