1881 Census extracts - worth ordering? .....

Post by **emanday** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 11:41 pm

Following from another post...

If I were to order the extract for an 1881 census, would it simply be the same table that we get as an image, or would it be a scan of the census itself?

LesleyB · Post by **LesleyB** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 11:52 pm

Hi Mary
I don't know!
However, I think that you can see the original 1881 on film, at LDS centres & etc. so presumably at NRH too.

I'm sure somebody will be able to tell us!

Best wishes
Lesley

AnnieMack · Post by **AnnieMack** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:37 am

I've gotr 1881 census pages at home that I got in NRH and they are the scans of the actual pages I'm sure (well as sure as I can be when at work and immersed in month end bumph!)

Will look later and let you know.

Annie

Post by **emanday** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:22 am

Thanks Anne and Lesley. It's just that I've already found one 1881 census that is not quite right and (nothing major, but it took a wildcard search to find it), hearing that this is not unusual with the 1881's , I wondered about a couple that I might benefit from viewing the original.

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:38 am

When I was in at NRH recently, I was checking the issue dates of the various brochures to see what was new, and the "Digital Imaging of the Gen......." i.e. DIGROS brochure was last updated in June 2006.

In the penultimate paragraph this relates ..."Work that took place during 2004 included t he imaging of the remainder of the statutory registers up to 2003 which is ongoing, imaging of the 1881 census, and the imaging of the OPRs ........"

Ealier, however, it's written. "Index linked images for the 1881 census will be made available at some point in the future." I assume that this relates to NRH.

A bit confusing, not least in the context that, at the last few User Group meetings no commitment has been given regarding timescale, - in fact the last that was said some meetings ago was that imaging and (re)indexing the 1881 was not a high priority task. You can see why I'm cofused, as the images obviously now exist and an index may, or is at least on the way for the DIGROS system at NRH ...............

I shall see what I can find out, and meanwhile would be most interested to know just what AnnieMack and others have.

David

Post by **emanday** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:58 am

I just know this is a really silly question, but my natural curiousity refuses be ignored.

If the originals exist, why were they not scanned, rather than the typed tables?

I love having the whole page of a census as it gives you a little picture of the neighbourhood. Some of them have had me asking myself, "Now why would someone like that be living next door to someone like him?

"

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:24 am

emanday wrote:I just know this is a really silly question, but my natural curiousity refuses be ignored.

If the originals exist, why were they not scanned, rather than the typed tables?

I love having the whole page of a census as it gives you a little picture of the neighbourhood. Some of them have had me asking myself, "Now why would someone like that be living next door to someone like him? "

Because what you see on SP is the result of the Mormon sponsored project, initial transcription carried out by UK FHSs, released in the early 90s, - I can't find a more accurate date !, - way before any other UK census was indexed on a national basis. Current LDS policy would have been to digitise, but the equipment wasn't really suitable at the time.

See http://www.ffhs.org.uk/General/Projects/1881.htm for the project background.

BTW, Came across a very good article by Barney Tyrwhitt-Darke at http://globalgenealogy.com/globalgazett ... azfd32.htm

David

Post by **emanday** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:56 am

Thanks for those links, David. They are fascinating reading and were well worth the visit.

Of course, I'd forgotten hadn't I, that the technology we are all used to as normal now wasn't readily available then, and what was, was hugely expensive and not a little unreliable.

I've bookmarked that second link as I think the information is very helpful.

AnnieMack · Post by **AnnieMack** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:16 pm

Sorry Mary, I raked through my paperwork tonight and it was an 1871 census I had from NRH not 1881

Sorry if I built up your hopes.

Annie

Post by **Tracey** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:20 pm

Ive got one which was sent to me by Old Meldrum Local Studies ( i think ive got one or two more sent from elsewhere but cant find them at the moment ).