For batch [M366-CYS] . There are duplicate names. The one is numbered the other is not.
[M366-CYS]
Person #7 is listed without his age. Under his name is the ditto symbols and his age listed. That person is not listed as #8. The next person has a different name and is the #9 person.
I think the #7 person is the same as the one listed under him. Something like this:
#7 Jeff Lane
" " Age 30
# 8 Jacob Hill
Do I list both Jeff Lane's or are they the same Person? They have this symbol after the 2 names }
Best Answers
-
I would only list Thomas Turner, Samuel Christie, Robert A Cunningham, etc. once. since they have one number and also are bracketed together.
0 -
Thank you for tackling this batch. It is a bit confusing. While I see your point and Melissa's, in the Project Instructions under What to Remember about This Project, bullet point 3 instructs us to:
- Index each unique name recorded in the first column of names, usually titled "Taxable Party" or "Occupants." Some names may be duplicated. When names are exact duplicates, meaning that all required fields are the same, index only the first instance of the name listed. Skip the other exact duplicates and then index the next unique name. Unique names include names with different middle initials and different name spellings or where the other required fields are different.
When you look at the age column, in some instances the age is blank. This registrar used ditto marks in his columns to denote when entries were the same from line to line. There are no ditto marks in the age column so we cannot assume that the age would be the same. I do realize that in some instances the empty age was above the written age, but there is also an entry where the written age is above the empty age.
If you look down the page at the Surname McNicol which are also in brackets, we see several different Given Names but only one age listed. We cannot assume that each of those individuals is 61; we can only use that for Nicole McNicol. The last set of names in brackets are again 3 different people but only one age is listed; again we cannot assume they are the same age; especially as this registrar did use ditto marks consistently in this document.
Bottom line is, I would index each of the names on this record simply because the "required fields", which is any field on the form with an asterisck (*) by it, are different for the age field.
Thank you again for your work on this project. I hope this helps.
Linda
0 -
I agree with LindaCP that all unique names are to be indexed, and that not having an age to index makes those entries unique based on the instruction.
But, I also think that one has to look at the whole document and assess what constitutes a unique name. In my opinion, the numbers beside the numbers prove each as an individual, and the brackets show they are involved in the multiple taxable properties. When we look at the names of the McNicols, they are all unique names, (Daniel, Alese, Colin, Nicol) with unique ordinal numbers next to them. The only one with an age recorded is the Freeholder. Of course we would not assume an age, since one is not listed for the first three names. I also think the use of ditto marks, meaning it is repetitive information, is another reason that we know these are not unique entries.
However, you could index the Gender on the ones that indicate LS in the fourth column as Male, since we know they are Landholder's Sons. There are 6 sons identified on this image. I am sure this is being missed since there is no example that covers the use of LS.
Sometimes the instructions and the examples don't cover all situations. In my most humble opinion, this image is one of them. What would be the benefit of indexing a record with only a duplicated name and a null response for the age field when the goal is to get the researcher to the image which will be "freely accessible to the general public"? On the other hand, it doesn't hurt anything to create a record which only has a name. If I were reviewing, I would accept either.
1 -
Thank you for your inputs!
0