Strange Ancestry Occupation .....

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 7:18 pm

What I can't get over is that if the Ancestry interpretation is placed alongside the actual entry, part is right, part is rubbish!

Assistant Keeper of General &c. particular Registar sasines Edinburgh .

Assistant Keeper of General & Trastiaula Registrar Davies [or Davives] Edinburgh

BTW I think it's written as Registar, - mis-spelling of Register?, - and I can't see that the surname is written as anything other than Wishert.

On the one hand OCR is the only explanation I can see for "Trastiula" and "Davies", but on t'other hand, OCR should have "seen" "particular Registar sasines Edinburgh" as the occupation of his wife B G Wishert, - BTW a bit naughty that the enumerator didn't seek clarification on the names behind the initials.

And what a pair of given names to "hide"!, - Brodie Gordon ! , as she also did on her second marriage register entry. As I'd have suspected for this era, Archibald was a Writer to the Signet.

David

Post by **SarahND** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 7:32 pm

DavidWW wrote:What I can't get over is that if the Ancestry interpretation is placed alongside the actual entry, part is right, part is rubbish!

This appears to be just the type of error that you used to get in telegrams. The correct letters are all in the right place, with incorrect ones in random locations.

DavidWW wrote:As I'd have suspected for this era, Archibald was a Writer to the Signet.

You mean a "Writer Cathe Lignat", surely, David?

Regards,
Sarah

scooter · Post by **scooter** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 7:32 pm

Hi David,

Yes, I thought the Brodie Gordon was a cracker! In actuality, the Ancestry transcription says: Assistant Keeper Of General & Trastiaula Regestar Davives Edinburgh which moves a little further off the mark!

Best,

Scott

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 8:04 pm

SarahND wrote:
DavidWW wrote:...snipped...............As I'd have suspected for this era, Archibald was a Writer to the Signet.
You mean a "Writer Cathe Lignat", surely, David?

Regards,
Sarah

Please, pretty please, what's the source of that "beauty" ?

David

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 8:11 pm

Scooter wrote:Hi David,

Yes, I thought the Brodie Gordon was a cracker!

Indeed !!

But was her name recorded with only the initials in the 1851 census entry and her second marriage because she preferred not to use these names?

Obviously, on her death register entry, she had no control over the situation

Scooter wrote:In actuality, the Ancestry transcription says: Assistant Keeper Of General & Trastiaula Regestar Davives Edinburgh which moves a little further off the mark!

Best,

Scott

Fascinating

, as I could just about have accepted "Davies" as an interpretation, not least on the basis of this being a recognised UK surname, but "Davives" just sends me into orbit as to how this could be acceptable to the extensive Ancestry quality control procedures that I am assured will most often pick up any such errors .....................

David

Post by **SarahND** » Sun Feb 25, 2007 8:19 pm

DavidWW wrote:Please, pretty please, what's the source of that "beauty" ?

The ancestry index for the 1841 census. See my first post on this thread above

Regards,
Sarah