Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Mean_genie

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 112
10
The Common Room / Re: References for censuses
« on: Tuesday 07 December 21 06:08 GMT (UK)  »
The details on census references in The National Archives research guide includes an illustrated example, which will help identify the various elements on a page.

The department and series numbers were assigned when records were deposited in The National Archives (or Public Record Office up to 2003). For census records this was HO (Home Office) until the General Register Office acquired its own designation (RG). Each department is divided into series - from 1861 this is quite logical, with a series for each census, starting with RG 9 for 1861, RG 10 for 1871 etc (1921 will be RG 15 and 1951 will be RG 16). HO 107 covers 1841 and 1851, but references for 1841 also include a book number. This is not the same as an enumeration district number.

Folio numbers were added at the same time as the series numbers, when the records were deposited - this happens to many paper documents, and has nothing to do with filming or scanning.

So a full reference for most census years (1851 to 1901) is Department, Series. Piece, Folio (and page) eg RG 11/4046 folio 44 page 16. The page is useful, but not essential because a folio is only 2 pages.

An example of a reference for 1841, including a book number, would be HO 107/290/19 folio 12 page 2

1911 is in a different format, so the reference for a household is the schedule number, rather than a folio/page number eg RG 14/2408 sch 56

https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/census-records/#11-the-national-archives-references-for-censuses

11
The Common Room / Re: ID tag? WW2?
« on: Tuesday 19 October 21 21:55 BST (UK)  »
If you look in contemporary newspapers, you'll see ads for this kind of thing - wristbands, pendants etc. It made a lot of sense to keep a note of your ID number, in case something happened to your card, and it would be particularly useful for children (who didn't carry their cards) if they were lost. Of course they were also a good way of identifying dead bodies, but that wouldn't be advertised as an big selling point... :-\

12
Family History Beginners Board / Re: Census Piece/Folio numbers
« on: Tuesday 19 October 21 03:34 BST (UK)  »
The National Archives guide explains census piece, folio and page numbers. You can identify the piece number for most parishes by means of an advanced search in their catalogue, Discovery. If you are searching on Ancestry or Findmypast you can use the piece number as a filter when you are searching. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/census-records/#11-the-national-archives-references-for-censuses

13
The Common Room / Re: Digitisation at National Archives
« on: Sunday 03 October 21 19:54 BST (UK)  »
It wouldn't save the document being handled again if only part of it was being copied. I get your point, but the record-copying staff have enough to do as it is without all the extra work that would be involved - there is already a limit on the number of orders they can deal with each day, to avoid a backlog building up.

A lot of images are kept, though. If they have been copied by the Image Library, there are tens of thousands of very hi-res (publication quality images - a friend of mine used a couple of them in a book), so those documents don't need to be re-photographed, and a lot of them are posters or photographs, which need particularly careful handling https://images.nationalarchives.gov.uk/assetbank-nationalarchives/action/viewHome

14
Cheshire / Re: Registation District Altrincham & Runcorn
« on: Sunday 03 October 21 19:02 BST (UK)  »
The 1841 census wasn't organised using the framework of Registration Districts, as later censuses were, it was based on hundreds, in line with the censuses 1801-1831. So strictly speaking, RDs did not exist as census divisions until 1851, although they were retrospectively applied to 1841. In 1851 Altrincham and Runcorn were separate districts, and as the links that arthurk posted to the UKBMD pages, they were created as separate districts right from the start of civil registration.

There was no such district as Altrincham and Runcorn, so it's likely that this was a mistake in the source where Black Sheep saw the information.

15
The Common Room / Re: Digitisation at National Archives
« on: Sunday 03 October 21 18:26 BST (UK)  »
Many document requests are for a page, or a selection of pages, within a file, and not the whole document eg divorce files, naturalisation certificates, and lots of other records that are catalogued in detail, but not digitised. As Guy said, hosting and flagging individual pieces in Discovery would be expensive and time-consuming; trying to do it for odd pages here and there would be insanely impractical!

16
The Common Room / Re: 1939 Register
« on: Thursday 30 September 21 22:27 BST (UK)  »
It sounds like a continuation entry - these are explained in The National Archives 1939 Register guide https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/#8-what-does-it-mean-when-an-entry-is-crossed-out-and-marked-see-page

17
Technical Help / Re: 1939 register address on Ancestry
« on: Sunday 27 December 20 18:56 GMT (UK)  »
The 'out of order' entries on the last few pages of enumeration districts in 1939 are not part of the original enumeration, they are continuation entries - usually with an annotation in red referring to the page where the original entry for that person appears. There's a brief explanation of continuation entries in the 1939 Register guide https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/help-with-your-research/research-guides/1939-register/#8-what-does-it-mean-when-an-entry-is-crossed-out-and-marked-see-page

18
The Common Room / Re: Jackdaw history folders
« on: Friday 15 May 20 01:05 BST (UK)  »
They were brilliant! I had the Shakespeare one

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 ... 112