Original 17th and 18th century Battle registers are hidden on Ancestry

[melba_schmelba]

I have already encountered the problem that many of the original Sussex registers uploaded to Ancestry do not have the county name filled in, only the parish, so to find the original you first need to locate the transcribed entry (which all seem to have been indexed correctly), then search for the name, with date and the parish as a keyword. But the 17th and 18th century (up to 1775/85) original registers of Battle seem to have been indexed with NO county name OR parish name, so you can only find the entry by limiting the date and hoping its been transcribed correctly. Links for the original Battle registers below:

Baptisms: March 1610 - Aug. 1653
Marriages: April 1610 - Sep 1653
Burials: March 1610 -1654
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/62049/images/par_236-1-1-1_001?pId=51624

Baptisms: 1654-1785
Marriages: 1654-1775
Burials: 1654-1659
             1664-1675
             1686-1785
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/imageviewer/collections/62049/images/par_236-1-1-2-01?pId=51624

[melba_schmelba]

It seems that many of the original registers may be affected by this issue, but not sometimes you can get around the problem by searching for the parish name or county as a keyword, but not seemingly in the Battle case, but I'm not sure why. For example, if you search for Edward Whittington's baptism in 1603 in Alfriston, Sussex, and you put Alfriston, Sussex in the location field, nothing will come up. BUT if you put Alfriston in the keyword field, it does:
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/discoveryui-content/view/3517969:62049

But that trick does not work for the earlier Battle registers and may not work for many of the others. i.e. the marriage of Mary Orkenden (Ockenden) in 1628 in East Chiltington, does not come up if you use the location field, OR if you put the parish name in the keyword box, but it does if you put Sussex in the keyword box

https://www.ancestry.co.uk/discoveryui-content/view/90561495:62049