"Brick Walls".....

[DavidWW]

Every researcher will regularly come up against these

I've made many posts going into the details of various situations in relation to Scottish statutory, census, OPR and other records.

The reason for this is that, unless you understand, sometimes in considerable detail, the full process that led to the creation of a particular record, then you will not have anything approaching a full understanding of the numerous errors than can creep into the whole process...... and be able to breach those d****d brick walls.

While I have a reasonable level of expertise in terms of the the various Scottish records, I rely heavily on sources such as the 440 page "Vital Registration: A Manual of the Law and Practice concerning The Registration of Births, Deaths and Marriages", author G T Bisset-Smith, published by William Green & Sons, Edinburgh, in 1907.

Until and unless you have read this, you would just not believe the range of most unusual situations that registrars had to cope with

I can only comment that I'm very glad that I was not the registrar for a small, rural registration district in the late 1800s in terms of the quite wierd situations that could occasionally come up, along with the question of how such an unusual situation should be handled in terms of the entry on the appropriate register of B or M or D ......... and, believe me!, you ain't seen anything yet in terms of the situations that can come up that you haven't even imagined

Similar considerations apply to the 1841 to 1901 censuses, and I can only encourage you to look at http://www.talkingscot.com/censuses/census-intro.htm and read and appreciate the various instructions to the enumerators, - together with FreeCen Scotland we have recently located these instructions for the 1861 and 1871 censuses, - which will shortly be uploaded to TalkingScot, - as will be a conversion table for the census district numbers used in 1851 only to those used in 1861 and later.

David

[Davie]

As usual David, very good advice and information.
Can you tell me where the LDS got their info that is on the IGI?
I have found several items that state "this is an extract from .......etc"
But when I have looked at SP or in the Record Office in Edinburgh, or the local Parish, I can find nothing.
However, on my family records the dates from the IGI tie in, but I cannnot find them anywhere.
Awrabest
Davie

[DavidWW]

As usual David, very good advice and information.
Can you tell me where the LDS got their info that is on the IGI?
I have found several items that state "this is an extract from .......etc"
But when I have looked at SP or in the Record Office in Edinburgh, or the local Parish, I can find nothing.
However, on my family records the dates from the IGI tie in, but I cannnot find them anywhere.
Awrabest
Davie

If it's described as an extract then it's just that. Most will be from the microfilms of the OPR, but, as with two censuses, there were two filmings, with one better than the other. The batch number should give you the film number, and a look in the LDS catalogue should tell you the filming.

But remember that there were a number of secession records included in IGI.

I'm not sure what the exact situation is but it may also be the case that BVRI material has been added to the online "IGI".

David

[AndrewP]

But remember that there were a number of secession records included in IGI.

To follow through an example of that, have a look at the christening record for one of my ancestors.

Go to the IGI search page on www.familysearch.org and input the name Jean Crookshanks; birth/christening, exact year 1795; British Isles, Scotland.

That should give one result.

• 1. Jean <Crookshanks> - International Genealogical Index
  Gender: Female Christening: 11 MAR 1795 Bridgend Associate Congregation, Mid Calder, Midlothian, Scotland

Click on her name to see the record.

Near the bottom of the page, click on the source call number 0304671. That produces a list of churches with records on that microfilm. Go to item #20 and click on the link there. The clue is on that page. The original of this record is held at the Scottish Record Office (the old name for the National Archives of Scotland), probably in General Register House (next door to New Register House).

The OPR records that appear on the ScotlandsPeople search are all from the (Established) Church of Scotland registers, whose originals are held in New Register House.

So the rule of thumb is, if a pre-1855 birth or marriage is in New Register House, it should appear on the ScotlandsPeople search. If the record is held elsewhere, but has been filmed (probably by the Genealogical Society of Utah), it can appear on the IGI without appearing on ScotlandsPeople.

All the best,

Andrew Paterson

[sporran]

Hello all,


I believe that the filming of English, Welsh, and Scottish records was through a collaboration of GRO, GROS, and the LDS. What is not clear is if a common index was used or the parties extracted their own indexes from the films, and perhaps someone with more knowledge could comment.

Certainly there are anomalies, especially with RCEs, which I suspect the LDS did not access, or ignored. Consider Charlotte McCurdy, born in Bridgeton Lanark in 1865, whose name was changed to Jane 3 months later through a RCE. She is indexed on the IGI only as Charlotte and on SP only as Jane, and I have not checked New Register House.


Regards,

John

[DavidWW]

Hello all, I believe that the filming of English, Welsh, and Scottish records was through a collaboration of GRO, GROS, and the LDS. What is not clear is if a common index was used or the parties extracted their own indexes from the films, and perhaps someone with more knowledge could comment.

I believe that the first index was purely an LDS effort, but that the index from the second filming, which resulted in the Scottish Churches CD, was a joint GROS/LDS project. It's this second index which is the basis of the GROS index as far as I'm aware, - I write "basis" as the GROS index is added to and updated on a regular basis. Exactly what is now on line at www.FamilySearch.org I don't know.

I suspect that it's possible that BVRI material may recently have been added.

Certainly there are anomalies, especially with RCEs, which I suspect the LDS did not access, or ignored. Consider Charlotte McCurdy, born in Bridgeton Lanark in 1865, whose name was changed to Jane 3 months later through a RCE. She is indexed on the IGI only as Charlotte and on SP only as Jane, and I have not checked New Register House.

LDS, or rather Genealogical Society of Utah, GSU, compiled the indexes directly from the statutory microfilms which were produced for 1855 to 1875 + 1881 and 1891, as far as I'm aware. Although there are microfiches of the RCEs I'm not clear on who produced these and when, and, when these statutory indexes were compiled by GSU, as far as I'm aware there was no cross-referencing between the OPR microfilms and RCE microfiches.

David

[worldlywanderer]

The "Brick Walls" heading inspired me to participate in this forum for the first time.

I have been in correspondence with management at the Scotlandspeople Centre on the subject of indexes for many months. The best information I believe I obtained was that the OPR index is the IGI index - which one I am not certain even GROS know. I believe the error level in that index to be substantial and I know I am not alone in that belief. There is a way GROS could establish what the error level is but they have point blank refused to do this on the grounds that it would be a waste of staff resources. I would quote exactly what was said but emails from GROS all contain a privacy clause - I'm not sure how effective that is but would hate to be the one who forced them to waste staff resources arguing the case.

In January of this year I was informed that had become easy enough to update poor images images of the statutory records and GROS now claim they can do this within a couple of hours of a report being received. For OPRs, however, I understand the software was completely different making the updating of the index much more complex. I understand this has still not happened and GROS are currently sitting on over two hundred reported errors (their figure) but bear in mind that a reported error could reflect whole sections of the index which are incorrect. Some months ago I was told that the number of known errors was well into four figures and that this could reflect an error level ten times higher. Frankly, until GROS are prepared to disprove this belief I am convinced that the higher error levels are more likely to be correct. Probably the most honest statement issued from GROS on the subjeect is that nobody knows how many OPR images need to be rescanned.

If one searches the SP website diligently it is possible to discover a list which shows each year for which GROS hold an image for a death or deaths in that parish. I compared this list to the published index used to indicate which year ranges exist for different classes in each parish and discovered several anomalies. The reasons given for these anomalies are interesting but not the issue. What concerns me is that this is recent work by a GROS contractor and although I could find the errors without the benefit of the electronic or staff resources of GROS apparently their checking systems did not. these anomalies alone prove, in my opinion, the need for a careful look at the images currently on the system compared with the paper resources and the two previously produced although incomplete indexes. Without this I cannot see how GROS can even begin to estimate the staff resources required to correct the errors let alone plan a programme of corrections.

Given there is an acknowledgement that the error level is significant one might expect a warning on the SP web sites. I have written confirmation that no such warning exists or is planned. It appears to me and other users of the SP Centre that the only work currently undertaken on the identification of errors is by us - the paying public. We identify the errors and we report then, well, at least some people report some of the errors. It seems to me that the least one might expect is feedback when an error is corrected or an apparently missing image is found. GROS management have recently confirmed that they have no plans to "divert staff time" to provide such feedback.

There is a formal complaints procedure which requires a specific answer within a specific time and enables reference to more senior management and eventually, the Parliamentary Ombudsman if an answer is unsatisfactory. It seems excessive to invoke such a ponderous procedure but perhaps that is what is required to have GROS management recognise that incomplete indexes and missing images are failures of their system and reports of missing images or incomplete indexes are complaints and require acknowledgement. Even if we are likely to have to wait years for all of the errors to be corrected.

[Alan SHARP]

Quote.......
"Brick Walls".....
by DavidWW » Tue Oct 04, 2005 11:27 am
................................snipped...............
I can only comment that I'm very glad that I was not the registrar for a small, rural registration district in the late 1800s in terms of the quite weird situations that could occasionally come up, along with the question of how such an unusual situation should be handled in terms of the entry on the appropriate register of B or M or D ......... and, believe me!, you ain't seen anything yet in terms of the situations that can come up that you haven't even imagined ......................................

End of Quote.

Before I was married, (in late 60’s) when the high NZ teenage pregnancy rate and NZ legislation regarding legal terminations, was getting a lot of press, a youth group I was active in, invited a leading gynaecologist as their guest speaker, to cover the issues from his perspective.

From the get go, he explained that as a specialist providing services for the National health provider, and one of those licensed, under legislation, to be a co-signer to any termination, his personal beliefs should not influence the advise, and options, he gave those referred to him. Nor did he cover his personal beliefs. In a twenty minute address he had our full attention, covering all the issues and the practicalities involved, and concluded with the observation that unplanned pregnancy, was also an issue that many in middle age, had to address.

Surprised at his parting statement, one of the girls in the audience, asked if he cared to elaborate. He then stated his most unusual case, of a patient referred to him, was the middle aged wife of a surgeon who thought she was part way through menopause. Very embarrassed she had to tell him that while two surgeons were overseas (with their respective wives) attending a medical conference, they decided to entertain themselves, with a partner swap. As her husband had had a vas., the father of her unplanned pregnancy, had to be the other surgeon, from her one night stand. There was a gasp from the attending youth.

The question for me, if that pregnancy went full term, was who would tell the child, and would both couples take stewardship for the raising the child. With the best intensions in the world, such a task is a tall order.

Alan SHARP.