Ancestry place search for wills is useless - use National Archives instead!

[Edward Scott]

I am sure this used to work.  Perhaps it is another system enhancement 

[Gadget]

Could you give an example (name and date) , please? I've just done a 'blind' search using Aldershot and got a listing.

[melba_schmelba]

I am sure this used to work.  Perhaps it is another system enhancement 

You can use the keyword box, but no wildcards, so it doesn't help to find variant place spellings.

[melba_schmelba]

Could you give an example (name and date) , please? I've just done a 'blind' search using Aldershot and got a listing.

It works, but you can't use wildcards, so no use for finding placename variants or mistranscriptions. This definitely used to be possible, and must be a recent ancestry 'enhancement' as Edward says .

[Edward Scott]

If one just types Aldershot into the place field and then do not select anything from the drop down list, they assume you do mean Aldershot, Hampshire.

However some Aldershot records are recorded as being from Aldershot, Southampton, England & in addition there are a few with 2 t's as well

Try James Allden probate 0.009.1836

Edward

[melba_schmelba]

If one just types Aldershot into the place field and then do not select anything from the drop down list, they assume you do mean Aldershot, Hampshire.

However some Aldershot records are recorded as being from Aldershot, Southampton, England & in addition there are a few with 2 t's as well

Try James Allden probate 0.009.1836

Edward

Yes, exactly. If you type Aldershott, you'll see there are 27 matches, which would come up if Ancestry still allowed the use of wildcards in the place or keyword boxes i.e. Aldershot*.

[BumbleB]

Not sure why you are being so pedantic with spellings, which is a modern trend.  Our ancestors weren't quite so "entrenched", even those who were educated.

The wonderful thing about genealogy is that we can all learn something new, and see things in a different light. 

[Bookbox]

I can’t imagine why anyone would want to search for PCC wills using Ancestry’s index, when there is a far superior index at TNA Discovery. This is free to use and can be searched by personal names, place-names, occupations etc. Enter the reference code PROB 11 to restrict the results to PCC wills. From the findings there, it’s usually possible to transfer enough data to Ancestry to locate the images. If not, it can often be done by browsing, with reference to the date/quire number etc., as has been shown in other RC threads.

In any case, some individual pages of PCC wills are completely missing from Ancestry. In cases where the first page of a will is missing, the item won’t appear at all in Ancestry’s index, no matter how hard you search for it there.

[horselydown86]

My apologies in advance for this    BUT why would anyone be searching for Wills by location, rather than by name? 

When searching for ancestors from the C16th and C17th who did not leave wills (but I know should exist), I have frequently read all the the wills from their own and nearby villages in the period of their probable lifetime.

Many times I have found the ancestor mentioned as an executor, overseer, appraiser, witness or (less often) legatee.  That alone makes it worth doing.

It hasn't happened yet, but one day I hope to read a mention of "my daughter/granddaughter [married surname]" to identify one of my missing ladies.

Bookbox has made the significant point.  Do all your PCC searches in TNA Discovery, then use the details to find the will in Ancestry.