I was going crazy looking for my great great grandfather, Benjamin Franklin Igleheart, and his family on the 1880 census. None of my searches of various sites turned him up. I really wanted to find that census, because I knew from the 1900 census that his wife, Mattie, had given birth to 11 children, only three of whom were alive in 1900. I had found five of them, but I assumed that finding the 1880 census would reveal the names of more. (Mattie was 25 in 1870.)
So I decided I would browse my way through the census looking for the family. I had a good idea they were living in McLean county, Kentucky, where he lived before the Civil War. (He fought in that war.) I knew that in 1870 they lived in Arkansas, something I initially doubted but was confirmed in his Civil War pension record. But since they had a child born in 1881 in Kentucky, I felt comfortable trying Kentucky first.
I had found Ben’s mother and stepfather in the 1880 census in Sacramento, McLean, Kentucky, so I started there. I browsed forward a page at a time, scanning the handwritten names. After a few pages, I decided to start looking the opposite direction, so I went back to his mother and started scanning a page at a time backward. Sure enough, just two pages behind his mother, there they were! The words “Igleheart, B.F.” jumped right out at me. His age and his family members’ names and ages matched up. Eureka!
So why didn’t they show up on a search? A simple transcription error. The name had been indexed as “Lylehuist.” When I look at it, I can see why. (I bet you can too, if you squint at the image above.) In Ancestry, where I found the document, I edited the record to add the name Igleheart in order to help others. I don’t see that record coming up on a search of Igleheart, though.
The 1880 family included two children, born in the 1870s whose names I didn’t have. They’ve now been added to my family-tree software. I still have four more children to find.
I have to say, it was really exciting to spot this family. I was in a college library among strangers, so I managed to keep from shouting out. I did raise both arms in victory, though!
i think I’m going to have to use the same strategy for some of my mystery people
Good luck! Let me know if it works for you!
I love those “YES” moments! I would of seen the name as “Lylehurst” so can understand the mistake.
I always try and look a few pages back and forward from relatives just to see if I can find a familiar name that may be connected somehow, you never know what you may find! You’re ya hoo moment is what we call in kindergarten a silent cheer haha the kids love it! Love your blog!!
Lylehuist / Igleheart – what a transcription error that was! You were smart to take a deep breath and browse, how wonderful for you to have found new answers and new clues.
Maybe church records are in your future for those missing children? Can’t wait to hear!
Thanks, Laura! I bet you’re right that I should look into church records–I should have tried that when I was at the Allen County Library! Thanks so much for your comment!
Practically all my research is in France, where indexing is not prevalent. In a way this has been much better for my genealogy research, because, that I want it or not, I have to turn each page at a time and scan for the names I know. I don’t even really use the “decennales” tables, which are useless in villages, where every other person has the same surname and even the same first name. I would never have made some of the discoveries I have made, if not for the methodical browsing I do. That goes too for the censuses, where I discovered families that had disappeared from my radar, and lo and behold, they were just a few houses away from those I was searching for at the time. In my opininon the indexes should just be another hint to start a more methodical search. Glad you found what you were looking for using that same method.
Annick, I think you make a great point: When we rely on indexes, we can miss so much. It’s a little like reading newspapers by clicking on a link to a story, rather than the old-fashioned ways we used to skim a whole newspaper. Or buying music singles one at a time, rather than listening to a whole, curated album. “Indexes should just be another hint to start a more methodical search.” Wise words!
Congratulations on your success in finding the family. I’m curious if you used Ancestry and Family Search? I’ve heard that since they are indexed by different people that sometimes you get different results from different sources. I haven’t really tried it myself.
When I was looking for the Igleheart family in the 1880 census, I checked both Ancestry and Family Search (hoping they’d been indexed differently). After reading your comment just now, I searched “Lylehuist” on Family Search and there they were! So it was indexed the same (incorrect) way for both sources. Interesting!
That is amazing! They weren’t being easy to find.
There’s a way to browse on ancestry by county or district using transcribed records, and one of the people who works at ancestry always suggested if you KNEW you had an ancestor who lived in a certain place, put in less information and search that way by the county and read through the whole indexed records (instead of the handwritten ones, first). Sometimes there are even “blanks” in the transcribed copies because the indexers have no idea who it is because it is too faded or has other issues and she says looking at who it is “around” on the typed page, if you have any clues to their identity can give you an idea, if you suspect they are spelled wrong, and you can find them that way. I’ve had many, many relatives spelled wrong. A few I browsed through the longhand written out pages to find (fortunately it was a tiny town) but it is a neat trick. You have to go in through card catalog, pick a census, on “lived in” type in the county, and state and you have to mark “exact to” on that particular category, and then if you want to put more information in you can, like a first name, or a beginning of a last name (L*)– or use soundex conversion on the name. Try it a couple different ways. Try leaving the name completely blank and bringing up the whole county, and looking for blank unindexed entries. If you still can’t find the person, spread out to neighboring countries and start again. I found one person that way. It was a neat trick and saved me the agony of reading through a bunch of faded handwriting. I’m much better at computer tricks than deciphering old handwriting that has already been beaten and destroyed.
Oh my goodness, Julie, thank you for taking the time to write out that technique! I can’t wait to try it!
The researcher who suggested that trick is Crista Cowan, one of the more “famous” people from Ancestry.com, in a video of hers that she had about hitting brick walls and missing people (I think its on youtube–it was a great watch– many tips!). She, lucky for us, will be one of the speakers at the genealogical conference in St. Louis I had mentioned to you about– I’m very excited she will be there!
I’ve heard Crista speak before (more than once) and I look forward to hearing her again! Thanks so much for telling me about the October conference in St. Louis. I look forward to meeting you there!
Oh yes, as researchers we absolutely need the patience to page through images! I’ve used that same technique on the City Directories on Ancestry, which are horribly indexed. The payoff is finding the information you’re after (and doing the victory dance)!
I admire your diligence! Those city directories can be a little tedious to look at. I haven’t browsed them, but I think it’s an excellent idea! And isn’t the payoff extra sweet after browsing?
Yes definitely, browsing a census is the only way when index searches yield nothing. Worked for me years ago when no search I tried on the 1880 census for my NYC Coyle ancestors succeeded. Yet, I knew they were there. Browsed the enumeration district for where they lived and there they were. The enumerator had written Coyne instead of Coyle. A definite reminder that indexes and soundex etc.are just starting places. However, browsing hasn’t worked for another ancestor invisible in 1860 Philadelphia.
Yes! Your Coyle/Coyne is very similar to my Igleheart/Lylehuist situation. I hope you eventually find your 1860 Philadelphia ancestor!