Is this census handwriting scenario plausible?

[Mart 'n' Al]

Recently I've been researching a family history and in 1891 I find a great great grandfather, James, living with somebody quite definitely called Rebecca, when we expected him to be living with his wife Barbara. I can't find any other record of Rebecca apart from on the 1891 census. I've come up with the theory that when the census man filled in the details of James and his family he was copying the details from a piece of paper left for him for that purpose while the ancestors had gone to the pub. (Probably the Black Lion in Hammersmith). My theory is that somebody, probably James, wrote Barbara but it was misread as Rebecca.

The age and birthplace  are correct for Barbara.  If he DID remarry, it seems unlikely that these details would match for 'Rebecca'.  I've tried writing Barbara and Rebecca so that they could be misread as each other, and, although I am not at all artistic, I have managed to convince myself that this might be what happened.  I'm not talking about a clever illusion, just a hastily scribbled name.

Martin

[stanmapstone]

The enumerator entered the details from the Householder's Schedule filled in by the householder, not a piece of paper.It is quite possible that the enumerator made a mistake.

The census schedules were collected on the Monday.
Stan

[Mart 'n' Al]

Thanks again Stan.  I wonder if GG GF James had his mind elsewhere while completing the form, or if his writing was at fault, or if the taker was wrong!  'Rebecca' has caused me a lot of frustration, but my theory seems quite plausible, but 'quite plausible' isn't good enough for me.  But it's either my theory, or else he did remarry at almost 70 to someone of the same age and birthplace as his late wife.  (Less plausible.)

Martin

[Rattus]

Seems plausible to me; clearly not definitive, but the most likely scenario in the absence of conflicting information. As to the lesser plausibility of a theoretical re-marriage matching the age/birthplace of his first wife, I would make a judgement based on context. In a close-knit village environment where everyone stays put, this is more possible; in other (urban?) situations, maybe less so.

[Greensleeves]

I think it's quite possible that 'Barbara' could be mistaken for 'Rebecca' by someone in a hurry, particularly if the initial B had not been properly closed at the bottom.  The enumerator might then see an R and then later a 'b' and finally an 'a' so would probably take a guess at it being ReBeccA rather than BarBarA.  Must have been a busy time so a I think a lot of guesses were made when handwriting was difficult to read. 

Coincidentally I was working on a branch of my tree yesterday where the woman's name was Lamanie, but it was never spelled properly in any of the censuses when she was a child, and only appeared in its correct form when she was an adult when she was in service in 1871 and then married in the 1891, 1901 and 1911 censuses.  But what made me feel very sad last night was that even on her headstone they got it wrong and she is called Lemone..... so even her children weren't sure what her name was!

Regards
GS

[StevieSteve]

Have you got Barbara's death?

While I'm sure we've all seen census errors and mixups, I do think that the first line of inquiry should be to treat an entry as accurate rather than try to fit it into what you want/expect it should be.

PS Always used to prefer the Old Ship myself

[Mart 'n' Al]

Stevie, I have a very likely BMD entry for her in the 1890s, in the right area, soon after a similar likely entry for her husband.  I can find no record of a marriage to Rebecca, and no further evidence of her.

I agree with your comments, but the whole thing is a bit off-topic for my research, so I can't justify paying for two death certs.  I'm just very curious, but not "£20 curious".

They lived in Black Lion Lion!

Martin

[CarolA3]

I agree with your comments, but the whole thing is a bit off-topic for my research, so I can't justify paying for two death certs.  I'm just very curious, but not "£20 curious".

Would you be "£12 curious" though?  GRO's pilot scheme for births and deaths at £6 per PDF runs until July, if you can provide their reference.

Carol

[Chilternbirder]

Considering some of the transcription errors in Ancestry I can't imagine that those made by the enumerator would be perfect.