UFT-L Archives
Archiver > UFT > 2001-05 > 0991341880
From:
Subject: RE: [UFT] Census Question
Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 16:45:37 -0400
Susan wrote:
<My question is- Where is the place that I can mark the head of the household on
the census form on the Individual record (in the census area)?>
Susan,
My method is a bit complex, but that is just because I want to get as much information about each census into my database as possible.
I generally start with the person listed as Head of Household. I select a new census event (I have my own definition of a census, but that is just a variation on one of the others). The starting person automatically becomes the Head of Household and the Principal role. In the text area, I list all the information about each individual, more or less in free format. (I generally skip people not related to me, such as servants.) Fields on the form are separated by commas, and individuals are separated by semicolons. For some fields I add some text to describe the field if I think that is useful. After each individual's name, I enter the individual's number in my database, and flag that as a Name Index.
After creating the text, I link all individuals to their correct role. I will then have the census event appear on each of their event lists. This allows for rapid navigation through my database based on the event links. I also create an appropriate source for the census.
If the Head of Household is not my ancestor, I select the person in the household who is my closest relative and flag that person as Principal, and then unflag the Head of Household, so I only have one principal role. In some cases, the rest of the household are not relatives, for example if my ancestor was just a lodger or servant, so I would only create an individual record for the Head. That ensures that the sentence for my ancestor will read correctly.
The following is an UFT text example taken from a 1871 Scottish census:
"The entry shows: William Bruce[IN:1234:IN], Head, Married, Age 30, Brewer, Born Aberdeenshire; Margaret[IN:234:IN], Wife, Married, Age 29, Brewers Wife, Born Linlithgowshire; William[IN:1235:IN], Son, Age 4 [sic], Born Linlithgowshire; John[IN:1236:IN], Son, Age 2, Born Linlithgowshire; Sarah[IN:1238:IN], Daughter, 5 mos. [sic], Born Linlithgowshire. The ages for William and Sarah were transposed."
In this case, Margaret Arbuckle is my blood relative (daughter of an ancestor) so she is flagged as principal and the event comes out under her:
"She was listed as William Bruce's wife in the 1871 Census, at Distillery Cottage in Kirkliston, Linlithgow, Scotland. The entry shows: William Bruce, Head, Married, Age 30, Brewer, Born Aberdeenshire; Margaret, Wife, Married, Age 29, Brewers Wife, Born Linlithgowshire; William, Son, Age 4 [sic], Born Linlithgowshire; John, Son, Age 2, Born Linlithgowshire; Sarah, Daughter, 5 mos. [sic], Born Linlithgowshire. The ages for William and Sarah were transposed. "
When reported using WordPerfect, each person has an index reference. I generate the report with birth and death dates appended to each person's name in the index, so that William the father is separate from William the son.
I've tried converting this database to TMG, and it comes across fairly well. Margaret stayed the principal role, as wife. However, the index entries got converted without the birth-death dates, so that, for example, the index for "She" at the beginning of the census report will have the dates (since that is generated from the role sentence by TMG) while the index for "Margaret" will not (since the index entry was created during the Genbridge transfer from UFT). The apparent limitation of TMG index entries is one reason I am sticking with UFT for now.
As I said before, this approach is a bit time-consuming, and it results in some redundancy (especially when I have several censuses for the same family). However, it does allow me to report just what I found, as well as note inconsistencies. Since the Family Journal report is the main report I use for research trips, I find this detail quite useful.
This is probably more than you wanted to know about creating a census event, but I think it illustrates the level of detail that can be defined for your data, and the cross-references that can be built into both the database and the final reports (through the index).
Pierce Reid
This thread: