Indexes BEWARE!!!!!!!

[teddybear1843]

I have just put on disk all the 1871 census for my two chosen villages ready for me to index for my files and thought I would check a few of the index entries on ancestry.

The first ones I checked were wrong.  My 3x great grandmother was put in the index as living in Rougham but she is  obviously the first person in Weasenham.  John Easter is indexed as 35 but he is 55 and the index says he was born in Hitcham whereas he was actually born in Mileham.

This just goes to reinforce the warnings that we have heard over and over again.

DO NOT RELY ON INDEXES.

They are handy but they were not usually transcribed by local people (so didn't recognise names and places) and often they were transcribed by people who have English as a second language.

If your ancestor is not in the index it doesn't mean they are not there.  Try looking under all possibilities for age, surname, place of birth, abode, first name etc etc and failing that try siblings with unusual names.

If all else fails, get a look at the originals anyway if you expect your relations to be somewhere. 

My family were living in Weasenham in 1881, I had seen them on the census but they weren't on the index.  I checked under first name and place of abode and found them under Bean, not Bear.

I don't know if I prefered the days before all the indexes?

Teddybear

[bel_jon68]

Thanks for the warning, Teddybear - I was beginning to suspect that this was the case, having been unable to find one Robert Thomas Jones on the 1881.  I am now beginning a trawl through the census images for the most likely districts, which is taking an absolute age and not doing my eyesight much good either!

Bel

[leagen]

Some of the original census are very hard to read and the person transcribing  them for Ancestry.com couldn't make out what it said so put down what they Thought it said.  I know this because I have looked in the index then at the actual census.  The index had names and places wrong but because I knew the "where and when" about my people I was able to check the  census and make out what the person reading the census couldn't make out and find my people.   Always read a copy of the actual census if possible.   Leagen

[Clincher]

It isn't only modern indexes which are suspect either. I recently had reason to look up a transcript (done long ago) of registers for a particular parish because the microfiche images of the parish registers were so poor. The transcript covered about 3 centuries, was beautifully legible, was divided into 3 sections for baptisms, marriages and deaths and each section was indexed. The indexes seemed too small to me so I tested a few of the entries - and they were not in the index.
If you don't believe me have a look at Blackmore in Essex. I left a warning note for others.
I think the moral is: take nothing for granted

[trish251]

It isn't only modern indexes which are suspect either. I recently had reason to look up a transcript (done long ago) of registers for a particular parish because the microfiche images of the parish registers were so poor. The transcript covered about 3 centuries, was beautifully legible, was divided into 3 sections for baptisms, marriages and deaths and each section was indexed. The indexes seemed too small to me so I tested a few of the entries - and they were not in the index.
If you don't believe me have a look at Blackmore in Essex. I left a warning note for others.
I think the moral is: take nothing for granted

I recently ordered a film from the LDS covering a parish in Yorkshire. It turned out to be a transcript done in 1901 and included an index. I also wondered about the indexing, so spent many hours staring into a microfilm reader and checked every page for my family. I didn't find one entry that wasn't in the index! and the page numbers for my family were all correct in the index. The preface to the transcript assured the reader that everything had been double checked, so in this case it appears this had been done.

Trish

[Clincher]

Hallo: I'm sorry that you did all that work for nothing. The point I was trying to make was that sometimes everything is not what it claims to be.

[trish251]

Hi Clincher

I didn't mean to confuse - I agree with your comments that sometimes things are not as they should be - problem is to determine which are OK & which are not - I don't trust any, so check them all! I just thought I'd mention that there are some transcribers who do everything in their power to get it right & my Yorkshire man obviously did a brilliant job - I can't imagine how long it must have taken.

Trish

[JenGen]

On the IGI my ancestor born in Mileham is recorded as having been born in Myhaw.

[1000xlch]

I agree the Indexes are not always accurate.  People are missing or spelt wrong or given wrong village etc.  Currently searching 1901 census for a person 4 years old and cannot find him but I know he is in Canada by 1916 so exists.  Must check the Canadian 1901 and 1911 but only knowing he was in Ontario and possibly a county there are no indexes so a long trawl sadly 

I always try and check data where possible.

Cheers

John Rowley