I put my level of trust of the GRO records probably on the same level as the one tree on family search or Ancestry trees - in short only if I have confirming evidence. This may be due to the fact the that the first several certificates I got (back around 2002/3) all had large errors - didn't seem worth wasting the money. So I treat it as I treat any transcribed index - half trust. I check back occasionally to see if they have gotten some of the ones I have but they missed and a few have made it, but on the whole it's definitely been a 50-50 proposition for me. When I get the true records ( especially on marriages) I make note of where the index is mistaken and go with the actual record information. My Peplxxs didn't seem to like bureaucrats too well and didn't mind flaunting the law. I have many that didn't get registered until 2 or more quarters after the event. Marie (GOONS 5318) Bringing the world together one surname at a time. 'A Pepler Name' http://pepler.tribalpages.com 'Hedgerow - the Ancestors' http://cranberry.tribalpages.com Pepler DNA Study http://www.familytreedna.com/public/pepler-ow/ 'Scroops, Scropes and Scroopes' http://dentonlk.tribalpages.com 'Peplers and Peplows' pepler.one-name.net ________________________________ From: "christopher.gray@gray-ons.org" <christopher.gray@gray-ons.org> To: Goons <goons@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 1:30 PM Subject: [G] Do you trust UK GRO records? This is taken from an e-mail by Russell Ridout to the SoG mailing list - with his permission. He refers to books by Michael Foster - well worth reading. ******** he (Michael Foster) does report that there are instances of either or both parties to a marriage not being indexed. In addition, there are cases of father's names - and witnesses - being indexed instead of the bride or groom and at least one where the bride's name was repeated for the groom. Add to that wrong page numbers/district/misread names/mistyped or miswritten data. Also factor in register copies which never reached the GRO for any number of reasons; transcribers losing concentration and missing a few entries - or not realising that the copy entries that they received were on double sided paper and it makes you extremely grateful to have found any of the events that we need! Given that until very recently all the indexing has been done manually you can understand why the GRO staff had regular breaks, as evidenced by changes in handwriting every half dozen pages or so. Michael mentions that he carried out an experiment with a quill pen and thinks that each clerk probably wrote for three or four hours at a time. Error checking - if it occurred at all - seems to have been rudimentary at best, but having worked in an industry where records were originally kept manually I understand how easy it is to introduce mistakes no matter how careful you are! Whether the modern computerised records are any more reliable remains to be seen. Ideally the records should be completely reindexed from the originals, but there isn't the spare cash for this to be funded by the state. Some records have been reindexed locally but these are in a minority. ******** So - please do not be concerned if you find multiple sources that are inconsistent. Just bear in mind that such records are manually produced and can be in error. Regards Chris _____________________________________________ Information and admin page: http://one-name.org/guild-information-administration/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GOONS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

The recent partial digitisation of the GRO records has made a significant difference - especially since they went back to the originals. But - as you say - it still used the transcription from the original, and the transcription from that transcription, that is the source of many errors. With GRAY being a prominent name in the Gypsy community, I would expect to have significant trouble identifying from many indexes - government or not. I would need to rely on family history and actual certificates - assuming that events were registered. Regards Chris -----Original Message----- From: GOONS [mailto:goons-bounces+christopher.gray=gray-ons.org@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Marie Byatt Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 9:49 PM To: goons@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [G] Do you trust UK GRO records? I put my level of trust of the GRO records probably on the same level as the one tree on family search or Ancestry trees - in short only if I have confirming evidence. This may be due to the fact the that the first several certificates I got (back around 2002/3) all had large errors - didn't seem worth wasting the money. So I treat it as I treat any transcribed index - half trust. I check back occasionally to see if they have gotten some of the ones I have but they missed and a few have made it, but on the whole it's definitely been a 50-50 proposition for me. When I get the true records ( especially on marriages) I make note of where the index is mistaken and go with the actual record information. My Peplxxs didn't seem to like bureaucrats too well and didn't mind flaunting the law. I have many that didn't get registered until 2 or more quarters after the event. Marie (GOONS 5318) Bringing the world together one surname at a time. 'A Pepler Name' http://pepler.tribalpages.com 'Hedgerow - the Ancestors' http://cranberry.tribalpages.com Pepler DNA Study http://www.familytreedna.com/public/pepler-ow/ 'Scroops, Scropes and Scroopes' http://dentonlk.tribalpages.com 'Peplers and Peplows' pepler.one-name.net