Thomas vs John

[libali]

I hope I've posted this in the right place...

I have several census records for a family in my tree, mid 1800s. The parents are John and Sarah (both born 1815), there is also a son called John (born ~1843). In the 1851 census, both Johns are listed as Thomas, but all other records I've got - before and after - refer to John. I'm pretty certain it's the right family because the ages, birthplaces and other children's names are consistent.

I'm looking at scans of the original documents, so it's not a transcription error.  I'm used to ages moving about a bit, middle names going missing etc., but have never come across such a direct but random swap (especially for both father and son) before. Wondering whether this is a common swap, a whim, or something else?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

[softly softly]

Can you give us a surname and 1851 census reference please.

John

[libali]

Uzzell

and the Ancestry record has the surname transcribed as Hggill(!)

Registration district:Cirencester
Sub-registration district: Cotswold
ED, institution, or vessel: 11f
Household schedule number: 119
Piece: 1968
Folio: 435
Page number: 27

[softly softly]

A mystery indeed. As you say apart from 1851 census they are always John's. Sorry I cannot give a reason.

John

[libali]

Thanks for looking, and (I assume) confirming that they are the same family.

I did begin to wonder whether (like John / Jack and Henry / Harry) Thomas might be a known nickname for John, but I've never come across it anywhere else.

I think I need to delve a bit deeper and see if I can find any record of either of them having a middle name.

Thanks.

[garden genie]

I think it is not uncommon for the enumerator to misread his own notes when copying them onto the form that we see. So he has presumably hastily read his scribbled 'John' as 'Thos'.

[libali]

Good point. Maybe not such a mystery after all!

[tazzie]

May have mis heard Tom instead of John. The family might not have filled out any form themselves.

 Tazzie

[libali]

Yes, another good point (and I really should have thought of this myself!)

Thanks all.