SCOTTISH RESEARCH on L.A.R.F.H.C. Site .....

[setait]

Hi Sam

I don't know if you already know, but the National Archives of Scotland's current catalogue is online at http://www.dswebhosting.info/NAS/DServe ... =Index.tcl including the CH3 class of records. This shows that CH3/1334 is for Henderson Memorial United Presbyterian Church and that the group of records is held at Glasgow City Archives. The various sub-records for CH3/1334 are also shown. CH3/1384 is for Dundee, St James Church, Arklay Street, Second Relief Congregation 1838-44 (and others ) but the record is slightly confusing about where these records are held - the "repository" field shows that they are held at Dundee City Archive and Record Centre, the "access conditions" field shows that they are held by Glasgow City Archives.

To find the details, put the full class reference in the "RefNo" field in the catalogue search screen (including the "/" as I've written them above) and when you get the list of results click on the "details" link next to the relevant record to get full details (apologies if I'm teaching you to suck eggs).

The online catalogue is fantastic but it can be veeeeery slow - even with broadband/DSL access.

Hope this is a feasible (sp?) solution for you.

Sheena

[sam gibson]

Thankyou Sheena.

This will fill in all the gaps, I hope.

Reading the fiche version of the Reportory was exhausing, bad filming, faded images, missing images, unreadable hand written notes, information obliterated by stickers saying which Archives they were to be found.

I should be able to complete my Non-Conformist Project with even more degree of accuarcy now.

Thanks again.

SAM

[DavidWW]

....snipped ..........

This will fill in all the gaps, I hope.

Reading the fiche version of the Reportory was exhausing, bad filming, faded images, missing images, unreadable hand written notes, information obliterated by stickers saying which Archives they were to be found.

....snipped

Sam

You really expect anything different

Orraverybest

David

[sam gibson]

Hi Dave,

When I was refering to filling the gaps, I meant the missing CH3 numbers. I checked out the NAS site and they go as high as CH3/ 1600. My list of churches will grow, I may only be able to descern what records and dates are available for each, as to reading them however, I'll leave that to someone a bit younger and better eyesight.

I had contacted Barbara Baker at the Salt Lake Library for some help. She has been updating her Project over the past couple of years as well and has offered to transmit updated Files to the Los Angeles Centre to keep our records updated.

Now I'm realising just ridden with srrors and omissions my Part I Book is and don't think I'd be doing anyone a service by releasing it until I have totally revamped it with all this new information. But what the heck, I wasn't planning to do anything with the rest of my life anyway.

SAM

[DavidWW]

Hi Dave,

When I was referring to filling the gaps, I meant the missing CH3 numbers. I checked out the NAS site and they go as high as CH3/ 1600. My list of churches will grow, I may only be able to descern what records and dates are available for each, as to reading them however, I'll leave that to someone a bit younger and better eyesight.

I had contacted Barbara Baker at the Salt Lake Library for some help. She has been updating her Project over the past couple of years as well and has offered to transmit updated Files to the Los Angeles Centre to keep our records updated.

Now I'm realising just ridden with srrors and omissions my Part I Book is and don't think I'd be doing anyone a service by releasing it until I have totally revamped it with all this new information. But what the heck, I wasn't planning to do anything with the rest of my life anyway.

SAM

Hi Sam

Given the quite incredible complications of the Scottish non-conformist records, as a Scottishprofessional genealogist, I greatly appreciate the fact that there may well be errors and omissions in your Part I Book, but, let's face it, that is not unexpected in terms of the major complications involved !!

In other words, any such listing, however imperfect and incomplete, is still of great interest to many researchers !!, so please publish it as soon as possible........

Orraverybest

David

[sam gibson]

Thanks Dave.

I'll give it some serious thought. I was scheduled to hand over the final manuscript to the publisher next sunday, I have until then to think things through.

I've been going through the NAS site to fill in my gaps, you wouldn't believe the number of ideas I got for improving the content of my Project. The Layout won't change, everything will still be layed out the chart by Parish for easier recognition as to location. I spent last Saturday and Sunday at the Centre going through our Bartholomew Maps and Gazatteer getting the locations on some of the odd ball church names I was sitting with.

If I decide by next Sunday to go ahead with the book, I might include the CH3 Inventory I've compiled, that would at least off-set the errors and omissions there are going to be in Part I. It also adds about 60 pages to the book since my trip through the NAS site has increased the number of records from CH3/ 1375 up to CH3/ 1600.

The loud clanging you will hear in the next week will be the rustu cogs and wheels of my brain turning over and over.

Thanks

SAM

If I were a drinking man I'd probably go out and get more than a few pints of Tartan Heavy while I pondered this situation.

[DavidWW]

Hi Sam

My argument is as follows.

You already have something of great value to many Scottish researchers that, I'm sure, many will willingly invest in, even knowing that there are imperfections.

My concerns is that the wait until every, single last perfection had been dealt with out could be a long one, as I suspect that not problem has yet been identified.

In such a situation, it's perfectly normal practice to have a Vol I which has, say, 80% coverage, followed at some later date by a Vol II, so that I'd say, go for it !!

Orraverybest

David

[sam gibson]

Hi Dave,

When I was going through the Project in the begining, the intent was to cover all 901 Parishes in a single volume. However, we I started seeing the amount of information I was amassing, then I knew it was too much to put in 1 book. I decided to split in in 2 parts and I made the split as close to the middle of the information I already had, which was at the end of ARGYLL. I just tacked on BUTE and decided Part II would begine at RENFREW. Part II of the book can have the corrected information in it. It will take a wee bit time, but knowing now what I do, I can adapt Part II to show the new information. In Part I, I've already assigned the Churches a number for easier reference in Appendix sections. Instead of covering the 2,367 churches I had on my original list, it's now going to well over 2,600 [I'm still in-putting the info I've gotten off the NAS site], so my numbering is going to be off. It's the domino effect, one thing affects the other. Not that I'm a total perfectionist, but I put this chart together for easier comprehension and now I'm negating some of the stuff I set out ot do in the begining. I don't what to appear any more of an idiot than I am [and that's from people I work with, you'll have take their word that I'm idiot. I'm a hot-head at times and I'll admit to that part of my charchter.]

I don't know if this makes sense. I have the same situations in my daytime job, I'm trying to think ahead and save time down the road and then it's up ended by idiots in other departments and we end up wasting time and money. With this Project, It was mine and mine only, no interference from anyone else. And now I'm in conflict as to how to show all the information and keep to the goals I set for myself in the begining.

Order up a few more kegs of the good stuff for me, it's going to be a long night

SAM [hic]

[DavidWW]

Hi Dave,

When I was going through the Project in the begining, the intent was to cover all 901 Parishes in a single volume. However, when I started seeing the amount of information I was amassing, then I knew it was too much to put in 1 book. I decided to split in in 2 parts and I made the split as close to the middle of the information I already had, which was at the end of ARGYLL. I just tacked on BUTE and decided Part II would begine at RENFREW.

My point, exactly

Part II of the book can have the corrected information in it. It will take a wee bit time, but knowing now what I do, I can adapt Part II to show the new information.

Again, my point exactly , in that I so strongly argue that so many researchers would greatly benefit from Part I in the lead up to Part II , with, most probably , I'd suspect, a Part III ..............

In Part I, I've already assigned the Churches a number for easier reference in Appendix sections. Instead of covering the 2,367 churches I had on my original list, it's now going to well over 2,600 [I'm still in-putting the info I've gotten off the NAS site], so my numbering is going to be off.

Given the very basic and fundamental nature of your work, I'd have thought that we're talking here about the definitive numbering system, to be henceforth known as the "Gibson" system for Scottish non-conformist church records =D> ................... let's get real in terms of your much better and very obvious expert knowledge of the situation ......

Modesty is not a permissible reaction

It's the domino effect, one thing affects the other.

Quite !

Not that I'm a total perfectionist, but I put this chart together for easier comprehension and now I'm negating some of the stuff I set out ot do in the beginning. I don't what to appear any more of an idiot than I am [and that's from people I work with, you'll have take their word that I'm idiot. I'm a hot-head at times and I'll admit to that part of my charchter.

Whey-hey

I don't know if this makes sense. I have the same situations in my daytime job, I'm trying to think ahead and save time down the road and then it's up ended by idiots in other departments and we end up wasting time and money. With this Project, It was mine and mine only, no interference from anyone else. And now I'm in conflict as to how to show all the information and keep to the goals I set for myself in the begining.

It makes perfect sense to me, from the point of view of understanding fully your objectives, as they'd be precisely the same as my own had I set out with the same objective ............... i.e. inter alia, eventually, perfection

But then, from much such experience, I'm a "pragmatic perfectionist", so that I'd probablyhave gone the Part I/Part II route, with all the advantages that such an approach results in for so very many serious researchers out there, who are looking for the definitive description and listing of non-established, i.e. presbyterian other than the Established Church of Scotland records, both in terms of the period of existence of congregations, including their allegiance over the years to the various major and minor secessions from the "Auld Kirk", - i.e. the Established Church of Scotland.

And for those readers not familiar with the major such secessions, it needs to be pointed out that such secession churches very often underwent further secessions, some of which amalgamated with other parts of other secessions and so on, and and ...............

QUOTE from http://www.newble.co.uk/guthrie/ownlips1.html

I do not know anybody perfect except our friend - indicating Dr Gibson, who has to confess nothing at all! With their anti-Burghers and Burghers distinction, their Lifters and anti-Lifters, and with their aversion in the olden time - though they have changed wonderfully of late,..........

ENDQUOTE

(BTW A "Lifter" communion vessel was only recently returned to the original congregation in Dalry in N Ayrshire from Canada, where it had been taken by a "Lifter" minister, - most "Lifter" congregations were in Ayrshire and Lanarkshire....)

The point of doctrine on which the "Lifters" disagreed was the exact manner in which the communion vessel was lifted ..............

Order up a few more kegs of the good stuff for me, it's going to be a long night

SAM [hic]

Veritably see such need from above in terms of the quite amazing detailed secessions involved

Orraverybest - [hic - indeed!]

David

[sam gibson]

There you go using that 'EXPERT' word again

Quote-----
"I'm knowledgable in my subject, but no expert." Unquote......

I think I've bought a few more days to get this put together.
I finally finished with the NAS site at CH3/ 1619, so I just need to get it into my CH3 INVENTORY CHART to tack on at the end of Part I as a Supplement.

I've always wanted to help people when it comes to doing Scottish Research, pass on what I've learned, KISS--Keep It Simple Stupid.
Now, I sometimes see myself turning into a monster because of all this.
Before I started teaching classes, I watched other Consultants at the Centre and how they conducted their classes. They turned out to be one prolonged sleep session on how they found their families, little of value to the atendees as to how they could use the records, or even what records there were and where they were located. I didn't want to turn into them, so putting everything down in charts was my non-verbal response to giving the patrons all the information they would need to find the records, that would lead them to their families. Now, I've overcome my stage fright. When I go out to speak to groups, they can't shut me up. Still having my cute Scottish accent wins over a lot of the female audience.

My charts will survive me , my legacy perhaps. As to having a numbering system named in my honour, get real. It might be better to have a snake named after me, because of my sharp tongue at times and my eyes being too close together.

Anyway, if I'm to get this out for you folks to have and to disect, I've a lot of work yet to do. Trying to work in the heat and humnidity out here isn't helping my mood either. Oh to be back home in The Shotts, with her rain and wind blowin' aff the moors.

SAM[/b]