NameCensus.

UK surname

Sisterson

In the 1881 census there were 168 people recorded with the Sisterson surname, ranking it #14,380 among surnames in the records. By 2016, the modern count was 143, ranked #24,505, down from #14,380 in 1881.

The strongest historical links point to Lanchester (Collierley, Kyo, Billingside, Medomsley, Ebchchester, Benfieldside, Heelyfield, Conside, Corbridge and Gateshead. In the modern distribution records, the strongest local clusters include Sunderland, Northumberland and Newcastle upon Tyne.

Across the surname records, the highest recorded count for Sisterson is 243 in 1911. Compared with 1881, the name has fallen by 14.9%.

1881 census count

168

Ranked #14,380

Modern count

143

2016, ranked #24,505

Peak year

1911

243 bearers

Map years

9

1851 to 2016

Key insights

  • Sisterson had 168 recorded bearers in 1881, making it the #14,380 surname in that year.
  • The latest modern count shown here is 143 in 2016, ranked #24,505.
  • Within the historical census years, the highest count was 243 in 1911.
  • The contemporary neighbourhood profile most associated with the surname is Young Families in Industrial Towns.

Sisterson surname distribution map

The map shows where the Sisterson surname is concentrated in each census or modern distribution year. Darker areas mean a stronger local concentration.

Distribution map

Sisterson surname density by area, 1881 census.

Loading map
Lower densityMedium densityHigh density

Timeline

Back to top

Sisterson over time

The table below tracks recorded surname counts and rank from the 19th-century census years through the modern adult-register period.

Year Period Count Rank
1851 historical 118 #15,362
1861 historical 146 #15,628
1881 historical 168 #14,380
1891 historical 187 #15,679
1901 historical 205 #14,884
1911 historical 243 #13,163
1997 modern 150 #21,119
1998 modern 156 #21,144
1999 modern 162 #20,781
2000 modern 147 #22,081
2001 modern 148 #21,664
2002 modern 156 #21,348
2003 modern 144 #22,270
2004 modern 150 #21,830
2005 modern 154 #21,396
2006 modern 141 #22,833
2007 modern 137 #23,590
2008 modern 137 #23,883
2009 modern 140 #24,033
2010 modern 147 #23,809
2011 modern 151 #23,204
2012 modern 144 #23,902
2013 modern 150 #23,653
2014 modern 147 #24,177
2015 modern 143 #24,481
2016 modern 143 #24,505

Geography

Back to top

Where Sistersons are most common

Historical parish links are strongest around Lanchester (Collierley, Kyo, Billingside, Medomsley, Ebchchester, Benfieldside, Heelyfield, Conside, Corbridge, Gateshead, Newcastle All Saints and Tynemouth (Chirton, Preston, Murton, Whitley, Monkseaton), Earsdon (Earsdon). These are the places where the surname stands out most clearly in the older records.

The modern local-area list points to Sunderland, Northumberland, Newcastle upon Tyne and County Durham. Treat these as concentration signals, not proof that every family line began there.

Some modern areas include a three-digit suffix, such as Leeds 110. The suffix is a small-area code, so it stays in the table while the prose uses the plain place name.

Top historical parishes

Rank Parish Area
1 Lanchester (Collierley, Kyo, Billingside, Medomsley, Ebchchester, Benfieldside, Heelyfield, Conside Durham
2 Corbridge Northumberland
3 Gateshead Durham
4 Newcastle All Saints Northumberland
5 Tynemouth (Chirton, Preston, Murton, Whitley, Monkseaton), Earsdon (Earsdon) Northumberland

Top modern areas

Rank Area District
1 Sunderland 032 Sunderland
2 Northumberland 005 Northumberland
3 Newcastle upon Tyne 031 Newcastle upon Tyne
4 County Durham 013 County Durham
5 Newcastle upon Tyne 008 Newcastle upon Tyne

Forenames

Back to top

First names often paired with Sisterson

These lists show first names that appear often with the Sisterson surname in historical and recent records.

Modern profile

Back to top

Neighbourhood profile for Sisterson

Modern surname records can be compared with neighbourhood classifications. For Sisterson, this points to the kinds of places where the surname is most concentrated today.

These neighbourhood labels describe areas, not individual people. They are useful because surnames often cluster through family history, migration, housing patterns and local work. A surname can be strongest in one type of neighbourhood even when people with that name live across the country.

The UK classification gives the national picture. The London classification is more specific to the capital, where housing, age profile, tenure and population mix can look quite different from the rest of the UK.

UK neighbourhood type

UK Output Area Classification

Supergroup

Semi- and Un-Skilled Workforce

Group

Young Families in Industrial Towns

Nationally, the Sisterson surname is most associated with neighbourhoods classed as Young Families in Industrial Towns, within Semi- and Un-Skilled Workforce. This does not mean every Sisterson household fits that profile, but it gives a useful signal about where the modern surname distribution is strongest.

Read profile summary

Group profile

These neighbourhoods house predominantly young, UK-born individuals identifying with a White ethnic group with dependent children. Long-term disability and unpaid care are prevalent, and religious affiliations are uncommon. Housing is terraced or semi-detached and social rented sector housing is the norm. Unemployment is above the Supergroup average, and employment is principally in elementary occupations, as process plant and machine operatives, or in caring and leisure services. Educational attainment is low. The group is scattered throughout former industrial towns in the Midlands and the South Wales Valleys.

Wider pattern

Living in terraced or semi-detached houses, residents of these neighbourhoods typically lack high levels of education and work in elementary or routine service occupations. Unemployment is above average. Residents are predominantly born in the UK, and residents are also predominantly from ethnic minorities. Social (but not private sector) rented sector housing is common. This Supergroup is found throughout the UK’s conurbations and industrial regions but is also an integral part of smaller towns.

London neighbourhood type

London Output Area Classification

Supergroup

Older Residents in Owner-Occupied Suburbs

Group

London Fringe

Within London, Sisterson is most associated with areas classed as London Fringe, part of Older Residents in Owner-Occupied Suburbs. This gives the surname a London-specific profile rather than forcing the capital into the same pattern as the rest of the country.

Read profile summary

Group profile

Predominantly located in neighbourhoods on the outskirts of Greater London, residents of these neighbourhoods typically have their highest qualifications below degree (Level 4) level, with those still in work engaged in skilled trades and occupations in distribution, hotels and restaurants. There is low ethnic diversity in these neighbourhoods and high levels of Christian religious affiliation. Detached or terraced houses predominate, often with spare rooms.

Wider London pattern

The age distribution of these neighbourhoods is skewed towards the middle-aged and old, although few residents live alone or in communal establishments and numbers of dependent children are around average. Owner occupation is the norm, as is residence in detached or semi-detached houses. Residential densities are low and many households have spare rooms. Most residents were born in the UK and, aside from some identifying as members of Chinese or Indian ethnicities, identify as White. Mixed ethnicity households are rare. Incidence of married couples is higher than average and few individuals have never been married. A large proportion of individuals still in employment work in administrative and secretarial occupations, or in the construction industry. Few residents are students, and many households own more than one car.

Healthy neighbourhoods

Access to healthy assets and hazards

Sisterson is most concentrated in decile 7 for access to healthy assets and hazards. This places the surname near the middle of the scale.

Lower deciles point towards weaker access to healthy assets or stronger exposure to local hazards. Higher deciles point towards stronger access and fewer hazards.

7
Lower access Higher access

Neighbourhood deprivation

Index of Multiple Deprivation

Sisterson falls in decile 3 for neighbourhood deprivation. This puts the surname towards the more deprived end of the index.

Decile 1 represents the more deprived end of the scale. Decile 10 represents the less deprived end.

3
More deprived Less deprived

Broadband speed

Fixed broadband download speed

The modern neighbourhood pattern for Sisterson is most associated with a typical fixed broadband download band of Over 70 mbit/s.

The scale below places that band in context, from slower local download bands through to faster ones.

10
Slower band Faster band

Area snapshot

Ethnic group estimate

Most common ethnic group estimate
White - British

This describes the area pattern most associated with Sisterson, not the ethnicity of every person with the surname.

1881 census detail

Back to top

Sisterson families in the 1881 census

These tables use 1881 census entries for people recorded with the Sisterson surname. Use the location tables for concentration, then the name and occupation tables for the people behind the surname.

Top counties

Total is the county count. Frequency and index adjust for local population size, so they are better concentration signals. Northumberland leads with 108 Sistersons recorded in 1881 and an index of 44.56x.

County Total Index
Northumberland 108 44.56x
Durham 52 10.73x
Kent 2 0.36x
Middlesex 2 0.12x
Somerset 2 0.76x
Yorkshire 1 0.06x

Top districts and towns

Districts give a more local view than counties. Total shows raw records, while frequency and index show local concentration. Wellhaugh in Northumberland leads with 15 Sistersons recorded in 1881 and an index of 8333.33x.

Place Total Index
Wellhaugh 15 8333.33x
Gateshead 12 33.08x
Chirton 10 182.15x
Corbridge 9 1011.24x
Coxlodge 8 434.78x
Cramlington 8 250.00x
Newcastle On Tyne All Sts 8 55.25x
South Shields 8 185.19x
Belsay 6 2727.27x
Ebchester 6 800.00x
Prendwick 6 20000.00x
Wallbottle 6 1176.47x
Westgate 6 39.97x
Westoe 6 21.84x
Lamesley 5 191.57x
Birtley 4 1904.76x
Bishopwearmouth 4 9.62x
Harraton 4 425.53x
Newcastle On Tyne St 4 31.85x
Cambo 3 6000.00x
Great Whittington 3 2500.00x
Heworth 3 31.41x
Morpeth 3 105.26x
Bingfield 2 5000.00x
Keynsham 2 106.38x
Ovingham Whittle Spital 2 540.54x
Plashetts Tynehead 2 800.00x
St Giles 2 66.23x
Chester Le Street 1 26.88x
Featherstone 1 55.25x
Heddon On Wall 1 333.33x
Lewisham 1 3.37x
Newton 1 1111.11x
Riding 1 833.33x
Rochester St Margaret 1 17.06x
St George Hanover 1 4.70x
Stella 1 238.10x
Westminster St 1 16.64x

Top female names

These are the female first names most often recorded with the Sisterson surname in 1881. Names are not merged, so initials, variant spellings and transcription quirks can appear as separate rows.

Top male names

These are the male first names most often recorded with the Sisterson surname in 1881. Names are not merged, so initials, variant spellings and transcription quirks can appear as separate rows.

Name Count
John 18
Robert 11
Thomas 11
William 9
Edward 7
George 6
Matthew 5
Adam 2
James 2
Stephen 2
Curwin 1
Francis 1
Geo. 1
Ralph 1
Wiliam 1
Wm. 1

FAQ

Sisterson surname: questions and answers

How common was the Sisterson surname in 1881?

In 1881, 168 people were recorded with the Sisterson surname. That placed it at #14,380 in the surname rankings for that year.

How common is the Sisterson surname today?

The latest modern count shown here is 143 in 2016. That gives Sisterson a modern rank of #24,505.

What does the Sisterson map show?

The map shows local surname concentration for the selected year. Darker areas have a stronger concentration of Sisterson bearers relative to the surrounding population.

What records is this surname page based on?

The historical counts come from census surname records. The modern counts and neighbourhood summaries come from later surname distribution records. Counts are recorded bearers in those records, not a live estimate of everyone with the name today.