Author Topic: This 1841 Census record must be there?  (Read 375 times)

Offline JenB

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,842
    • View Profile
Re: This 1841 Census record must be there?
« Reply #9 on: Thursday 29 November 18 11:33 GMT (UK) »
Many thanks. I did actually just find it when I searched on findmypast under Thomas Light who appears in the FamilySearch record (as Thos) below William. I wonder why William himself isnít indexed on findmypast?

The William who appears in this family group is indexed on FindMyPast as William Light born 1826. The year is correct, as he is shown as 15 on the page. Strictly speaking he should be indexed as Willm.
All Census Look Ups Are Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline Jebber

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,733
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: This 1841 Census record must be there?
« Reply #10 on: Thursday 29 November 18 11:44 GMT (UK) »
Many thanks. I did actually just find it when I searched on findmypast under Thomas Light who appears in the FamilySearch record (as Thos) below William. I wonder why William himself isnít indexed on findmypast?

Dave :)

Perhaps you put in his birth year 1820 exactly, the adult ages were rounded down to the nearest five years, so William is shown as 15, then he doesnít show up in the index.
CHOULES All ,  COKER Harwich Essex & Rochester Kent 
COLE Gt. Oakley, & Lt. Oakley, Essex.
DUNCAN Kent
EVERITT Colchester,† Dovercourt & Harwich Essex
GULLIVER/GULLOFER Fifehead Magdalen Dorset
HORSCROFT Kent.
KING Sturminster Newton, Dorset. MONK Odiham Ham.
SCOTT Wrabness, Essex
WILKINS Stour Provost, Dorset.
WICKHAM All in North Essex.
WICKHAM Medway Towns, Kent from 1880
WICKHAM, Ipswich, Suffolk.

RootsChat is the busiest, largest free family history forum site in the country. It is completely free to use. Register now.
Also register instantly with Facebook or Twitter (and other social networks). Start your genealogy search now.


Offline JenB

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,842
    • View Profile
Re: This 1841 Census record must be there?
« Reply #11 on: Thursday 29 November 18 11:48 GMT (UK) »
FamilySearch gives the census ref: HO107/1074/47/15.

Family Search give the reference in a very confusing way.

An 1841 census reference should always contain (in this order)

Piece number (1074), Book number (7) Folio number (47) Page number (15)
All Census Look Ups Are Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline rosie99

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 27,898
    • View Profile
Re: This 1841 Census record must be there?
« Reply #12 on: Thursday 29 November 18 12:48 GMT (UK) »
Many thanks. I did actually just find it when I searched on findmypast under Thomas Light who appears in the FamilySearch record (as Thos) below William. I wonder why William himself isnít indexed on findmypast?

Dave :)

He is indexed in 1841 - I just searched William Light living Chertsey reg district, the other result was the 3 year old

William Light   1826    Surrey   Chertsey   Chertsey   Surrey
Census information is Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Davedrave

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 251
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: This 1841 Census record must be there?
« Reply #13 on: Thursday 29 November 18 13:29 GMT (UK) »
Many thanks. I did actually just find it when I searched on findmypast under Thomas Light who appears in the FamilySearch record (as Thos) below William. I wonder why William himself isnít indexed on findmypast?

Dave :)

He is indexed in 1841 - I just searched William Light living Chertsey reg district, the other result was the 3 year old

William Light   1826    Surrey   Chertsey   Chertsey   Surrey

Thanks Rosie. For a moment I thought I was not simply losing, but had already totally lost, the plot! In mitigation I will simply say that I was being too specific. I had the baptism date from FamilySearch (1820) and was specifically searching only the 1841 Census data pages, using the broadest age range it seems to allow, +/- 5 years, and it is now clear to me that the date FindMyPast had worked out (1826) was just falling outside my search net. I need to learn to search more broadly, clearly.

Dave :)

Offline JenB

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 12,842
    • View Profile
Re: This 1841 Census record must be there?
« Reply #14 on: Thursday 29 November 18 13:36 GMT (UK) »
it is now clear to me that the date FindMyPast had worked out (1826) was just falling outside my search net.

In fairness to FindMyPast the age given there is exactly the same as that given in the Family Search census entry you quoted in your original posting.
All Census Look Ups Are Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk

Offline Davedrave

  • RootsChat Senior
  • ****
  • Posts: 251
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: This 1841 Census record must be there?
« Reply #15 on: Thursday 29 November 18 15:54 GMT (UK) »
it is now clear to me that the date FindMyPast had worked out (1826) was just falling outside my search net.

In fairness to FindMyPast the age given there is exactly the same as that given in the Family Search census entry you quoted in your original posting.

I didnít notice that maybe because I started with his baptism record and then swapped page to the census. However, you have fortunately just prompted me to revisit FS website and I have now found him in the 1891 Census too, which is great. Thanks.

Dave :)