I have researched my grand-father who is in the 1921 census. I did pay for
the individual record and received 2 pages and found the information helpful.
I didn't find any significant difference in this from from the 1911 census.
But the address is on a separate page. The address I found only gave the
street name and house number, so there was a bit of detective work to find the
location. Fortunately I had enough other information that it was easy to find.
Toni Redish
On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 09:24:36 p.m. EDT, Cathy Pinner
<[email protected]> wrote:
Jenny,
There is an English/Wales 1921 Census SourceWriter template. If you
haven't found it, you are behind in updating Legacy 9. I'm not sure
whether something different will be required when Scotland gets around
to releasing it.
I haven't yet tackled how to source the 1921 Census as I've been waiting
for it to come on subscription. Now it has but I'm waiting until my sub
to FMP is due late December to upgrade for otherwise I would be kind of
paying twice. It's interesting but not vital to my research. I have
found a few people in the free search and confirmed a couple of
households via searching.
I understood from a very early webinar on the 1921 census that piece and
schedule number weren't enough as the schedule number can be repeated
for a particular piece. How easy it is to see the full TNA reference, I
don't know as I haven't paid to look at any transcripts or images.
Cathy
> Roberta Schwalm <mailto:[email protected]>
> Sunday, 6 November 2022 05:14
> I haven't found the UK 1921 Census easy to navigate either! The was
> never a problem with the previous UK censuses but this one presents a
> real conundrum.
>
> I would also like to find out how others are handling it.
>
> Thanks everyone
>
> Roberta Schwalm
> Gatineau, QC Canada
>
>
>
> Jenny M Benson <mailto:[email protected]>
> Sunday, 6 November 2022 05:04
> How are other LUGgers handling the 1921 Census, for which there isn't
> - yet - a SourceWriter template?
>
> Firstly, there seems to be some confusion about precisely what
> comprises a "correct" reference. Some people seem to think that
> something along the lines of RG15-nnnnn-xxx will suffice (where nnnnn
> is the Piece number and xxx the Schedule number, whereas others are
> saying that this does not always relate to ONE individual record and
> that to ensure that it does so it is necessary to include the tri-part
> District Reference.
>
> Secondly, unlike with earlier Censuses, including the 1911, the
> address of the household is not shown on the "main image", nor any
> reference information. The address and Schedule number are shown in
> two separate images. To provide a fully authentic Source citation,
> need one include all 3 images?
>
> I have only accessed a couple of 1921 records so far and the best
> method of recording them seems to be to use the template for the 1911
> Census, typing a space in the first field (otherwise RG78 is
> automatically included in the citation) and leaving the 2nd field
> blank, but filling all the other fields as indicated. It may be
> "overkill" to include all this, but it makes for consistency with the
> 1911 Census. So far, I have only included the main image with each
> citation.
>
>
--
LegacyUserGroup mailing list
[email protected]
To manage your subscription and unsubscribe
http://legacyusers.com/mailman/listinfo/legacyusergroup_legacyusers.com
Archives at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
--
LegacyUserGroup mailing list
[email protected]
To manage your subscription and unsubscribe
http://legacyusers.com/mailman/listinfo/legacyusergroup_legacyusers.com
Archives at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
