RootsChat.Com

General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Shrop63 on Friday 28 May 21 20:40 BST (UK)

Title: Census remarks
Post by: Shrop63 on Friday 28 May 21 20:40 BST (UK)
Been browsing an 1821 census, and fascinating but odd to see such things as "bastard" "idiot" or "husband gone in madhouse"!
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: Tickettyboo on Saturday 29 May 21 16:08 BST (UK)
You may also be fascinated by this transcript of the 1816 census of Rothbury Parish, I certainly was!

https://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/NBL/Rothbury/Rothbury1816

Boo
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: KGarrad on Saturday 29 May 21 16:14 BST (UK)
"Bastard" was a description of an illegitimate child.
"Idiot" was a person of low intelligence.

I don't see the problem?
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: Tickettyboo on Saturday 29 May 21 16:37 BST (UK)
"Bastard" was a description of an illegitimate child.
"Idiot" was a person of low intelligence.

I don't see the problem?

 I interpreted the original post as saying the poster was fascinated - not that he found a problem understanding the meaning.

I too find it fascinating that what we, from a present day point of view, would see as derogatory terminology was commonplace and acceptable way back then.
Its part and parcel of finding out about the past and how different it sometimes was to what we have experienced.

Boo
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: BumbleB on Saturday 29 May 21 16:49 BST (UK)
Boo - what a fascinating transcript, but I do find it a bit strange in that so much emphasis appears to be placed on the number of bibles and/or prayer books which were in a particular household.  The inhabitants were, obviously, very well educated in 1816.  :-\

As far as "bastard", "idiot" etc were concerned, I think that our ancestors said it as it was.


Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: JenB on Saturday 29 May 21 17:01 BST (UK)
Boo - what a fascinating transcript, but I do find it a bit strange in that so much emphasis appears to be placed on the number of bibles and/or prayer books which were in a particular household. 

That's because it was a Parish census carried out by the Vicar, Reverend L. V. Vernon Harcourt.
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: BumbleB on Saturday 29 May 21 17:10 BST (UK)
Whether it was a parish census or not, I was amazed at the number of bibles/prayer books and (on my part) an assumption that therefore the population in 1816 was so literate, and perhaps, had money available to spend on such items.  Ah! perhaps they were given away by the church.  :-\

Apologies if I'm being too flippant.  :-X
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: Tickettyboo on Saturday 29 May 21 17:11 BST (UK)
Boo - what a fascinating transcript, but I do find it a bit strange in that so much emphasis appears to be placed on the number of bibles and/or prayer books which were in a particular household.  The inhabitants were, obviously, very well educated in 1816.  :-\

As far as "bastard", "idiot" etc were concerned, I think that our ancestors said it as it was.

My understanding is that this was a  'personal census' taken in 1816 by the Reverend
L.V. Vernon Harcourt to record what religious material was in each household within his parish.

As for being well educated, I am unsure, Bibles, Prayer books etc may have been given out by the church, perhaps funded by the local 'gentry' so may have been common - knowing how to read them may have been less common :-)

I've seen a couple of these random parish 'census' or survey, usually done by the Vicar - there was one for Whickham Parish, County Durham in 1835 by the Rev W Gould, which he entitled "Speculum Gregis of Whickham Parish'
He recorded the name of the head of household, whether or not they had a spouse,numbers of children, which school the children went to, where the parents had married, what means of religious instruction were in each home - and some remarks about the members of each household. Again the remarks could be quite scathing, but they are super things to read. and a brilliant insight into the times.
The remark for one of my ancestors was 'drinks often', so there may be something to genetics after all :-)

Boo
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: chris_49 on Saturday 29 May 21 17:30 BST (UK)
You may also be fascinated by this transcript of the 1816 census of Rothbury Parish, I certainly was!

https://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/NBL/Rothbury/Rothbury1816

Boo

Fascinating, Boo. I was puzzled to find some "Whigs" near the end when there had been none beforehand. Turns out it's probably not a political label but (per Wikipedia) referred to Scottish Covenanters - distinct from the mere Presbyterians though they must have been that too.

Incidentally (Wiki again) the term "idiot" was used for the least mentally able, below "imbecile", itself below "moron". Good that we've (mostly) stopped using such terms.
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: BumbleB on Saturday 29 May 21 17:34 BST (UK)
Whatever, it is all fascinating reading and gives us an insight into our ancestors' lives.

I now live in Tamworth, Staffordshire, and at the end of the 18th century there was a vicar here who attached a summary of events at the end of each year when submitting his records.  Very interesting.



Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: brigidmac on Saturday 29 May 21 18:07 BST (UK)
Its wonderful to have pre 1841 census
I read the link
Ive not come across the word hind in this context ...presuming it means works for ...
Does it have a particular meaning like apprentice or servant ?
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: brigidmac on Saturday 29 May 21 18:10 BST (UK)
Just because a family had a bible didnt mean they could read
My grandmother told me that her aunt   taught her husband to read using the bible .it would have been around 1890
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: Tickettyboo on Saturday 29 May 21 18:23 BST (UK)
Its wonderful to have pre 1841 census
I read the link
Ive not come across the word hind in this context ...presuming it means works for ...
Does it have a particular meaning like apprentice or servant ?

As JenB pointed out it wasn't what we would generally class as a "Census' but was limited to the Parish.
A Hind was an agricultural worker, most commonly one who worked with horses.

Boo
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: brigidmac on Saturday 29 May 21 18:36 BST (UK)
Thanks Boo

As for the language i wonder what future generations will think of some of our terms such as bipolar or learning disabilities both horrible tems .
I actually like the term lunatic which originally meant changing with the moon. In french its still used in that sense
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: Tickettyboo on Saturday 29 May 21 18:43 BST (UK)
Thanks Boo

As for the language i wonder what future generations will think of some of our terms such as bipolar or learning disabilities both horrible tems .
I actually like the term lunatic which originally meant changing with the moon. In french its still used in that sense

We all (whatever time period) are limited by the terms which are common at the time.
As knowledge improves new terminology emerges and replaces the old stuff.

Best we can currently say is that those who are being described also now have a 'voice' and have (some) opportunity to say what they would prefer.
Not always taken notice of, sadly,  but it's a good step in the right direction.

Boo
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: markheal on Saturday 29 May 21 19:27 BST (UK)
Its wonderful to have pre 1841 census
I read the link
Ive not come across the word hind in this context ...presuming it means works for ...
Does it have a particular meaning like apprentice or servant ?

"hind"  yes this word was new to me too, but I have not yet finished reading the whole excellent and detailed document.....
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: Maiden Stone on Saturday 29 May 21 20:50 BST (UK)
You may also be fascinated by this transcript of the 1816 census of Rothbury Parish, I certainly was!

https://www.genuki.org.uk/big/eng/NBL/Rothbury/Rothbury1816

Boo

My favourite bits are the elderly joiner who owned a dog with long, silky fur which he cut for making stockings and the woman who moved into a farmhouse and became troubled by a poltergeist.
The parts I disliked were descriptions of:
 A young man with what we would now call "learning difficulties" and who also had physical disabilities. Author called him a "monster".
A woman who may have had a mental illness or a learning difficulty.

Some people were buying bibles in parts. Some Catholics owned New Testaments.

A hind was a farm labourer. My dictionary says that especially in the North it was a married one with a cottage on the farm. Origin is Old English. I think I first came across it in "Ivanhoe". Hinds in that novel, being lower class, were Saxon. There were also hinds as in deer. Some Irish farm labourers had "hind" as occupation on censuses.
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: coombs on Sunday 30 May 21 18:24 BST (UK)
Bocking, Essex has a census for the late 1700s.

Rochford, Essex had an 1811 census and an 1803 count of all able bodied men who could be eligible for military. Remarks such as "3 cows" or "3 dogs" can be seen.
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: Jeuel on Tuesday 01 June 21 11:15 BST (UK)
One poor relative of mine has "bastard" recorded in the occupation column!  Several decades later, the enumerator has kindly described a few-weeks-old baby as a "love child" - but the love child was not my great-great grandfather's, but his daughter's.  (She married the father later).

I also have various people called "feeble minded" or "weak-minded". 

Very un-PC by today's standards!
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: Maiden Stone on Tuesday 01 June 21 14:52 BST (UK)
  Several decades later, the enumerator has kindly described a few-weeks-old baby as a "love child" -

A census enumerator was supposed to transcribe what the householder had written on the census return. "Love child" would have been the term used by the member of the household who completed the form.
One woman's relationship to the head of household on a late 19th century census return in England was "concubine".
Many women in an enumeration district in Manchester had their occupation recorded as "prostitute" on a census. It may have been 1861.

Added: As I don't wish to stigmatise Manchester I should point out that there were women in other towns and cities who had the same occupation. It's just that I found a concentration of them in 1 district, many in 1 street.
I've also seen "brothel keeper" as occupation for head of household, often in combination with "lodging-house keeper".
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: coombs on Tuesday 01 June 21 15:25 BST (UK)
Someone in Dennington, Suffolk was enumerated in 1851, but a remark on the census page was "died April 2nd". So the papers were collected a couple or so days after 31 March.

In 1871 though, my ancestors neighbours in St Pancras, London gave very vague info on the census, just initials for first names and "England" for birthplaces.
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: venelow on Tuesday 01 June 21 17:10 BST (UK)
I looked at a village census where there were several families with wives described in the occupation column as "Concubine". 

I think the enumerator was expressing his views on people living "in sin" without benefit of clergy. I wish I could remember which village it was now.

Venelow
Canada
Title: Re: Census remarks
Post by: BumbleB on Tuesday 01 June 21 17:21 BST (UK)
Perhaps we should all bear in mind that these remarks were written AT THAT TIME.  For us in the 21st century to pass judgement is perhaps wrong.  :-\ 

We can't change history - it was what it was - although I think there are those who would like to.  :-X