Census 1911: British Infirmities Listed As ‘Old Age', 'Baldness' And Being 'Short Of Cash' (PICTURES)

1911 Census

First Posted: 06/01/12 12:46 Updated: 06/01/12 12:46

The release of a section of the 1911 census relating to illnesses and infirmities gives a revealing insight into how people viewed their health then.

The column, which details descriptions of people's ailments as perceived by the head of the household on the night of Sunday 2 April 1911, has remained closed under data protection regulations until now.

The entries, given for the most part by people who would have had no medical knowledge, are often amusing, with some of the more unusual health conditions including "old age", "voteless", "bald" and being "short of cash".

A less politically correct age is apparent in the use of language - with "lunatic" and "imbecile" both occurring in the top five most common ailments, along with "feeble-minded".

In many of the entries individuals' negative attributes are listed, rather than their illnesses.

One record, written by John Underwood from Hastings, East Sussex, describes his children as "quarrelsome", "stubborn", "greedy", "vain" and "noisy" while he records himself as "bad-tempered" and his wife as suffering from a "long tongue".

Another unusual entry is from Thomas Wallace Young, who was described as "bald and toothless".

The cause of the suffragettes is also illustrated within the records, with some women listing their infirmities as not having the vote or not being enfranchised. For example, four women living in the same household recorded their infirmities as "voteless, therefore classed with idiots and children".

Others chose to make a note of their good health instead of the health problems the form enquired about, giving answers such as "well", "healthy", "sane", "alright", and even "perfect".

Evelyn Baker and her family from Leeds were recorded in the census by their father, Addiman Parkin Barker, as simply being "alive" and 72 entries said of their illnesses: "none, thank God".

The census also shows a correlation between infirmity and occupation. The biggest source of employment for blind men and women was basket-weaving. Other trades for blind men were as musicians or musical instrument makers.

Women who were deaf and dumb were often employed within the textile or garment trades, or in domestic service, while men were most likely to be labourers.

Debra Chatfield, family historian at findmypast.co.uk, said: "The infirmities column is the last piece of the jigsaw completing the 1911 census. This column alone provides a fascinating insight into life a hundred years ago.

"It not only reflects health conditions, but also a time before society became aware of political-correctness and certain terminology was deemed acceptable.

"In the more unusual entries we also get a wonderful sense of post-Edwardian humour, society and family dynamics at this time."

Audrey Collins, family history records specialist at The National Archives, said: "The information in the infirmities column being released today helps add an extra dimension to the picture of our ancestors' lives in 1911.

"We have to remember that the census returns were completed by relatives living in the same house who for the most part had no specialist medical knowledge.

"Their descriptions provide us with a clue as to how each individual was viewed by other family members, although many would have been reluctant to admit that their relatives suffered from any defect."

The infirmities column can be viewed at www.1911census.co.uk and www.findmypast.co.uk, which first launched the 1911 census in 2009 in association with The National Archives.

1  of  5
PLAY
FULLSCREEN
ZOOM
SHARE THIS SLIDE 
A 1911 census entry showing the section relating to illnesses and infirmities filled in with words such as short of cash. Photo: The National Archives/PA
RATE IT!   |  
VOTE
CURRENT TOP 5 PICK YOUR OWN TOP 5
USERS WHO VOTED
NEW! CREATE YOUR OWN SLIDESHOW
FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK

Filed by Sara C Nelson  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 17
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
20:14 on 07/01/2012
like it
17:49 on 07/01/2012
"Less politically correct" maybe because they weren't subjected to being 'ruled' by the EU and were allowed to speak their own minds! They also didn't have to cope with the mass immigration problem!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deluk
hot mess...
08:56 on 09/01/2012
yawn.
00:03 on 07/01/2012
wife suffering from a "long tongue" .. HAHAHAHA! XD ... not much has changed in the last 100 years then!
11:15 on 07/01/2012
Made me smile too lol
22:34 on 06/01/2012
Don't get me started on my family.
21:38 on 06/01/2012
This Huff post is total bollox they dont pulish comments. they write utter bollox im not reading it again..bring back aol
20:56 on 06/01/2012
No political correctness, at least that was one thing that was good 100 years ago. They said like it was.
13:45 on 07/01/2012
Very well said Chris1000! - and THAT is what makes for a happy top-down society worth defending - regardless of financial status. Sadly todays society is so vile and unhappy - who would give their lives to defend it? We were warned 100 years ago against what was coming if it was not ruthlessly stopped - with expression: "Fake humanitarianism and zionism - are satan's pincers".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
deluk
hot mess...
09:04 on 09/01/2012
You think society a hundred years ago wasn't "vile and unhappy"?..but never mind let's just attack those  in society to weak to defend themselves, judging by your comment you're slightly demented, we'll begin with you.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
18:36 on 06/01/2012
Quarrelsome", "stubborn", "greedy", "vain" and "noisy" Probably the most accurate description of a man's children. BTW they all went on to become politicians!
18:33 on 06/01/2012
Most people were what we consider as poor, they led their lives as best they could, we should count ourselves very grateful that we are so much better off.
To complain that one is poor because of a lack of a 40" TV seems crass when we look back at what being poor really meant, starvation, early child death and death in childbirth, the workhouse and worse.
We are very lucky and of course poverty is relative, compared to a family in a 3rd world country even our poorest are rich.
19:43 on 06/01/2012
It may seem crass when you aren't comparing like with like.
Poverty is relative to the times we live in. The aristocracy in Norman times didn't have 40 ' TVs but they were relatively rich compared to the rest of society.
These days nearly everybody has 40' TVs therefore they are regarded as everyday items not luxuries....perhaps they should be and the cost of them should rise so that only the rich can afford them.
20:18 on 06/01/2012
I am one of the 99%
16:18 on 06/01/2012
Whats that I see written on the top one in small print?

"For God's sake don't give women the vote - British society and the family itself will collapse - and the next thing is they will want men's jobs, equal rights - and vote in complete idiots to make sure they get it!"

Phew - I suppose that we should consider ourselves lucky that THAT didn't happen!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
adidasmmxx
No likey? Not bovvered !
22:17 on 06/01/2012
Read recently that Women who seek equality with Men ,lack ambition ...