APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2004-10 > 1096834984


From:
Subject: Re: [APG] Census citation
Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 16:23:04 EDT


Rondina:
I am not a professional genealogist, but I consider myself a pretty good
amateur one.

Of the census that you cited, it appears to me that you are reading things in
that are not there. This census listing is so flawed that I would stick it
in the "further research file" and not add it to my general family research.
It I were trying to prove a lineage, I wouldn't use this at all. [I'd make a
note, "not able to idenify positively in the 1920 census"]

Obviously somebody made a mistake. For instance, Ancestry has this indexed
as "R.M." and it could just as easily be "R.M." as "P.M." This may or may not
be your family. Families had children with very similar ages and names. The
census taker has recorded children relationships with impossible ages

[Frankly, why didn't the children give the correct age and come up with a
plausible age if they were trying to hide that their father was dead.]

However, in trying to explain faulty census information, I've found that it
is very easy to move into writing fiction, in stead of documenting the
lineage. So if it doesn't fit, I don't try to make it fit.

Virginia Green

This thread: