Ancestry Database

scooter · Post by **scooter** » Fri Jan 30, 2009 9:44 pm

Hello All,

Just noticed that Ancestry now have a fully-searchable database of the England and Wales birth indexes from 1916 - 2005, so rather than scouring the scans of the indexes you can now search by a variety of options and see computer generated results. Quite how accurate they are I'm not sure, although I found myself without too much bother.

Cheers,

Scott

Currie · Post by **Currie** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:02 am

Thanks Scott, that’s very interesting.

I wonder where that database came from. Is it something that has been laboriously transcribed by the workers or whatever at Ancestry or something they have acquired from somewhere? If so where? If this was from Ancestry’s efforts why would they duplicate a great slab of years from 1916 to 1930 which was already available to them from FreeBMD? Could it be part of the temporarily suspended MAGPIE project initiated by the GRO which was intended to have a free index? If so, why is it now locked away by a commercial site?

All of a sudden the FreeBMD search on Ancestry has changed from 1837 – 1915. The following paragraph on Ancestry’s search page has been very quickly changed in part to show the 1915 date but the rest of the paragraph is rubbish because the FreeBMD figure is approximately 100% and in fact is at this rate of completion all the way to 1930. Are they hoping that people seeking Birth registration data after 1915 will believe it is only available through Ancestry?

“About England & Wales, FreeBMD Birth Index, 1837-1915
This database is a searchable, digitized version of the indices of civil registrations in England and Wales, reported quarterly to the General Register Office (GRO) in London. This index spans the years between 1837 and 1915. Approximately 50% of the names between 1837 and 1900 have been transcribed thus far.”

What is the significance of the 1916 start date? When did the Indexes switch from Handwritten to Typewritten or was there some sort of a format change in 1916 that makes the use of OCR more viable? Hopefully I haven’t lost the plot here but I think there is more to come to light about this one.

All the best,
Alan

scooter · Post by **scooter** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:44 pm

Hi Alan,

I also wondered about the 1916 start date. I don't really know enough about English indexes etc. to know if it's significant or not. One things for sure, they do seem to have trumped the ill-fated Magpie scheme, and I would imagine this has all been done through OCR. If this is the case, it makes the GRO (or their contractors) look pretty inept. Aside from finding myself and siblings/children I personally have no other use for the indexes. Interesting though....

Cheers,

Scott

trish1 · Post by **trish1** » Tue Feb 03, 2009 7:09 am

I thought they started at 1916 simply because freebdm is virtually 100% complete to that date (probably further) but reading your comments, I would agree it is probably done via OCR, which would surely be impossible on some of the early handwritten (badly) indexes. I think some of the typed indexes are transcripts of the original index created from the certificate copies, so much room for transcription errors. I have seen different versions of some index pages on the net at various times. Perhaps 1915 was as far back as the typing went??

It may have been plan B for ancestry after they missed out on initial access to the 1911 census and it does rather highlight the debarcle of the GRO index/access that didn't/hasn't got anywhere near completion.

I don't know of anything that changed on the indexes as at 1916. There were a couple of important changes with maiden names on indexes shortly before this date.

The new index has been useful for some of my research, although not critial, it's nice to tie up some loose ends.

Trish

Currie · Post by **Currie** » Wed Feb 04, 2009 5:47 am

Hello Trish,

You’re probably right about the Plan B thing as a way of getting some of the genealogical attention directed back towards Ancestry.

Free BMD progress has been really spectacular and it will continue to be a great resource for those of us who believe that genealogy should be free. http://freebmd.rootsweb.com/progress.shtml

All the best,
Alan

trish1 · Post by **trish1** » Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:25 pm

Hi Alan

I do agree re FreeBDM - when I started researching 4-5 years ago I think it was somewhere in the 1850s. I used to visit the local LDS and they had the St Caths index on microfilm - now that was timeconsuming.

I haven't ever transcribed for FreeBDM - I did one stint for FreeCen but one piece seems to last forever, so I got no further. I do send quite alot of corrections to FreeBDM when I find errors - they are very responsive to corrections.

Most of us have to decide where to spend our research budget, I have equal ancestors in Scotland and England so I find ancestry (Oz/UK only) good value for money. SP gets a reasonable amount as well. I would wish all the BDM registeries had certificate images at Scotland prices and BDM indexes as per some of the Australian States with full parent names on births and deaths.

One day

Trish

Post by **AnneM** » Wed Feb 04, 2009 3:58 pm

Found number 2 son no bother at all. Everything present and correct including my (then maiden) surname. May come in useful.

Anne

mean_genie · Post by **mean_genie** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:23 am

There is nothing significant about 1916 in terms of English registration. I think you are right that Ancestry decided on a comfortable overlap with the virtually complete part of FreeBMD. They also provide a certificate ordering service through their site, but it is MUCH more expensive than buying directly from the GRO.

Ancestry will have had the indexing done themselves, though. The GRO no longer sell databases or even fiche copies of their indexes to anyone at all. That is why Findmypast have birth and death indexes for 2006, but no-one else has anything beyond 2005. FMP had purchased their most recent lot of data just before the policy was changed.

For anyone who's interested, the indexes were handwritten to 1865, then printed until 1910. Then they were typed until 1969, when computers were first used. Some of the old pre-1866 indexes were re-typed.

Audrey

trish1 · Post by **trish1** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 8:50 am

Thanks Audrey for the info re typing - might I add that some of those typewriters could have had the ribbon changed a little more often - or the keys cleaned!

With the indexes no longer being sold - is this meant to restrict the availablilty of certificates? In my world most birth indexes/certificates are not available until 100 years after the birth (except to oneself or next of kin) and deaths have to be at least 30 years past before open access is granted.

Trish

mean_genie · Post by **mean_genie** » Wed Feb 25, 2009 12:02 pm

The most recent indexes and updates are distributed (in microfiche format) to six libraries/archives around England and Wales, so that index info is still quite widely available. The change came about when the GRO moved from being part of the Office for National Statistics to the Identity and Passport Service in April 2008.

If you want to order a birth certificate from the last 50 years, or the death certificate of someone born within the last 50 years, you will be asked for quite a lot of information - pretty much everything that is actually on the certificate - before they will issue it.

And it's not just the typewriter ribbons that could have done with changing, it wouldn't have hurt to clean the glass on the photocopier once in a while either! Seriously though, you need to beware of those old re-typed indexes before 1866, because the extra stage of copying means an extra level of errors and omissions.

Audrey