I have returned to family history research after a few years off.
I have been rechecking one of my ancestors, Absolom KNIGHT.
I have found him and family on various censuses ( all via FamilySearch.org )except on the 1861 Census.
I just cannot find them on this census no matter what spelling, etc I try ?
Curiously I don't remember this problem when researching them a few years ago, and seem to remember slowhands posting this information back then ?
Also I just checked the 1861 Census on this FOD website (thanks to the person/people who transcribed it), and found Absolom and family quite easily !
Can anyone explain why I can't find Absolom and family on the 1861 Census accessed via FamilySearch.org ?

--
MXB

Hi mxb and welcome back.

Searching this forum for "absolom knight" gives the following old threads which mention him, hopefully they will contain what you're looking for (you don't indicate his whereabouts, likely age, etc).

I'm afraid I cannot spend more time now, but hope to be back on line later-on tonight, or tomorrow Wednesday, when I'll try and find that elusive 1861 census.

Re Familysearch, I cannot explain your specific problem, but can say I've found similar issues myself where apparently clear census info cannot be found as easily as I'd expected. In my case I then searched for another name in the same household in the same census year, perhaps this will work for you ?. I'm a big fan of the Familysearch site, despite my initial reservations when I first started my researches abt 7 years ago, when all the text books suggested that site was "full" of transcription errors, perhaps that's the problem here ?.

atb J

http://forest-of-dean.net/fodmembers/index.php?id=1696

http://forest-of-dean.net/fodmembers/index.php?id=15402

I assume this is the correct person?

GR 1851 Census, Highbeech, East Dean

Absalom KNIGHT, 39, Coal miner
Elizabeth, Wife, 35
William, Son, 17
Charlotte, Daur, 15
Richard, Son, 12
Sophia, Daur, 7
M Ann, Daur, 4
Elizabeth, Daur, 1

If so, in GR 1861, High Beech, East Dean

(Thomas) KNIGHT, 53, Coal miner
Elizabeth, Wife, 45,
Mary Ann, Daur, 14
Elizabeth, Daur, 11,
Jane Hanah?, Daur, 9
George, Son, 4

The problem is that Absalom’s name is somewhat unclear on the original image. It looks more like Ablom. However, transcribing it as Thomas looks like an act of desperation by GR! It is certainly not that. FamilySearch have done exactly the same thing and transcribed him as Thomas. Jeff’s suggestion is a sound one; if you search via Elizabeth the results should come up

Mike has sorted it. The image of the census return is very poor. Ancestry have transcribed him as Abslom. His wife is Elizabeth born about 1816. On ancestry their address is High Beech, on findmypast it is High Back.
familysearch.org and findmypast are linked and clicking on the original images icon on familysearch take you to findmypast. findmypast have Absolom transcribed as Thomas.
This is the link to the transcription on family search
https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:M728-QLJ

Thanks guys that is the one I was looking for. Obviously I am not as eagle-eyed as you...it will probably take me awhile to get my research eye sight back.
As I said I got the info that I wanted from the excellent 1861 Census transcription on this website.
I was curious as to why I couldn't find it easily via FamilySearch.
I don't recall having any trouble finding it all those years ago.

Yes FamilySearch was known for it's transcription errors, and I personally recall getting multiple different results for a person's baptism. But as it's free we can't really complain.

Thanks again and I promise to get better at the searching...

--
MXB