Author Topic: SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus  (Read 1322 times)

Offline gaffy

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,315
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus
« on: Saturday 27 January 18 15:04 GMT (UK) »
Might seem a silly question, but in case someone already knows the answer and can avoid nugatory effort on my part...

The forename SeŠn/Sean appeared only 150 times in the 1911 Ireland census, almost exclusively with Irish surnames.  And searching for the same forename brings back no 'hits' in the 1901 Ireland census. And yes, there were a few 'Shauns' and 'Shawns', but the number isn't material.

Likewise the forename Sťamus/Seamus appeared only 330 times in the 1911 Ireland census, with a mere 7 'hits' in 1901.

I'm surprised how few occurrences there were in 1911 and baffled by the 1901 results. Am I doing something wrong in my search?  If not, my next question is...  Why? 

I could find no ready answer on the internet. I could start tracking back the 1911 folk to 1901 to see what they're called, but as I said, I'm hoping someone already has an answer...


Offline athacliath62

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 444
  • Dublin
    • View Profile
Re: SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus
« Reply #1 on: Saturday 27 January 18 15:13 GMT (UK) »
I'd suggest looking for John and James instead

Offline gaffy

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,315
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus
« Reply #2 on: Saturday 27 January 18 15:16 GMT (UK) »

I'd suggest looking for John and James instead


But why so few SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus in the first place?

And why would the few in 1911 be called John and James in 1901?



Offline athacliath62

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 444
  • Dublin
    • View Profile
Re: SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus
« Reply #3 on: Saturday 27 January 18 15:20 GMT (UK) »
dont think you see many births marriages or deaths at that time as Sťan or Sťamus either, but at least some could have been known as the Irish version of their names.

Offline athacliath62

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 444
  • Dublin
    • View Profile
Re: SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus
« Reply #4 on: Saturday 27 January 18 15:23 GMT (UK) »
I see just 11 births registered as Sean (none as Sťan) between 1890 and 1911

Offline heywood

  • RootsChat Honorary
  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 35,250
    • View Profile
Census Information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Sinann

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 10,250
    • View Profile
Re: SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus
« Reply #6 on: Saturday 27 January 18 16:13 GMT (UK) »
This might help explain it

https://www.irishfamilyhistorycentre.com/article/the-irish-language-and-the-1901-and-1911-irish-censuses



That's what I was going to say, the Gaelic Revival, apart from first names it's also when the Mc and O begin to return to the surnames.

Offline josey

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,511
    • View Profile
Re: SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus
« Reply #7 on: Saturday 27 January 18 16:31 GMT (UK) »
I agree; I have done a lot of transcribing of Ireland BMDs from the 1860s - 1890s. Virtually all had Anglicised names. All the people in my tree from Ireland born 1800 - 1940 have Anglicised names too.
Seeking: RC baptism Philip Murray Feb ish 1814 ? nr Chatham Kent.
IRE: Kik DRAY[EA], PURCELL, WHITE: Mea LYNCH: Tip MURRAY, SHEEDY: Wem ALLEN, ENGLISHBY; Dub PENROSE: Lim DUNN[E], FRAWLEY, WILLIAMS.
87th Regiment RIF: MURRAY
ENG; Marylebone HAYTER, TROU[W]SDALE, WILLIAMS,DUNEVAN Con HAMPTON, TREMELLING Wry CLEGG, HOLLAND, HORSEFIELD Coventry McGINTY
CAN; Halifax & Pictou: HOLLAND, WHITE, WILLIAMSON

Offline gaffy

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,315
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: SeŠn/Sean and Sťamus/Seamus
« Reply #8 on: Saturday 27 January 18 21:24 GMT (UK) »
Thank you for the link heywood and thanks to everyone, that's been helpful.