help with census confusion, please

[lazarus]

So, I have an ancestor named Alan Balam Brooks, born 30 Dec 1815 in Warren, GA. He died 9 Aug 1870 in Bullock Co., Alabama. He married Martha Ardella Hodge.

In the 1860 census there's a Balaam A Brooks married to a Martha A Brooks. He gives his birth as 1820. That doesn't bother me, they weren't too precise on the census, I've found. He's living in Pike Co., Alabama, which is next to Bullock Co. He has a long list of children, with ages from birth dates from 1843-1857.

Thing is, in the 1850 census I have an Allen Brooks married to an Ardella Brooks. Here, he gives his birth as 1816. And there's a totally different list of children, birth dates from 1835-1847. There's some overlap, but the ages are wrong (I have a Jane who is on both lists with wildly different ages, one born 1838, one 1850). In 1850, he's living in Kitchafoona, GA.

Both list Georgia as their birth place. The 1850 Brooks has a child named Joseph, with the right birth date, who would be my ancestor, Joseph Leonard Brooks. The 1860 Brooks doesn't have a Joseph listed, but Joseph would have been 23 and on his own by then.

So, how do I tell which one is right? Or are they both right, and this is just some inaccuracies in census taking? The children's dates are what's getting me. Some of the children born to the 1860 Brooks should have showed up in the 1850 census, and aren't there.

Thanks for any help or guidance.

[sybylla]

1. Couple of thoughts...

In my experience, they weren't very consistent in recording names and my ancestors weren't very consistent in reporting them. Since Balaam is a very unique name, it would be hard not to believe they are the same people.

Secondly, since you have already noted discrepancies in dates for the adults, you should expect them in the children. Informants for the census taker could be neighbors who didn't know all the details, might only know your ancestors by nicknames and likely guessed the rest. It may also be that being a certain age or having children of certain ages had some legal benefits locally or in regards to citizenship/residency. Add to that the fact that some people just didn't know exactly when they were born (even my husband's grandmother born in 1905 didn't know her exact birth date until she needed her birth certificate for something as an adult) and discrepancies are expected.

Let's start with the adults in question. Some variation of Alan Balaam and Martha Ardella appear in both censuses and they are together. That tells me it's a high probability they are the same people, especially since their appearance in both states matches so much of what you already know. The shifting to or away from use of the middle name may have happened due to naming conventions - the first name is in honor of a parent, grandparent or aunt/uncle, etc. If you didn't like it, you might have decided to use your middle name. You also might have decided that since there were 4 other Alan Brooks in the same community and same family, that you would go by your middle name to avoid confusion. I've found this a lot in families that stayed in the same community for generations.

Alternatively, life expectancy for children was crap in the 1800's. So children who showed up on the census in 1850 and should show up in 1860 but don't, have either apprenticed out, married (often quite young) or passed away. Children who show up in 1860 and should have shown up in 1850 but don't seem to, may be using a different name (middle name issue) or may be the children of a deceased brother or sister(nieces and nephews) which were often taken in by family. Unfortunately you're working in census years where there are few details as to relationship to help sort any of this out. Looking for those individuals in later census records may be helpful in answering some of these questions.

Lastly, don't forget to look through a few pages before and a few pages after your relatives in both censuses. (This is pretty easy to do on Ancestry - just go to your ancestors page and then either click the arrows to move through the census pages or enter the page numbers in the box.) Census takers walked streets and drove their buggies down country roads to record the census. That means most of the records are in street order and include neighbors of the Brooks family. In with those neighbors can be more relatives - grown children, parents/in-laws, brothers and sisters, future in-laws of Joseph Leonard Brooks or one of the other children, etc. If you already know who these people should be and can find any of them in close proximity in either or both censuses, then you might be able to pile up enough evidence that allows you to connect the dots indirectly, if not directly.

Sometimes it takes a lot of research to squeeze ancestors out of census records. It sounds to me like they are both the same family. You just need to find some supporting evidence.

[lazarus]

2. thanks so much for the reply

I hadn't thought about looking at other pages on the Census. I'll do that today.

For the name changes, for some reason, my family is big on using middle names over first names. In all branches. It may be a southern thing. So that could account for some of it.

[csziggy]

3. The other thing is could grandchildren be living with the couple?

A few times I have gotten confused and almost missed the right people in the census because they had children far too young to be their own. It turned out that their own children had died and the grandchildren (maybe with a surviving parent) had moved in. One ancestor at one point had fourteen grandchildren and two daughters-in-law living with him and his elderly wife.

The middle name thing is not just Southern I just got finished figuring out that Susan (tombstone) was the same person as Susannah Augusta (birth records) and as Augusta (1900 Census). Not to mention her mother Janet, Janet Louise, or Jeanette or Louise or Jennette. They were both born in Canada and lived in Michigan.

[lazarus]

4. the ages don't work, really, for grandchildren

But that's a good thought, I'll dig a little deeper.

[csziggy]

5. Or maybe nieces and nephews?

Extended family members of some kind?

[lazarus]

6. it's possible, but I have no idea how I'd establish that

:shrug:

[csziggy]

13. Yeah it is hard to hunt down siblings' children, especially before 1850

I just found an unidentified child today - the 13 year old girl is the half sister of the head of household's wife, but there is a 14 year old boy with a surname that does not match anyone in that family or the wife's step-father's family. I poked around a couple of hours trying to find out where he came from and where he went, but I could not find him again, at least not to be sure it was him. I'll probably never figure out who he is and where he came from or went to!

[jwirr]

18. check the census dates. Could they have moved from one place

to another between the taking of the census.

[madinmaryland]

19. I've seen that a couple of times. And it was only two or three weeks between

when the two censuses were taken.

[Rosie1223]

7. My guess is you have 2 different Alans

There can be some variance with dates but in large families usually you can get the children to match up. Even with the use of the middle name, you can get the sex and approximate age to match up. At least that has been my experience.

As mentioned above, Alan is probably a family name and your Alan may very well have had a cousin (or 2) also named Alan.

When I'm tracking dead relatives I start with my known facts as a starting point and go from there. You know Alan died in
Aug 1870 in Bullock Co. See if you can find a census record for Alan for that year. Censuses were supposed to be taken in June. See if Martha is still alive and if he has children in the household. See what other Brooks families are in the same township, look for marriage records for Bullock Co and see what Brooks marriages happened in the 1860s & 1870s.

Try to find a marriage date for Alan and Martha. If they were married in 1840 chances are they don't have a child born before that. Of course, they could have children from previous marriages, so see the age they were when they were married. If they were in their teens or early 20's, chances are it was a first marriage, if older, maybe a second.

Look at the earlier census records too. Tho they only list the head of household and group the others by age, you may be able to identify your ancestor by knowing the dates of their births and Joseph's.

Keep in mind, this is Civil War time in the South. Families did blend out of necessity and as mentioned above, childhood mortality was unfortunately high.

I like to call this the "Guess and Check" method. There are a lot of variables.

Good Luck!

[lazarus]

8. the one thing making me think it's the same Allen

is that one has Joseph, which is my ancestor, and the other is known as Balaam, which is an unusual name. But blended families is possible, as are the aforementioned nephews and cousins.

[Rosie1223]

9. I think you need to study further

Here is your Balaam from 1860 Pike Co Alabama: (sorry the formatting is bad on DU messages!)

1860 Pike Co Alabama

Name Age
Balaam A Brooks 40
Martha A Brooks 41
James Brooks 17
Henry C Brooks 15
Joseph W Brooks 14
Vincent L Brooks 12
Jane Brooks 10
Bailey Brooks 8
William A Brooks 5
Daniel P Brooks 3
John T Brooks 6/12

All the children are listed as being born in Alabama so this Balaam would presumably be living in Alabama 10 years previous.

Here he is in 1850 Pike Co Alabama

Name Age
B M Brooks 30
Martha Ann Brooks 31
Lydia Brooks 8
James Brooks 7
Henry Brooks 6
Joseph Brooks 4
Leonard Brooks 2
J C Brooks 21
Martha J Brooks 17

You see that the younger children in 1850 match up with the older children in 1860.

I see that there is a Joseph and a Leonard...sounds like those are family names as well and may very well be repeated in several families.

Good Luck!

[lazarus]

10. so the Allen-Ardella marriage in 1850 is a coincidence?

Interesting. I'll definitely look closer at the 1850 census now. Thanks!

Edit:
Looking, I'm confused further. The Joseph you have found is born the wrong year. He should be born around 1836/1837 to be my ancestor.

Ack!

[Rosie1223]

11. Here's the other Allen in Georgia:

He may fit your dates better??

1850 Marion Co, Georgia

Name Age
Allen Brooks 34
Adella Brooks 36
Elisabeth Brooks 15
Joseph Brooks 13
Jane Brooks 12
Allen Brooks 9
Marion Brooks 6
Wm Brooks 3

1860 Lumpkin, Stewart Co, GA
Name Age
Allen W Brooks 42
Ardilla Brooks 43
Falba Brooks 18
Matthew W Brooks 15
William Brooks 12

2 houses down:
Name Age
Joseph W Brooks 22
Elizabeth Brooks 18

There's also:
Name Age
Joseph L Brooks 21
Martha Brooks 18
Polly Burson 75

Could all be completely unrelated, though. That's why we do this :)

[lazarus]

12. I think that may be a cousin

Falba, or Phalbia, is also a family name from a generation or two earlier.

[Gormy Cuss]

14. Families that like to recycle names can be VERY difficult to untangle.

I've got several branches where the families reuse unusual names (Hatevil for one) and it gets very confusing when there are same named, same generation cousins living in an area.

What I've resorted to is compiling trees of all branches in the same area. Usually that either solves the conflict in my data or it opens up possibilities that weren't apparent initially.

[goclark]

17. I know a first name of ALLEN

Have you checked it that way?

[dgibby]

15. Something else to think about:

Very often, if a child died, a subsequent child would be given the name of the deceased child, thereby creating more confusion as to age, DOB, etc.

[lazarus]

16. I've heard about that sort of thing happening

I lost an infant, and can't imagine naming another child Trevor.