Eliz, For interest only: I am currently involved in a project referencing Free BMD with Parish Registers and have been surprised by the errors I have found in Free BMD. The percentage is not very large, but of them many are due to poor quality copy images. Spelling errors are not uncommon, and reference numbers can be incorrect. I have also found some individuals totally missing. even though the register is supposed to be completed.
I am not criticising Free BMD who I think have done a marvellous job of transcribing so many records, but just advising that if you do not see, or get, what you are looking for it may not mean the record does not exist. Ron Ferguson http://www.fergys.co.uk/ -----Original Message----- From: Eliz Hanebury Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 9:57 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] "Facts" In the English census there is a Parish problem, they really are moveable feasts and they change and people often will use the new parish name as their birth place. As for age, FreeBMD makes it fairly easy to find the year (however it is year of registration not of birth, but it will be closer than the census age) Eliz On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Joan Kemp <[email protected]> wrote: > As a veteran researcher of many English censuses, I regard the stated age > (date of birth) as no more than a useful guide. The 1841 census, in > particular, rounded down to the nearest 5 years, though a few ennumerators > defied the rules and used 'exact' ages. The DOB is particularly suspect > when the woman is older than the man..... > 'Place of birth' tends to suffer a similar fate, particularly with older > people who are wont to say they were born wherever they are currently > living. > My husband's gg grandfather's birthplace was listed as Tenbury, > Worcestershire (1851); Tenbury, Worcestershire (1871); Worcester (1881); > Woolwich, Kent (1891); Worcester (1901). The older censuses tend to be > more > accurate here. > > When searching on ancestry, I try to give the widest margins possible. So > above, I would search for 'Kemp' (or better, 'William' as Christian names > are less susceptible to mis-spelling) yob 1830 - 1840, birthplace > 'Worcestershire'. If I am sure of the place of residence, I will add it > to > the seach (Woolwich, Kent). However, I have frequently been reduced to > searching for all the people born in some small village over a 10 year > period - you track them down eventually! > > Happy hunting > > Joan > > > > On 22/08/2011 16:51, Ron Ferguson wrote: > > Paula, > > The probable year of birth when calculated from a census is not > necessarily > that given in, say, Ancestry’s index. Consider the English Census which is > usually taken around the end of March of the census year. If in 1911 the > age > of someone at the time of the census is 50, then Ancestry will give the > year > of birth as 1861 (1911-50). I would suggest that this is wrong because the > actual dob lies between 1 Apr 1860 and 31 Mar 1861, so there is a 75% > chance > that the actual year of birth is 1860, which is the year I would use. > > However, having said that, the census ages of the English seem to be > rather > like Easter – a moveable feast – so at the end of the day I doubt if it > makes much difference. > > Ron Ferguson > http://www.fergys.co.uk/ > > > From: Paula Ryburn > Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 4:33 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] "Facts" > > Thanks, Connie, for all this detail. I run into this "calculating the > best > date based on multiple somewhat conflicting sources" issue a lot and > appreciate your insights. > > To the OP: Sometimes the age on census is a year different just because > of > the date the census was taken, at least I've found that to be the case > with > some of my ancestors. > > --Paula in Texas > Researching: Adair Baker Beasley Benson Betz Bigley Blagrave Burton > Chapman > Clement Clough Coppernoll Costine Daulton Dinwiddie Doody Ellis Exline > Field > Floran Floyd Gates Goodale Gordon Gump Hale Harbaugh Hind Hopkins Hughes > Hurdle Jones Klein Koyle Laswell McDonald Misner Passwaters Pelton Roberts > Roche Ryburn Short Singer Sullivan Weller Williams > > > ________________________________ > From: Connie Sheets <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wed, August 17, 2011 4:14:50 PM > Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] "Facts" > > It is perfectly acceptable to use the "best" source for a fact. For > example, if I have an original marriage record, I cite that for the date > and > location of a marriage, rather than a book of compiled marriage records. > Or, if I've been to a cemetery and saw a tombstone with my own eyes, I > cite > t Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
