* Census and how it Supports Birth facts

[David Potter]

Hi Forum

I'm seeking opinions on how well Census data supports Birth facts in general genealogy terms and within FH. And hopefully glean some ideas on how best to handle the subject using FH.

Background
The Birth Fact in FH is geared towards recording Who, When and Where and optionally (albeit wise to do so); use Source/Citations to substantiate the fact data. And as we know not all pieces of this data apart from Who are available when researching. Using the 1841 UK Census as an example. Who we have, and if we sure we have the right census an easy win. When and Where is more tricky. Ages are +/- 5 years I believe; and Where born amounts to born in same County Y/N. All rather sketchy.
Subsequent Census can conflict with Where born being reported differently, ages again can differ quite remarkably.

Question/Discussion
If we take the Event (Fact) that a person was born, regardless of When and Where, is it best practice to Cite each and every Census towards the Birth fact, or is it common practice to not do this. Or maybe not Cite the 1841 UK census, but use any others deemed valid?

Opinions and suggestions very welcome.

Kind regards

David Potter

[David Potter]

Setting reply option - please ignore this post.

[tatewise]

Yes, that is a good overview.
Actually in the 1841 census, the age of persons over 15 was supposed to be rounded down to the nearest multiple of 5. For example, a person aged 19 would be listed as 15, a person aged 22 would be listed as age 20, and a person age 59 would be listed as 55. So children should have their actual age and older ages rounded down, but that was not universally applied. I have seen ages recorded as 19, 22 & 59, etc.

This is one of those questions where the answer depends on how rigorous you wish to be, but whatever you do be consistent.

I cite all the Census records against one Birth Event with Notes explaining any unusual circumstances.
It is the accumulation of those 'unreliable' records that allows a consensus to be decided upon regarding who, when & where, until a more concrete Birth Certificate or Baptism Record can be found.

Ancestral Sources offers the option of revising the Birth Event and citing each Census for exactly those reasons.

[David Potter]

Thank you Mike

That was exactly what I wanted to hear. Fully support that and thanks very much for explaining the semantics around 1841

[Valkrider]

David

I record all as birth citations regardless of what the individual census say, likewise I also record any other citations that mention birth / age / place as well as it can hopefully build up a more accurate picture. If you don't record all you could make a mistake as to the birth details. We end up usually dealing with a balance of probabilities and that needs as much evidence as possible imho to determine the most likely date and place of the event.

[David Potter]

Thank you Colin

A good consensus of opinion forming - please excuse the subtle pun

[tatewise]

Maybe you didn't notice but I got my 'consensus' in first

[David Potter]

Yes - I see it now. I'll give you the credit for that. Maybe one of those subliminal moments on my part.

[AdrianBruce]

I will also cite each census against the birth, along with all other sources that give an age.

What I also do is record the age and birthplace in the Text-From-Source so that I get a visible stack of place-names - such as "Crewe Green", "Haslington", "Haslington", "Haslingden" - which sample list would suggest to me that I could ignore the "Haslingden" as an error for "Haslington", while I also happen to know that Crewe Green and Haslington are adjacent.

This also gives a possible way of keeping a track of birth date data, though actually I go a step further and record the deduction in the relevant Note in the yellow source pane. The sequence might read 1830-1834, 1833, 1834, 1833, suggesting reasonable consensus (yup, me too) on the date.

[David Potter]

Thank you Adrian

Yes - I see how that could work to keep discrepancies documented. I have a clean up task now to attach all my AS created Census Sources records to all of the related Birth records in that Census. No small task.

Many thanks all.

[tatewise]

I presume that task is necessary, because you turned off the AS option to do that for you, or did not review it?

If so, make sure you turn the option back on for the future.
Tools > Options > Census settings > Birth Facts > Create citation for existing births

[David Potter]

Hi Mike

Yes correct, I have re-enabled it now. Thanks for the reminder.

[David Potter]

Hi Guys

May I expand on this general concept of using Census to Cite all Birth Facts of those recorded in the Census. What would you do with say Baptism. This supports the Individual birth record, but not the parents - correct?

I mean it confirms their existence but would you take it far enough to Cite the Baptism against the parents Birth event?

Getting deep here and sorry for that; but since moving away from TMG where I made a mess of things unknowingly - I want to adopt best practice in FH.

Thanks in advance.

[Valkrider]

David

Unless the baptism of the child mentions the age of the parents how can you estimate their (the parents) birth date?

I certainly cite the baptism against the parents names and any other life time events that are confirmed by the baptism record, fathers occupation, parents residence etc.

[Gowermick]

David,
I only cite baptisms for bith date, when it specifically mentions it. Otherwise you may be leading yourself up the garden path. Many, many children were baptised years after the were born. Quite often with their siblings in one great ceremony. By all means use it to cite their names and where they were born, but personally I wouldn't use if for births.

[David Potter]

Hi Colin and Mike

Thank you very much for the very useful pointers. Your comments have made a big difference to my intended approach and how I setup AS for Baptism's.

I was baptised at age 24 so I get what you mean about not deducing the birth from the Baptism.

@ Mike One question - how would I cite the baptism if it provides place of birth but not age without using the Birth fact to handle this? Would you just leave the date blank?

[Gowermick]

David,
IMHO, a baptism provides evidence of where someone was living at the time of the baptism, NOT where they were born! Thus I think one can safely ignore using baptism citation for date and place of birth.
In saying that, there is nothing to stop you using it if you so wish, especially if date and place of the baptism coincides with date and place of birth, obtained from other sources.

[David Potter]

Hi Mike

Thanks again for your reply. And yes I understand I can of course do as I wish, but I'm trying to pick up good habits and best practice from you experts. Picking up on your quote - particularly the part below.

By all means use it to cite their names and where they were born, but personally I wouldn't use if for births.

If the info provided from the baptism is reliable as to where born but not when, how do you record where they were born without using a birth fact, do you use a residence fact for this? Or use the birth fact to hold the place but no date?

Thanks again.

[Gowermick]

David,
I may have misled you, as looking back, my comments were really aimed at post 1837, when GRO and Censuses provide the evidence for births (which of course everyone must have).

Pre 1837, before GRO records and censuses, one relies more and more on church records and a baptism is usually the only evidence we have of where and when the birth took place, so of course one uses the baptism citation for both baptism and birth, as we have no other evidence to back up the birth!

Sorry for any confusion

[David Potter]

Hi Mike

No problem and thanks for the quick reply - I hadn't started stripping out those Baptism citations from the birth records so all is good.

[David Potter]

Hi Folks

I have finished attaching Census Source Citations to all Birth Facts. A lengthy but worthwhile process I can see now.

Is it possible to query if I have missed any Birth records during this correction process?

[tatewise]

It is probably not too difficult to Query if each Birth Event has at least one Census Source Citation only if there is a Census Event with a Census Source Citation. The complication is the multiple instances involved, i.e. the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc, Citation on the Birth Event must be tested to be a Census Source Citation, and the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc, Census Event must be tested to have a Census Source Citation.

But to fully check that each Birth Event has same number of Census Source Citations as there are Census Events with a Census Source Citation, then that is extremely difficult if not impossible, and would need a Plugin to build & check that profile of statistics.

[David Potter]

Hi Mike

I see - I didn't realise how complex this could become. Thank you for the quick reply.

[David Potter]

Hi All those who contributed to this thread... Thank you once again

Last question if I may. Again looking for best practice approach but now considering Burial info.

My thoughts:
The Burial event does not support the Birth fact from a Source/Citation point of view, unless age at Burial is mentioned AND reasonably agrees with the Year of Birth.

So unless the above is true the Burial should not be cited against the Birth.

Comments/Opinions most welcome...

BR

David

[Valkrider]

David

I go back to what I said earlier if in this case the burial adds, confirms or calls into question another lifetime event data I always cite it against that lifetime event. What this helps to do, imho, is to firm up my thinking on which of the citations for that lifetime event are correct. There is a saying "You can never have too much information" and I think this holds true for any genealogical research.

However, you may not agree with this approach, everyone does research differently. The key thing is to be consistent in how you record your data so that you can review it properly later if you need to challenge previous conclusion.