Tweet
As the grandson of two lots of East End families, one from Shoreditch/Hoxton/Whitechapel, the other from Islington/Bethnall Green, I have been interested in both genealogy and JTR for many many years and have researched many articles and searched through many archives.
This lifelong interest has told me one thing above all else.
That there are VERY FEW documents, printed, written, official or otherwise, that can be taken "as is".
Through researching the census returns (1841-1911), all BMD results(1837 onwards), there are common faults that appear with regular occurance.
1. Names.
Misspelling of names. Changing of names, from first Christian name to second, from census to census. Dropping of names, both First and Last. Use of "known name" for people that were living at or visiting the building but were out at the time so the info was provided. or filled out, by another. Names in the Parish Books are also unreliable. As a general guideline, one must allow for changes during the last 200 years to have been made all the way along, because the society we know of today, based on total FACT, exact age, description, where born, etc etc, was NOT the norm then. An example of that is the 1841 census which shows age that can vary by 5 years! Because it was accepted to round up the age to the nearest 5 or 10. Some didn't actually KNOW their own birthday... as many birth certificates have revealed later! Even people who have copied, verbatim, names from Parish record books, have made glaring errors when submitting them to, for example, the free BMD (Births, marraiges and Deaths website. Althought the vast majority are exact, there are many that have had to have been corrected under a re-check.
2. Residences
The case of who goes where at any given time is a nightmare for census researchers. A visitor at a place at any given moment in time is NOT always listed in a census. Therefore, there are MANY gaps of names throughout ESPECIALLY the censuses of the 1800's. Together with this, many of the East End residents could neither read nor write, and if asked to fill out the form themselves, either just asked others to do so, or lied. If someone DIDNT want to be known to be in a given place, he or she would change their name, or age, or occupation, or both. I hate to add this, but there were an awful lot of criminals in the East End of London. Whole families of them infact, dotted around any given district. And they didnt like their whereabouts being known.
3. SUSPICION OF STRANGERS
It is almost a by-law, that the East End residents have ALWAYS been suspicious of strangers in their midst. Poverty breeds it's own rules, and if there was a stranger asking questions, he or she was distrusted. Many, many census collectors were given a hostile reception. Have a look at the census records and see that many homes or houses were "empty".. in the middle of a row of tightly packed houses and dwellings. Not always, Im afraid, because the resident was out...We are NOT talking of the type of violent suspicion of the 50's and 60's, with gangs ruling their "manor". But individuals that knew a way of life that was based on limited trust. There were many petty larconists living in the East End. So a stranger in their home? Very suspicious. The urban myth of "the door always being open and you could just walk in" was limited to those who knew each other very well. A knock on the door meant normally one thing. A stranger. And strangers were treated with suspicion.
4. Name occurrance.
Unless one actually looks into it, one is amazed at the amount of people with the same name, married to a spouse with the same first name as many others. This combination means that is infact is LIKELY that there are other familes with the same name, born, or living in or around the same street and around the same age.
5. Marraige
It was NORMAL to marry in the womans parish church, NOT the man's. A woman living in Shoreditch for example, that was to marry and even live with a man whose adress was in Islington, would always marry in her own parish.
So summing up, facts that appear to be facts aren't always facts, even if they are official documents. I do not, for one minute, say that the above always means that any look up in a census for example is wrong, but the automatic assumption that the facts are correct, is a dangerous one, and a common trap to fall into. Double checking and triple references are the order of the day. The excellent and reknowned Philip Sugden proved this in his excellent book on JTR, as have other sound writers, Stewart Evans, for example. So this "erring on the side of caution" attitude is paramount to any researcher.
Good luck and good hunting!
This lifelong interest has told me one thing above all else.
That there are VERY FEW documents, printed, written, official or otherwise, that can be taken "as is".
Through researching the census returns (1841-1911), all BMD results(1837 onwards), there are common faults that appear with regular occurance.
1. Names.
Misspelling of names. Changing of names, from first Christian name to second, from census to census. Dropping of names, both First and Last. Use of "known name" for people that were living at or visiting the building but were out at the time so the info was provided. or filled out, by another. Names in the Parish Books are also unreliable. As a general guideline, one must allow for changes during the last 200 years to have been made all the way along, because the society we know of today, based on total FACT, exact age, description, where born, etc etc, was NOT the norm then. An example of that is the 1841 census which shows age that can vary by 5 years! Because it was accepted to round up the age to the nearest 5 or 10. Some didn't actually KNOW their own birthday... as many birth certificates have revealed later! Even people who have copied, verbatim, names from Parish record books, have made glaring errors when submitting them to, for example, the free BMD (Births, marraiges and Deaths website. Althought the vast majority are exact, there are many that have had to have been corrected under a re-check.
2. Residences
The case of who goes where at any given time is a nightmare for census researchers. A visitor at a place at any given moment in time is NOT always listed in a census. Therefore, there are MANY gaps of names throughout ESPECIALLY the censuses of the 1800's. Together with this, many of the East End residents could neither read nor write, and if asked to fill out the form themselves, either just asked others to do so, or lied. If someone DIDNT want to be known to be in a given place, he or she would change their name, or age, or occupation, or both. I hate to add this, but there were an awful lot of criminals in the East End of London. Whole families of them infact, dotted around any given district. And they didnt like their whereabouts being known.
3. SUSPICION OF STRANGERS
It is almost a by-law, that the East End residents have ALWAYS been suspicious of strangers in their midst. Poverty breeds it's own rules, and if there was a stranger asking questions, he or she was distrusted. Many, many census collectors were given a hostile reception. Have a look at the census records and see that many homes or houses were "empty".. in the middle of a row of tightly packed houses and dwellings. Not always, Im afraid, because the resident was out...We are NOT talking of the type of violent suspicion of the 50's and 60's, with gangs ruling their "manor". But individuals that knew a way of life that was based on limited trust. There were many petty larconists living in the East End. So a stranger in their home? Very suspicious. The urban myth of "the door always being open and you could just walk in" was limited to those who knew each other very well. A knock on the door meant normally one thing. A stranger. And strangers were treated with suspicion.
4. Name occurrance.
Unless one actually looks into it, one is amazed at the amount of people with the same name, married to a spouse with the same first name as many others. This combination means that is infact is LIKELY that there are other familes with the same name, born, or living in or around the same street and around the same age.
5. Marraige
It was NORMAL to marry in the womans parish church, NOT the man's. A woman living in Shoreditch for example, that was to marry and even live with a man whose adress was in Islington, would always marry in her own parish.
So summing up, facts that appear to be facts aren't always facts, even if they are official documents. I do not, for one minute, say that the above always means that any look up in a census for example is wrong, but the automatic assumption that the facts are correct, is a dangerous one, and a common trap to fall into. Double checking and triple references are the order of the day. The excellent and reknowned Philip Sugden proved this in his excellent book on JTR, as have other sound writers, Stewart Evans, for example. So this "erring on the side of caution" attitude is paramount to any researcher.
Good luck and good hunting!