At some point in your research, you’ll almost certainly stumble upon an ancestor who mysteriously vanishes from one census year, only to conveniently reappear in the next.
I spent the longest time looking for my husband's ancestor, Henry Nation. I knew he was born in Ohio in 1814 and suspected he was living in Missouri. His wife, Mary, survived him by many years and I couldn't find her or their children either. Finally, I did a search looking only for Henry, born 1814 in Ohio but living in Missouri. Up he popped. The handwriting was absolutely beautiful - it could have been the model for the cursive writing cards handing in school classrooms. The ink was clear and dark - a perfect image. So, how was his name indexed? WATIAU!!!! I couldn't believe it.
and her children, in two separate census records for the same year. In the first she was married and living in Ohio. In the second one, taken two weeks later, she was in another state, listed as a widow, along her children. In the two weeks between the census recording, she left her husband (who wasn’t a bit dead) and took her kids to moved in with her sister. Fantastic post! You make a lot of great points as to why they may be missing. Thanks for posting, Paul!
I once searched the entire 1850 US census for stone cutter. Astounded to find there were about 50 female stone cutters, I thought I had a good story. Turns out the vast majority were transcription errors. There was one female slave, a husband wife team, and three or four young Irish girls in Connecticut that were actually stone cutters. The rest were all errors.
I believe it was a large family business. It is unknowable what exact work the girls did but it may have been light finishing work. Or alternatively they were Amazons. Stone work is really hard work. I’ve tried my hand at it and refuse to use a mallet and chisel.
One of my ancestors was a sailor (with a fairly common Scottish name) - it took me ages to track him back to his birthplace as it was different from any of the other coastal places I'd found him in, and his children were born in several different places and their births weren't always recorded. Still, I've found him in all the Scottish censuses except 1841, when his wife and children were all in Stirling and I'm guessing he must have been away at sea.
On the other side of the family I've found an ancestor of my husband's who was a customs officer, and the occupants of the boat he was on at the time of the 1861 English census were all recorded, off King's Lynn. I suppose maybe this was because he and the others were there in an official capacity.
Thanks for sharing those examples with me Cecilia. Seafaring ancestors can be notoriously difficult to find as you have experienced yourself, but those in port were often recorded and sometimes even recorded twice, once at their normal place of home and again onboard ship! Bu twice is better than not being recorded at all!
I've also had success looking up the names of a neighbor from the census before and then found the relative with a misspelled name. Transcription errors are incredibly common and so maddening once found. Great advice
I have a couple of situations like this. I keep looking with different combinations. For different members of the family. First name only. Different spellings. People from New York. Looked through the whole town page by page. (So OK it isn't that town.) Every year or so I try again, in fact maybe I'll just go do that now ... because wheel spinning is so much fun ...
My third great-grandparent, George Mustin Sinkins and Elizabeth (née Morris), are AWOL in 1871. I've tried every which way to find them. Their son, Henry, is recorded at the family home, 2 Tower Street, in Seven Dials, but George and Elizabeth are nowhere to be found. I've tried every possible way to search for them, checked at the second home they owned in Wimbledon, browsed through the images on either side of the known addresses in both locations, checked to see if they were with other relatives - all to no avail. I do wonder if they were in transit somewhere. George is back in 1881 (Elizabeth died in 1877) at the correct address in Seven Dials, and then 1891 in Wimbledon.
It’s always an interesting conundrum when you can’t find someone where you expect them to be. Have you tried walking the entire census for where you expect them to be? In case they are visiting a few streets away. It’s a long job and a long shot but you never know
yes - that's what I meant when I said I'd browsed the images on either side of the known addresses...On both Ancestry and FMP. George is still listed there in the Electoral Register as well. It's so odd. Their oldest son lived in Leeds, so it's possible they'd been visiting up there and were on the road at census time.
Sure, census enumerators were “respectable” men with clipboards and ink pots. But let’s not kid ourselves. Half the reason your ancestor is missing is because some bored official butchered the name, skipped the house, or just didn’t care. Government didn’t take the census to help you trace Grandma Polly. They did it to count bodies for taxes, wars, representation, and housing projects.
So when you go hunting the “missing” ancestor, don’t just blame fate or family legend. Blame sloppy clerks, bad handwriting, and a bureaucracy that thought your bloodline was disposable. The census isn’t gospel. It’s a crime scene with missing witnesses.
Find the gaps. Follow the lies. That’s where the real history lives.
And sometimes they just didn’t get enumerated for goodness knows what reason. While other evidence indicates that the person lived in that location at that time but the census taker omitted them.
Thanks for sharing this example Karen. Your background research does give you a reasonable explanation for their absence, without the diligent work, you would just keep wondering why they are missing.
I spent the longest time looking for my husband's ancestor, Henry Nation. I knew he was born in Ohio in 1814 and suspected he was living in Missouri. His wife, Mary, survived him by many years and I couldn't find her or their children either. Finally, I did a search looking only for Henry, born 1814 in Ohio but living in Missouri. Up he popped. The handwriting was absolutely beautiful - it could have been the model for the cursive writing cards handing in school classrooms. The ink was clear and dark - a perfect image. So, how was his name indexed? WATIAU!!!! I couldn't believe it.
I know so frustrating Linda! But you did the right thing tried all different search parameters - it brought you a result in the end!!
I've seen similar indexing from what appear to be very clearly written names!
One time, I found the same woman,
and her children, in two separate census records for the same year. In the first she was married and living in Ohio. In the second one, taken two weeks later, she was in another state, listed as a widow, along her children. In the two weeks between the census recording, she left her husband (who wasn’t a bit dead) and took her kids to moved in with her sister. Fantastic post! You make a lot of great points as to why they may be missing. Thanks for posting, Paul!
Thanks Aryn much appreciated
I once searched the entire 1850 US census for stone cutter. Astounded to find there were about 50 female stone cutters, I thought I had a good story. Turns out the vast majority were transcription errors. There was one female slave, a husband wife team, and three or four young Irish girls in Connecticut that were actually stone cutters. The rest were all errors.
Grueling work I agree, so maybe finishers would ‘fit’
Interesting David that there were Irish female stone cutters in Connecticut
I believe it was a large family business. It is unknowable what exact work the girls did but it may have been light finishing work. Or alternatively they were Amazons. Stone work is really hard work. I’ve tried my hand at it and refuse to use a mallet and chisel.
One of my ancestors was a sailor (with a fairly common Scottish name) - it took me ages to track him back to his birthplace as it was different from any of the other coastal places I'd found him in, and his children were born in several different places and their births weren't always recorded. Still, I've found him in all the Scottish censuses except 1841, when his wife and children were all in Stirling and I'm guessing he must have been away at sea.
On the other side of the family I've found an ancestor of my husband's who was a customs officer, and the occupants of the boat he was on at the time of the 1861 English census were all recorded, off King's Lynn. I suppose maybe this was because he and the others were there in an official capacity.
Thanks for sharing those examples with me Cecilia. Seafaring ancestors can be notoriously difficult to find as you have experienced yourself, but those in port were often recorded and sometimes even recorded twice, once at their normal place of home and again onboard ship! Bu twice is better than not being recorded at all!
I've also had success looking up the names of a neighbor from the census before and then found the relative with a misspelled name. Transcription errors are incredibly common and so maddening once found. Great advice
Thanks for sharing that Helene I’m glad you enjoyed it
Thanks Paul, very useful.
I have a couple of situations like this. I keep looking with different combinations. For different members of the family. First name only. Different spellings. People from New York. Looked through the whole town page by page. (So OK it isn't that town.) Every year or so I try again, in fact maybe I'll just go do that now ... because wheel spinning is so much fun ...
It’s always good to revisit these old searches with new found inspiration
Great tips here Paul. I have an ancestor missing from his family at Bradford-on-Avenue. I’ll take another look taking note of your ideas
My third great-grandparent, George Mustin Sinkins and Elizabeth (née Morris), are AWOL in 1871. I've tried every which way to find them. Their son, Henry, is recorded at the family home, 2 Tower Street, in Seven Dials, but George and Elizabeth are nowhere to be found. I've tried every possible way to search for them, checked at the second home they owned in Wimbledon, browsed through the images on either side of the known addresses in both locations, checked to see if they were with other relatives - all to no avail. I do wonder if they were in transit somewhere. George is back in 1881 (Elizabeth died in 1877) at the correct address in Seven Dials, and then 1891 in Wimbledon.
It’s always an interesting conundrum when you can’t find someone where you expect them to be. Have you tried walking the entire census for where you expect them to be? In case they are visiting a few streets away. It’s a long job and a long shot but you never know
yes - that's what I meant when I said I'd browsed the images on either side of the known addresses...On both Ancestry and FMP. George is still listed there in the Electoral Register as well. It's so odd. Their oldest son lived in Leeds, so it's possible they'd been visiting up there and were on the road at census time.
My surname is spelled at least 25 different ways in documents and transcriptions.
Now that has to be a record………..
It’s ridiculous!!!
Sure, census enumerators were “respectable” men with clipboards and ink pots. But let’s not kid ourselves. Half the reason your ancestor is missing is because some bored official butchered the name, skipped the house, or just didn’t care. Government didn’t take the census to help you trace Grandma Polly. They did it to count bodies for taxes, wars, representation, and housing projects.
So when you go hunting the “missing” ancestor, don’t just blame fate or family legend. Blame sloppy clerks, bad handwriting, and a bureaucracy that thought your bloodline was disposable. The census isn’t gospel. It’s a crime scene with missing witnesses.
Find the gaps. Follow the lies. That’s where the real history lives.
Well said
And sometimes they just didn’t get enumerated for goodness knows what reason. While other evidence indicates that the person lived in that location at that time but the census taker omitted them.
Great hints!
Thanks for sharing this example Karen. Your background research does give you a reasonable explanation for their absence, without the diligent work, you would just keep wondering why they are missing.