We have just published the 1881 Scottish census on findmypast.co.uk

The census recorded the population of Scotland at over 3.7 million in 1881 and we’ve freshly transcribed these records to ensure your ancestors’ details are accurately recorded.

We’ve already published the 1841-1871 Scottish censuses on findmypast.co.uk. You’ll be keen to search the 1881 Scottish census for the ancestors you’ve traced in the previous censuses. If you haven’t been able to find your ancestors in the earlier Scottish censuses, now’s the time to search the 1881 census to see if they make an appearance.

Our high quality transcriptions make it easy to discover the crucial details about your ancestors’ lives. It is not possible to view the original census images on findmypast.co.uk, due to the General Register Office for Scotland’s licensing regulations.

We will publish future Scottish census on the site in the coming weeks.

Search the 1881 Scottish census now

Hello - my name is Ian Tester, and I’m findmypast’s product manager. I wanted to let you know about a fundamental change we’re about to make to the way findmypast.co.uk is organised, which should make it a lot easier for you to find and search the millions of new records we’re adding to the site every month.

Findmypast has grown an awful lot since we last designed the way the records are organised. We’ve added millions of records that don’t fit into the main categories of births, marriages and deaths/census/military/migration/living relatives and, at the moment, they are often either being wedged into a section where they don’t really fit, or being put into specialist records.

This doesn’t make it easy for you to discover and use some of the fantastic historical records that are regularly being provided by our record partners. You’ve probably also noticed that we’ve significantly upped the rate at which we put new records online - and the number of records we are adding each year is increasing all the time.

Ian Tester, findmypast

So the site is already beginning to burst at the seams and there are lots of very exciting new collections on the way that deserve new sections to accommodate them. We’ve spent several months working with our members to find a set of categories that will allow us to make room for the new records and make better sense of the records that are already online. Many thanks to the hundreds of you who have taken the time to complete surveys and participate in research sessions to help get us to this point!

The result of all this hard work is that in the next month, you’ll begin to see some changes to the site. The first one is that the main record categories across the blue navigation bar at the top of the site will all come under a single new category: “Search records”. Within this category, you’ll be able to choose from a range of sub-categories of records, just as you can now. The new sub-categories are very similar to the current ones in many cases, but you’ll notice a few new ones as well.

• Life events (births, marriages and deaths) - this will be very similar to the current BMD section and will continue to contain our millions of parish records
• Census, land & surveys - as well as our best-in-class England & Wales censuses (including our complete 1911 census), this will include fabulous new records, including historical electoral rolls
• Armed forces & conflict - our comprehensive military collections will live here
• Education & work - with fantastic school and merchant marine records on the way, we need a new sub-category. You’ll also find some gems currently buried in the specialist section
• Institutions & organisations - covering workhouses, hospitals and more, you’ll also find some fabulous new court records in future, as well as records that are sprinkled across other sections at the moment
• Travel & migration - is very similar to our current migration section, but has some lovely new international records on the way
• Living relatives & directories - this will give us room to expand the directories that we hold, way beyond the current living relatives directories

These new sections are designed to be as futureproof as possible, so you’ll also notice a few more new sub-categories appear over time as new records come online. A fringe benefit of creating more space on the blue navigation bar at the top of the site is that we’re making room for some very exciting new tools, including what we hope will be one of the best “saved records” tools available.

Obviously it’s hard to imagine these changes before they go live, but let us know if you have any thoughts on this approach.

We’re very excited to be making such a large-scale improvement, especially as it has taken lots of time to test and refine the new sub-categories so that they make sense to our members. Keep your eyes peeled for other improvements in the coming months - there’s a pile of exciting new features in the pipeline, as well an awful lot of exciting new records…

This month we also have an expert answer to the question of a disappearing relative from the 1881 census. Michael Sheppard asks:

“My grandfather was Sylvester Sheppard born 27 April 1857 in Ubley, Somerset. He enlisted in the Grenadier Guards in 1877 Service No.5924.stationed at Horse Guards until 1883 and transferred to the Reserve until 1889. I cannot find him on the 1881 census.

Do you have any idea on how to find this record? Would the army have had their own record of this census?

Stephen replies:

“Thanks for your question about Sylvester Sheppard. I’ve chosen it as I believe the answer may be of value to other researchers, even though the short answer is “No”.

Firstly, it’s worth summarising the situation with regard to each of the decennial censuses for England and Wales for 1841 to 1911 which are available, fully name-searchable, on findmypast.

1841 – no separate census returns for any of the armed forces
1851 – no separate census returns for any of the armed forces
1861 – separate census returns for Royal Navy At Sea (and also for British Ships In Port and Ships At Sea)
1871 – separate census returns for Royal Navy At Sea
1881 – separate census returns for Royal Navy At Sea
1891 – no separate census returns for any of the armed forces
1901 – separate census returns for Royal Navy At Sea
1911 – separate census returns for Overseas Military and Royal Navy At Sea

Although any individuals serving in the armed forces stationed within England and Wales (or Channel Islands or Isle of Man) should be enumerated at their barracks or garrison in all of the above, you will quickly see that there is tremendous scope for our ancestors to be “missing” from a census return due to service abroad (including, for that matter, Scotland or Ireland). This is particularly true for 1901, as that census, which was carried out on 31st March that year, took place during the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902) – it is not unusual to see wives and children enumerated at home with a remark that the head of household is on overseas service.

One of these holes has been largely filled by the recent publication of the 1861 Worldwide Army Index on findmypast this month. This covers approximately 245,000 British (and of course Irish) soldiers who were stationed overseas in census year. As the 1861 census already covers the Royal Navy and at least a proportion of the merchant navy, the publication of the 1861 Worldwide Army Index goes some way towards completing the coverage of the population in 1861. To search this dataset, go to http://www.findmypast.co.uk/search/military/indexes/1861-army-index.

Unfortunately, Michael, to return to your original question, if you cannot find your Guards ancestor in the 1881 census of England & Wales (and have also searched unsuccessfully the Scottish 1881 census on Scotland’s bonny People) normally this would imply that he was serving overseas and the censuses will remain forever silent as to his whereabouts. There was no separate “army census” of the type to which you allude. However, his “Chelsea Pensioner” army service record suggests that he was in fact “at home” from 1877 to 1889 inclusive. I would expect “at home” at that date to include Scotland and Ireland, so it may well be that Sylvester was elsewhere within the British Isles rather than in truly foreign parts.

Incidentally, another notable gap in the coverage of census-taking was the merchant navy and the small fishing fleets and solitary vessels which were offshore or at sea on census night. While sometimes these men and boys were recorded as if they were at home on census night, or included in returns of boats in harbours, they are too often missing from censuses (the 1861 census again being the only prominent exception to this rule).”

If you would like to have the chance to Ask the Expert, please email your query to casestudies@findmypast.co.uk

Please note that our experts cannot enter into personal correspondence and only a limited selection of queries will be answered per month. We try to select questions which reflect the most common enquiries.

We conducted research the day before census envelopes started to land on doormats to find out about people in England and Wales’ understanding of the legalities behind the 2011 census. Our findings show that 51 per cent of people are unaware of how to respond appropriately.

A confused one in six adults (16%) are completely unaware that everyone is legally required to be included in the census, instead believing it is optional. Youngsters (18-34 year olds) are the most unaware, with 30 per cent stating that they thought the census was optional.

Another area causing confusion around completing this year’s census was who should complete the form and how many. Our research shows that over a third (35%) believed that every household member had to fill in the form, rather than just the head of the household.

The most switched on area of the UK to the 2011 census was the South West (56%), followed by the North East and Wales (both 54%). Worryingly, this still leaves nearly half of those in these areas not aware that it is only the head of the house that should fill it in.

Debra Chatfield, our marketing manager (pictured), said: “As the website that scanned and published online the last publicly available census for England & Wales (the 1911 census), we at findmypast.co.uk have had much experience with census forms and the different ways people complete them.

“Census records give family historians a fascinating snapshot of how their ancestors lived and the 2011 census will be no different in revealing our lifestyles to future generations. The rule on who fills in the census hasn’t changed in 17 decades, so it’s surprising that there’s so much confusion, especially as we now have access to so much more information than previous generations. Perhaps it’s symptomatic of our generation for this detail to be lost on us.”

Have you filled in your 2011 census form yet?

You might have seen in the news over the weekend that the British government is considering abolishing the census after the next one in 2011. The government has said that they are looking at other ways of collecting the same sort of information.

What do you think about this? Let us know your views.

This morning, after months of searching, we finally came across an astonishing historical document in the 1911 census. Emily Davison, the suffragette who was to die in 1913 after throwing herself in front of the King’s horse at the Epsom derby, is famously said to have secreted herself in the House of Commons at the time of the 1911 Census in order to have herself enumerated within Westminster.

We have now uncovered the actual historical documents that prove this is the case and will perhaps throw some more light on this key moment in parliamentary history. The event is considered to be such a landmark event in British politics that a plaque was secretly installed in Parliament in honour of her rebellious act  by Tony Benn, with the aid of Helena Kennedy QC and Labour MP Jeremy Corbyn.

We had already found Emily Davison on the census listed at her boarding house, but had wanted for some time to discover how much truth there was in the parliament story. Thinking laterally, we realised that there was a possibility that she had been incorrectly recorded, and decided to try searching for her using the “variants” search on the findmypast.co.uk 1911 Census search. This search not only looks at exact names searched for, but also looks for common variants of names.

Sure enough, when we repeated the search with the surname variants search on and allowing a few more years flexibility than her actual age at the time of the census, she immediately appeared listed as Emily Wilding Davidson (note the extra D in her surname). Most astonishingly, her address was listed on the census transcript as “Found Hiding in Crypt of Westminster Hall Westminster”.

Emily Davison on the findmypast.co.uk 1911 census

Click here to view the full size image

Intrigued, we decided to look at the original documents. First of all, we looked at the RG14 Household page - this has been signed by the Clerk of Works at the House of Commons, a Mr Percy Ridge (for a bit of fun, you can also find him in the 1911 census, living in South London).

1911 census Household form filled in by the Clerk of Works

Click here to view the full size image.

We can see that Ridge’s handwriting only records Emily’s name (spelt wrongly), age (3 or 4 years off her actual age) and marital status. Somebody else (likely to be the enumerator – the handwriting looks very similar) has filled in her occupation and place of birth. It is notable that both of these bits of information are wrong too – Davison had given up full-time teaching in 1909 to concentrate on her work for the Women’s Social and Political Union and her birth was registered in Greenwich, not Northumberland (Davison’s mother, however, had been born in Morpeth, Northumberland).

So now on to the back of the household form, to see where this extraordinary address from the transcription had come from.

address panel from the household form

Click here for full size image

Sure enough, Ridge has put her address as “found hiding in the crypt of Westminster Hall since Saturday” There’s also a note at the top which says “apply Common Row police station for more information”.

So finally, a quick look at the Enumerator’s Summary to see whether she succeeded in her aim of being enumerated at Westminster.

The enumerator's summary listing her as sole occupant of the crypt

Click here for full size image

Sure enough, she has been enumerated as the sole occupant of the Crypt in the “Houses of Parliament”.

A few interesting lessons for family historians in this discovery:

1. Think laterally when searching for names and dates of birth and allow for wide margins of error even if you think you have the exact information
2. Use the “variants” search on findmypast.co.uk - it really is a powerful piece of technology!

Emily Davison, we salute you, and are proud and humbled to have found the documents that record your astonishing census night 99 years later.

If any of our readers can shed any further light on this astonishing find, we’d be delighted for you to add notes and observations in the comments below.

Our expert Stephen Rigden answers your questions:

‘Can you help me break down the brick wall that I have concerning my grandfather please?

My grandfather was: William James Wilson 1860-1937. I have found a marriage entry for him: he married my grandmother, Margaret Rees, in Swansea on 22 June 1893. On the certificate he gives his age as 32yrs and his occupation as house painter. His father’s name is given as William Wilson, deceased, occupation mason.

I have also found him on the 1901 census for Wales, when he and my grandmother are living at 113 St Helens Road, Swansea, Glamorganshire, Wales. He gives his age as 40yrs and his place of birth as Manchester, Lancashire, England.

Until the 1911 census for England became available I had thought that he might have been the William James Wilson living in Kirkby Ireleth, Lancs shown on the 1861/71/81 and 1891 censuses. However, on the 1911 census that one is still at home, unmarried and working as a ‘general labourer’, whereas my grandfather was married, living in Swansea (at 93 St Helens Road) running a painting and decorating business, (’Wilson and Co’) and had six sons!

I have searched exhaustively through the various censuses and the birth index, but am unable to find any definite matches. I have ordered six birth certificates, none of which match the information given on my relative’s marriage cert.

His son’s names were (presumably some family names were used):

William Havelock, born 1894
Evan Douglas, born 1896
Ernest Rencella, born 1897
George Felix, born 1900
Richard, born 1902
Archibald, born 1903.

I would welcome some advice as to how to find any further trace of my grandfather as I am completely stuck with this. I am unable to find a definite birth entry for him, and unable to find him at all prior to 1901. Hoping that you can help!’ From Isobel

Steve says:

‘As I am sure you expected, this is not the sort of question that yields up a quick and easy answer! I imagine that you’ve been looking at this problem for months, if not years. So it requires systematic consideration of all possible eventualities. I will list some of these here for starters. I expect that you will have thought of and eliminated many of these already, but perhaps the underlying suggestions will help others out there facing comparable difficulties in their family history research.

1. He may not have been named William James at birth. He reversed his forenames, or added one.
2. His birth may appear as male in the General Register Office indexes, at the end of the A-Z sequence of forenames for the surname Wilson.
3. He may not have been born as Wilson. He may have been called Willson. Or Wilson may have been the name of his step-father, following the marriage or remarriage of his mother.
4. He may not have known where he was born. He may have believed that he came from Manchester and stated that in good faith, but perhaps he only grew up there to migrant parents who came from somewhere else: his mason father might find have found job opportunities lacking where he came from but plentiful in the city. Perhaps your grandfather was born somewhere else entirely in northern England.
5. He may have been born outside England and Wales. Some of the names of his children point to real or imagined Scottish roots, as does the surname Wilson. However, other names hint at the solid respectability of the late Victorian era tradesman class and may have been aspirational or fanciful, perhaps derived from reading matter rather than recycled from earlier generations of the family.
6. He may have modified his age, especially if there was more than a one or two year difference in years between him and his wife. Even though his recorded ages on his marriage certificate and the 1901 census are compatible with one another, once he had knocked off a few years, he may have felt compelled to keep up the pretence.
7. It is not possible to get death certificates for all the many men named William Wilson born between, say 1809 and 1843, and dying in England and Wales before 1893 but, if you have a great deal of patience and a subscription to a census website such as findmypast.co.uk, you could try looking at the 1851 to 1891 census returns to isolate the masons. You would then need to sketch basic trees for each of these candidates to see if one or more had a son named William James or similar born at about the right date, and then tentatively address and see if you can definitively eliminate these by turn.
8. His father could have been a highly specialised monumental mason or stone mason, or he might have been a bricklayer. He may not always have been a mason. Although this is a skilled trade, he may have been a master, or a journeyman, or a casual labourer who had to take other work when need be. Perhaps he appears on the earlier census returns with a different occupation.
9. The story might not be entirely reliable in several particulars. What would bring a house painter from Manchester to Swansea at some date between 1860 and 1893? Britain is criss-crossed with the improbable long- and short-distance migration routes of our ancestors. Many, of course, lead from country to town. Why would a Mancunian head for South Wales? One would think that there would be sufficient house-painting opportunities in Lancashire, and enough home-grown house painters in Glamorganshire, to make this surprising. Perhaps he had an earlier trade or calling? Or perhaps his family moved to Wales when he was still a boy?
10. Perhaps his seemingly modest story - born in Manchester circa 1860 to a father William, mason - was entirely invented. Identities could be changed with ease in the 19th century. Aliases could be taken to start afresh, and to leave behind bad memories or a dubious history. I have recently been looking at the data underlying the Chelsea Pensioner records which findmypast.co.uk is in the process of digitising in association with The National Archives: although we have not calculated any reliable statistics, perhaps 1 in every 1,000 soldiers had an alias. It may not help you advance your research but it remains a real possibility when you have carefully and methodically ruled out all the more usual explanations.’

We hope this is useful to your research. If you would like to pose a question for Steve, please register or opt to receive newsletters in My Account.

In last month’s newsletter we asked you to send us your experiences of researching your family tree. Thanks to all of you who wrote in - we really enjoyed reading your stories. Read on for how Liz is getting on with the search for her ancestors:

Liz Riley’s story:

‘I’ve had a lot of trouble locating people on one branch of my tree because they have changed their first names. The first one to come to mind was my husband’s great great grandmother who was christened Ellen Fawcett in 1809 and was named that at her marriage in 1832. Then on all the censuses she was Ellen Riley (her married name) and Ellen Fawcett on the birth certificates of her children. This was consistent until her death in 1874 which I could not find for many years.

I knew she died between 1871 and 1881, as I couldn’t find her on the 1881 census and couldn’t find a second marriage for her. I bought one certificate which looked close enough in DOB (1911) but it was the wrong Ellen Riley. So I gave up looking until recently I noticed a number of Eleanors among her grandchildren and great grandchildren and decided to risk the expense of buying the certificate - this was after checking the 1871 census for Eleanor Riley born about 1809 to ensure there wasn’t another person who this could be. It paid off and I now have the correct death cert for Ellen - I still can’t figure out why she suddenly changed her name though! I’ve noticed several others who had different names on official documents from the ones on censuses, but for Ellen this was a one-off.

This led to my reviewing a number of Ellen’s children and grandchildren who had seemingly disappeared without trace. Her daughter, always Ann on earlier censuses, turned out to be Susannah, her grandson Riley turned out to be Samuel (Riley was his middle name) and his brother Herbert was later known as John (his middle name) when he migrated to the US. Another brother, Henry, was known as Harry, so I was able to find some of his missing records when told this by a living descendant. I should have guessed these name changes earlier as my father-in-law was Lewis John, but was always known as John or Jack, and his sister Beatrice Maud (still living at 106) is mostly known as Maud, but was Betty to her husband. Also my husband’s grandmother was known as Annie, whereas her name was Ruth Hannah.

So my advice to others is to keep trying different variations of first names and second names, as they may have gone by different names at different times of their lives. You may also find clues in younger generations’ names (I now understand why my father-in-law almost insisted that we add John and Ruth as middle names to our first born son and daughter). It’s also important to get the certificates to ensure you have the correct person, but before purchasing them, check censuses if available to help rule out the wrong ones or you can spend a fortune on the wrong certificates. This is why it is important to have a subscription as it gives you the freedom to check all the resources available without worrying about how many credits you’re using up.’

We’ve just unearthed nearly 95,000 new records to add to the 1851 census for Isle of Man, Hampshire, Buckinghamshire and Carnarvonshire. See below for a breakdown of the records:

 
Get searching the 1851 census now.

Findmypast.co.uk has just carried out a survey which has revealed that young Brits shy away from jobs that require hard graft and instead, one in six 18-24 year olds aspire to become a famous singer, actor or member of a band.

There has never been such a stark contrast between the career choices of today’s young people when compared to the manual jobs of their ancestors. In the 1911 census some of the most popular occupations recorded include working in domestic service, agriculture, mining, building and the cotton industry. In contrast, less than 1% of young Brits in the 21st century would like to have a manual job such as a builder or plumber.

Here you can see a 1911 census return for singer Tom Jones’ maternal grandparents, Albert Rees and Ada Jones, who were in the coal-mining industry. Jones is Tom’s stage rather than birth surname.

Click to enlarge

Debra Chatfield

Our marketing manager, Debra Chatfield (pictured right), says: “It seems the growing obsession with celebrity has really impacted on young people’s career choices these days, as our study reveals how the more non-traditional jobs now come high up on the wish-list.

“Times have certainly changed when it comes to young people’s career choices. A look at the 1911 census provides a fascinating insight into the professions of our ancestors and you can really see how times have dramatically changed. On the other hand, in some cases, it can be interesting to see how some families have carried the same profession down through the family tree to the modern day. In our recent study it was revealed that, worryingly, a fifth (22%) of those aged 18-24 years do not know what their ancestors did for a living.”

Find out what your ancestors did in our complete census records from 1841 to 1911.