HELP! This is from UK census from 1881. There are lots of ink blotches and this one covers the name of one of my mystery ancestors. I have the original and then one that I lightened in Photoshop. Anyone care to guess the boy's name? Keep in mind, it's 1881 UK, so names back then were traditional. Also the original page to compare handwriting. #geneology
@Agatha that's good to know, however I haven't seen it in all the years I've been researching the family and records. The person who entered the info in Ancestry, thought it was Evan but I know that's not the case. I'm leaning toward John.
Well I can say Jim in particular goes back a good 200 years or so for sure. But, you don't have to take my word for it. There is already research done on shortened names. π€·
Luckily, I usually had access to original records in archives, which gave me so much valuable experience (some genealogy, but much of it was more expansive research). Transcribers too often butcher what they're trying to read. Old handwriting is like learning another language π, and they're rarely trained.
@Agatha don't get me started on transcribers. Many are from other countries who are not familiar with old European names. You really have to check the documents yourself. I've found many errors.
@Pepstar
The handwriting will be different, but that's fine. It can tell you who that person is if other data points match.
They certainly did have shortened names back then. I've done historical research for many yrs using or records - they go way back. Whether or not the short name is written depends on the census taker & the person giving the information. If a neighbor provides the information, details can be sketchy. And not all named Jim are James. Some are Jim on their birth certificate.