On 30 Nov 2010 at 14:11, Josephine Jeremiah wrote: > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 09:33:10 -0000, Josephine Jeremiah > <jojeremiah@dsl.pipex.com> wrote: > > >> Here are some more surname sites: > > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 10:11:56 -0000, Roy Stockdill > <roy.stockdill@btinternet.com> wrote: > > > If I might offer a word of advice when looking at these or any other > > surname websites, equally surname dictionaries..... > > > Treat them with caution! By all means regard them as an interesting > > adjunct to genealogy and family history, entertaining and perhaps > > even informative - but do not believe or accept as gospel > > everything they say > > !!! > > You could say the same for all sorts of other sites connected with > genealogy and family history research and also for posts on the > mailing lists. Mistakes can be made. > I agree with you, naturally! As you say, we all make mistakes. What does concern me slightly about some of these surname websites is that they are run by academics and statisticians whose researches and assumptions appear to be based on statistical data and not on research in original records by genealogists and experienced family historians. I tend to take little notice of what their findings supposedly reveal about the social classifications allotted to surnames. For instance, the social demographics for STOCKDALE claim that their "Mosaic type index" (whatever that is, precisely, since I couldn't get the link to the explanation to work) makes them principally "Upland hill farmers". That might have been true in the 1881 census but I find it highly doubtful that it is true today when the majority of the population live in towns and cities. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE