|
 |
|
|
|
| What kind of data is in the database
|
There are three separate databases, one each for baptisms, marriages
and burials.
The essential basic information associated with the event is recorded, basically surname, forename, dates and associated information. See http://www.freereg.org.uk/howto/enterdata.htm for detailed information. FAQ Index | General Questions Index | FreeREG Home Page
|
| Is there information in the original registers which is not in the database | Yes. Not all of the information in a register will have been transcribed
into the database. Neither is it a literal transcript. Marriages from 1754
onwards, for example have the signatures of two witnesses, and these names
are usually included in the database. Marriages
from 1837 have the names and occupations of the fathers of the couple, and
an address for each, and these are not always included in the database. If
the volunteer transcriber has included these extra details, then we have
included them in the database too.
Some additional information from the body or margin notes in a register may well be included in the "notes" section. It is recommended that once you have found an event in a transcript or index (such as the FreeREG database or the IGI) that you *always* look at the original register on microfilm/fiche to confirm the details and see if there is additional information. Some local family history societies sell copies of registers on microfiche. We recommend that you contact the relevant county family history society. Films/fiche of registers may also viewed at a County Record Office, and in many cases, ordered through the LDS to view at your nearest Family History Centre. FAQ Index | General Questions Index | FreeREG Home Page
|
| Why doesn't FreeREG have a full literal transcript of the register? | It isn't practical. Neither is it the objective of the FreeREG Project.
You should always check with the original documents.
(see above)
>Isn't it? My general philosophy is that people should transcribe exactly what they see, and any transformations are done afterwards. Or did you mean something different? Yes, you are correct. FreeREG urges its transcribers to enter what they see contained in the register however it was spelled, mis-spelled, in Latin, or abbreviated. We expect to provide capabilities to assist researchers locate those names that are 'similar'. At the same time all we can do is create a searchable database. The most important thing about any database is standardisation of input. So certain fields must be transcribed in specific ways regardless of how they actually appeared in the original register. >I don't see why not (barring illegibility, of course)? OK. a few examples:
County = Nottinghamshire
A) old style marriage register pre 1754: A search for the surname NOTTINGHAM would also find all records which contained the place name too. Now look again at that for Peter, Mary, St. Peter, St. Mary, and BEDFORD or the place Bedford. "Mr. James TONBRIDGE, Gent. and Jone WILLIAM were marryed ye same day" No date in the register. Find that one out of context and you would have no idea when it was. Is WILLIAM a Christian name or a surname? What about the place name Tonbridge? Would someone search the database for "Jone" or "Joan"?
B) a post 1754 marriage register: It is impossible to write software to sort out the church name, county name, Christian names, surnames and dates from that when someone does a search of the database. ;-) I helped by capitalising the surnames in correct fashion, although that of course is not a literal transcript.
Now add all the extra variables that start to come in with post 1837 marriage
registers, and early registers in Latin.... or:
translating that:
It just isn't practical to have a full transcript which can be searched.
For the structure of what is in the database see a standard set of contents for each database. FAQ Index | General Questions Index | FreeREG Home Page |
| How reliable
are the records in the database?
|
No guarantee can be made regarding the accuracy of the data in the databases.
Transcribers of the data take every possible care to ensure accuracy, but
mistakes can be made. In the case of difficult to read handwriting, the
transcriber may have interpreted a word or name as s/he saw it. You should
always check with the original documents. (see
above).
Also see: Quality Control FAQ Index | General Questions Index | FreeREG Home Page
|
| What counties and parishes are included in the database? | The FreeREG Project's aim is to include counties, places and parishes
in England, Scotland and Wales in the first instance. (Northern Ireland
will follow). To see if a particular place has been included see
the County pages.
FAQ Index | General Questions Index | FreeREG Home Page
|
| Is data from Non-Conformist church registers included? | Yes.
FreeREG contains details of baptisms, marriages and burials from Non-Conformist (Baptist, Methodist, etc) registers if the data has been submitted to our project. |
| A question
- is a Church and a Parish the same thing?
Why does the database contain Place and Church, and not "Parish" |
As usual..... a long answer to a short question.
No, a Church and a Parish is not the same thing. A parish is a Church of England administrative area. Not the same thing as "church" or "place". A town (place) can contain many Parishes. A rural Parish can contain one or more villages and other settlements (places). Each of those places can have one or more churches and non-conformist churches. A parish contains just one Church of England Church, (actually it can also contain Church of England Chapelries - sub churches - too), but the town/village/place can contain many other non-conformist churches. That's why we have done away with the term "parish" when really we do mean "place". e.g. in our little town of 7,000 population: (which is actually two parishes now)
Cinderford St. John (est. 1845)
then we have: but just to confuse things really well... part what is now St. Stephen's Parish used to be (pre 1890) in Flaxley Parish (and people born there were baptised at Flaxley - 4 miles away), and part of it used to be Newland Parish and people born there had to be (if they were C of E), baptised at Newland, 10 miles away! Those two areas were actually "outliers" (islands) of Newland and Flaxley Parishes and not even physically connected. Its just that the church owned the land (administratively) here in Cinderford! Another strange example in the next town to us:
Coleford St. John (a parish church) So theoretically our database would have both (the buildings were actually two different churches, each with its own register):
Coleford St. John So you see.... Place & Church is really the only compromise that fits *all* situations. It also makes sense when narrowing down a search of the database to narrow it down to a "place" rather than a "parish". |
|
|
FreeREG has three databases, one each for baptisms, marriages and burials. Only one may be searched at a time, and for one person or one surname only.
See: Searching the Databases |