RootsChat.Com

*** The missing Fife parishes were the result of the sinking of the ferryboat which was taking them from Fife to Edinburgh. All these volumes were lost in the Firth of Forth. Scottish enumeration books NEVER went to London, as the Scottish census was run from Edinburgh.[/quote]
Interesting... Do you know when this sinking took place?

The NRS (National Records of Scotland) tell the story as I had heard it before, about the 1841 and 1851 census enumeration books having been in London, and returned to Scotland after being found in 1910.
** It is true that 1841 and 1851 census enumeration books were found in  London in 1910 and re-sent to Edinburgh, but originally all the enumeration books were required to be sent to Edinburgh from the parishes, as all the administration was done from Edinburgh (had been since 1801). Why these books got to London is a mystery (I suspect some London-inspired administrative foul-up before 1861), but the fact remains that at every census the enumeration books went directly to Edinburgh, which is why the Fife volumes would have gone by boat to Leith, there being no bridge then. There is no documentary evidence of the loss (why would some books lost overboard be newsworthy). The idea of solely some Fife books being lost from a ship, London to Edinburgh in 1910 is ludicrous. Rail would be the only sensible method of movement at that date.

The 1881 LDS transcription was indeed triple checked, but has just as many transcription errors. I checked ONE village name and found it written in about six different ways! The LDS's problem was that many of their transcribers were in the USA and were unfamiliar with Scottish names and places.
Whatever transcribed source you are using, I recommend having Black's "Surnames of Scotland" and a good gazetteer to hand.  Scotlandspeople allows you to read the original image.
Gordon Johnson.

Hi, folks. Gordon Johnson here, of KinHelp Scottish Genealogical Services. My website is housed on a relative's server, which has been going downhill for a while. A new server has been bought, and is now installed, with some of the file transfers still ongoing, but the KinHelp website is back up.
I know I have been slow at adding new material, but life has been busy, even at the age of 70. I currently am involved with Aberdeen University's on-line course "Family History in Northern Scotland", for which I act as Tutor. We have just completed the first assignment, and the second assignment is due early in April, and with 40-plus students, I get plenty of queries to sort out.
I am also writing a novel, as well as the occasional article for family history society journals - latest was one for an Irish society, about deaths in Scotland. I have got another index in preparation, but it needs inputting to a database.... another task not yet done!

Whose coat of arms is that Drom image you have attached to your postings?
Gordon.

I think you should perhaps also add Wanton to your Smith problems!
The parish listing prepared by the Craig minister in 1788 contained NO Wantons, but one spouse (to Robert Watt) is an Anne HAMPTON.
The 1841 census of Craig has NO HAMPTON, but has at least one WANTON (1841 parish surname index) ; while the 1851 census of Craig has NO WANTON or HAMPTON, but has two HANTONs, born Dundee but nephews of a local resident). The Craig OPR has at least one HANTON family (James Hanton and Barbara Walker married 20 march 1790). The pre-1855 Angus M.I.s don't show a Wanton in Craig or Montrose.
I conclude that there is a possibility of the surname being heard and written by session clerks in several ways, so look for the relatives under various spellings in locations up and down the coast (most of the Craig families were fishermen and seamen).
Hope this helps.
Gordon Johnson