Genealogy Chat

morning all ,i know the census returns are famous for mixing things up but i wonder if anyone can help me - i have an ancestor , agnes ramage ( 1853c) in 1891 census ( scotland) with an occupation as naturalist , can anyone tell me what that might be ? the other one i have is from 1871 ( scotland ) occupation given as hary louise !! ?? anyone translate , please , thanks, angela

Looks like she had a good sense of humour lol

naturalist is some who studies wildlife

eg david attenborough

thankyou lorraine and devon dweller , have to go to work now - not as a hary louise ! i don't think !! angela

was this agnes too in 1871 if want me to take a look post details

may be able to work out what it is between us

Lorraine, tracked it down by using key words - looks a real old mess, course, no images for scottish census :( Im wondering if it should be the name of the 3 year old - Mary Louise??

Name: Had Ramsse
Age: 20
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1851
Relationship: Son
Father's Name: Robert
Mother's Name: Janet
Gender: Male
Where born: Greenock
Registration Number: 564/3
Registration district: Greenock West
Civil Parish: Greenock West
Town: Greenock
County: Renfrewshire
Address: 7 ?? St
Occupation: Hary Louise
ED: 35
Household schedule number: 15
Line: 22
Roll: CSSCT1871_99
Household Members: Name Age
Ramsse 3
Had Ramsse 20
James Ramsse 20
Janet Ramsse 55
Robert Ramsse 63
William Ramsse 23

Hi

I had a look at the image (which isn't very clear) and I think it is House Joiner. His name is Hugh.

Margaret

Margaret, whats the surname, surely that isnt right is it?? Whats the 3 year olds name please? Im intrigued now.

Hi Heather

It is really badly transcribed. The names are as follows:

Robert Ramage 63
Jane Ramage 55
Jessie Ramage 32
Hugh Ramage 24
William Ramage 22
Jane Ramage 20

There is no 3 year old.

Margaret

Where on earth did the 3 year old appear from on ancestry - lol I suppose considering how awful many of the images are (well Ive never seen a scottish one, but certainly all the others!) then it really is wonderful that so many transcriptions are reasonably correct.

hi all , just in from work - thankyou all for input ,it is a mess isn't it ! margaret i think you are right - hugh is a joiner in later census .wish i could have been here earlier but work was calling , thanks for all your work , regards , angela

Hi all

It just proves the importance of looking at the original document yourself, where possible.

The number of times I have seen Edmund instead of Edward - and I had Rabbit instead of Robert once!

With due deference to Robert, if the transcription says your ancestor was born in Feeble Minded, Northumberland, England, you might stick with that and not check the original.