'Xow'

[yeahyeah121212]

The last part looks like the mark for ditto so maybe something else Hill?

Is it written again down the page or on the next page similar?

Neither

[Ruskie]

number of rooms = 4

Addresses:
Ashford Hill
Absent do.

The "do" dittos the entry above, so Absent Hill looks like the address. No idea if there was such a place.

Which census is this from?

[yeahyeah121212]

number of rooms = 4

Addresses:
Ashford Hill
Absent do.

The "do" dittos the entry above, so Absent Hill looks like the address. No idea if there was such a place.

Which census is this from?

Thank you,

1911 census.

[Christine53]

number of rooms = 4

Addresses:
Ashford Hill
Absent do.

The "do" dittos the entry above, so Absent Hill looks like the address. No idea if there was such a place.

Which census is this from?

Thank you,

1911 census.

This is the 1881 census , not 1911.   Mary ( Maria Smith ) is  listed at Ashford Hill in 1871. I think  Mary was just  absent when the census was taken.

[CarolA3]

number of rooms = 4 Refers to original post

Addresses:
Ashford Hill         Refers to post #6
Absent do.

The "do" dittos the entry above, so Absent Hill looks like the address. No idea if there was such a place.

Which census is this from?

Thank you,

1911 census.

The original question about the 1911 census has been answered.

You have now introduced a completely different issue in post #6 which is causing confusion.  I will attempt to deal with the second question.

We are now looking at the 1881 census for Hampshire (RG11/1266/112/17).  Everyone on that page lives at/on Ashford Hill.
Please refer to the snip below.
 
The first household schedule number is 88 - Ashford Hill, occupiers named.
The next is 89 - marked 'Absent' as occupiers aren't there so no names, address 'ditto'.
Next is 90 - address 'ditto', occupiers named.
Then 91 etc are normal entries - address 'ditto', occupiers named.

The enumerator has entered the first name from 90 on the line for 89, which should show no names.  The wiggly line between 89 and 90 is meant to show that Mary belongs in household 90.

[CarolA3]

This is the 1881 census , not 1911.   Mary ( Maria Smith ) is  listed at Ashford Hill in 1871. I think  Mary was just  absent when the census was taken.

Posted just before me Christine

Mary is listed as the head of her household, which I believe is schedule 90.  If she was absent on census night she shouldn't have been listed at all.

Carol

[Treetotal]

Absent was first suggested by me in reply #8

Carol

[CarolA3]

Yes it was, and I didn't spot it

Sorry if you thought I was ignoring you

Carol

[Treetotal]

No not at all Carol, just pointing out that I suggested it early on and that the poster had overlooked it 
Carol