"United States Census, 1920," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33S7-9R6D-S64?cc=1488411&wc=QZJP-6RM%3A1036469101%2C1037290901%2C1037315301%2C1589332312 : 9 September 2019), Arizona > Navajo > St Joseph > ED 91 > image 4 of 6; citing NARA microfilm publication T625 (Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.). |
Note: This is not really a series although reading all the posts with this topic are useful. If you want to find additional topics, do a Google search for the first part of the post name and add the term "Genealogy's Star, like this "you can read handwritten documents! genealogy's star"]
As I go step-by-step back through the U.S. Federal Census records, I chose to highlight the census from a small town in Arizona where some of my ancestors lived. There are a total of six pages in this particular census enumeration district. Because the town is so small, I can see everyone who is related to me in a short review. In 1920, a fair percentage of the people living in the town were directly related to me. But of course, this post and the other related posts are about handwriting.
In 1920, the handwriting was still predominantly following the Palmer Method. Here is a screenshot of the first example.
For reference, here is an alphabet showing the ideal Palmer letter shapes.
You can see some radical departures in the characters such as the "T" for Henry M. Tanner and Teresea Clossey and also the "F" in Lorana F Richards. You can also see that some of the single letters are not written completely such as the "M" in Henry M Tanner. You might also note that many of the lower case "e" letters are closed and look more like an "i." You need to look carefully for the cross strokes for "t" and the dots for "i" to help distinguish these letters from others that are similarly written.
It is important to recognize these variations in letters and use a standard alphabet for comparison. Also, if you look down the list giving the head of household and other relationships, you will see a lot of variations from the same enumerator for the letter "H."
All in all, this example of 1920 style handwriting is fairly accurate and easily readable. Perhaps it would be a good idea to give another example for the same year with handwriting that is not quite as easily read.
"United States Census, 1920," database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33S7-9RJ2-WTM?cc=1488411&wc=QZJB-M7F%3A1036472201%2C1036474402%2C1037011001%2C1589335318 : 13 September 2019), Rhode Island > Washington > South Kingstown > ED 356 > image 1 of 30; citing NARA microfilm publication T625 (Washington, D.C.: National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.). |
This is from across the country in Rhode Island. Here is an example of some of the difficulties found in this census sheet.
You can immediately see that there is a much greater variation in this example from the standard Palmer Method alphabet example. The name "Julian" would be harder to read if the dot over the "i" were not obvious. Coming down the page, the next name circled looks like "Geaber." This turns out to be probable. There is a name "Geaber" found in other census records and in Rhode Island. See Ancestry.com "Where is the Geaber family from?" But the "b" could easily be mistaken for an "f."
The last example on this page shows a problem with an entry that was written over for a correction. One advantage of digital images is that you can zoom in and look closely at a single name.
The last name is likely Bannister but the first name is a real problem. This person is 60 years old and it is possible that he could be found in a previous or subsequent census record. Identifying this person's from just this record will take some research. If you look over in the census record, you will see that this person is reported to have been born in Ireland. This name was indexed as "Annie." The name is much easier to read in the 1930 census.
One reason to begin your handwriting study with the census records is this opportunity to verify your guesses and that of the indexer.
See you next time.
No comments:
Post a Comment