Dear all, At the risk at seeming immodest, I have resumed after a year gap, doing indexing for this project. The results will appear on the pilot site. <http://pilot.familysearch.org/recordsearch/start.html#start> The batches I am doing at the moment are for Knowle. More precisely for the period 1837 to 1900. The scans are very clear and it really is a doddle! However, the Mormon Church is omitting to transcribe occupation oif father and home address. So, I have asked them why? There are several UK projects on the go, I did Cheshire last year - Bristol was not in the list. BTW, U spotted a BEES baptism there in 1885 Thanks Phil

I recently joined the project and have tended to transcribe a page or two each day, depending on the weather. I suspect the reason Bristol is in the list is because they were one of the last to allow their registers to be filmed in the late 1980s and they were never added to the IGI. You cannot select exactly which records you want to index apart from selecting "Bristol". So far I have done burials, christenings and marriages from Stapleton, Bedminster and two Christchurches. It is very easy and only a subset of the data is transcribed. I think the idea is that if you identify someone in the index you can then download the image which contains the extra data such as occupation, address and other details which could help identify the correct person. For some events such as marriage it will give free access to an image of the original document for which the GRO certificate is a copy. Chris Jefferies Cheltenham Glos -----Original Message----- From: bristol_and_district-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bristol_and_district-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Phil Warn Sent: 06 March 2010 12:15 PM To: bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com Subject: [B&D] Family Search Indexing - Bristol Dear all, At the risk at seeming immodest, I have resumed after a year gap, doing indexing for this project. The results will appear on the pilot site. <http://pilot.familysearch.org/recordsearch/start.html#start> The batches I am doing at the moment are for Knowle. More precisely for the period 1837 to 1900. The scans are very clear and it really is a doddle! However, the Mormon Church is omitting to transcribe occupation oif father and home address. So, I have asked them why? There are several UK projects on the go, I did Cheshire last year - Bristol was not in the list. BTW, U spotted a BEES baptism there in 1885 Thanks Phil ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to BRISTOL_AND_DISTRICT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2721 - Release Date: 03/06/10 07:39:00

Hi All, Having done some searching of the pilot family search site, I came across a record that puzzles me. It clearly concerns some relatives of mine - Lily GOULD and George BULLOCK - but their names are all written in a Latin form - Lilianum & Georgium - and the date given (1925) is 2 years after the GRO registration of their marriage. So although it is listed under Marriages, I don't think it can be one. Can anyone help ? Is this perhaps a Catholic service where one or both have converted to catholicism and is a blessing of their marriage ? The name of the church isn't given, unfortunately. Best wishes, Mike Gould Leicestershire

Hi Mike Certainly the Catholic Church were using the Latin names at that stage so you are quite right there. The marriage that you have from the GRO would probably be in the Register Office as the Catholic priests were not licenced to perform marriages at that stage. Even my SIL had to go to the Register's Office in 1962 - they then went to the Pro Cathedral where they had a marriage in the Catholic Church...this was the same day. It may well be that your ancestor went to the Register Office and thought that was that, then if they went to have their children baptised the Priest may well have found that they hadn't had a church wedding! Perhaps they didn't realise they had to do that or, as you say, may be one or both of them converted and it was suggested they should marry in the church? Liz www.btinternet.com/~e.newbery OPC for Street, Somerset ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Gould" <mike.gould@ndirect.co.uk> To: <bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 7:09 PM Subject: [B&D] Marriage (?) entry in Latin > > Hi All, > > Having done some searching of the pilot family search site, I came across > a > record that puzzles me. It clearly concerns some relatives of mine - Lily > GOULD and George BULLOCK - but their names are all written in a Latin > form - > Lilianum & Georgium - and the date given (1925) is 2 years after the GRO > registration of their marriage. So although it is listed under Marriages, > I > don't think it can be one. > > Can anyone help ? Is this perhaps a Catholic service where one or both > have > converted to catholicism and is a blessing of their marriage ? The name > of > the church isn't given, unfortunately. > > Best wishes, > > Mike Gould > Leicestershire > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > BRISTOL_AND_DISTRICT-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi Liz, Thanks for your reply. I was interested to see that in your example the church service was still called a marriage, even though the "official" marriage had already taken place. Your possible reasons make a lot of sense, so I think one of them is probably the right one. Thanks for your help, Best wishes, Mike -----Original Message----- From: bristol_and_district-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:bristol_and_district-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Liz Sent: 07 March 2010 19:25 To: bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [B&D] Marriage (?) entry in Latin Hi Mike Certainly the Catholic Church were using the Latin names at that stage so you are quite right there. The marriage that you have from the GRO would probably be in the Register Office as the Catholic priests were not licenced to perform marriages at that stage. Even my SIL had to go to the Register's Office in 1962 - they then went to the Pro Cathedral where they had a marriage in the Catholic Church...this was the same day. It may well be that your ancestor went to the Register Office and thought that was that, then if they went to have their children baptised the Priest may well have found that they hadn't had a church wedding! Perhaps they didn't realise they had to do that or, as you say, may be one or both of them converted and it was suggested they should marry in the church? Liz www.btinternet.com/~e.newbery OPC for Street, Somerset ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Gould" <mike.gould@ndirect.co.uk> To: <bristol_and_district@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 7:09 PM Subject: [B&D] Marriage (?) entry in Latin > > Hi All, > > Having done some searching of the pilot family search site, I came across > a > record that puzzles me. It clearly concerns some relatives of mine - Lily > GOULD and George BULLOCK - but their names are all written in a Latin > form - > Lilianum & Georgium - and the date given (1925) is 2 years after the GRO > registration of their marriage. So although it is listed under Marriages, > I > don't think it can be one. > > Can anyone help ? Is this perhaps a Catholic service where one or both > have > converted to catholicism and is a blessing of their marriage ?