Dear Tim Very interesting post. If you remember, I suggested that you might be wasting your time,as the records were now ALL available either on the LDS site or on Vital Records. I tried to replicate your search. I took the same quarter Dec 1870 and used MY extracted records for the sub-division of Arran. I had 29 births in total. I found 28 easily on the LDS site. The missing one was <female> Cheevers, parents Pat + Catherine. I also searched using the batch no. (C012206) ie. all the births on that particular film no.0101218. That birth was missing from the batch. However ALL unnamed births seem to be missing from the batch,or ,more accurately, there were no <male> or <female> births shown. I checked the Vital Records,and the birth WAS there, so I had my 29 total births. So I went back to familysearch.org and looked for your 3 missing names from Renvyle,and found ALL three of them. If you want to check , I found them listed as: Mary Anne CONRY Mary fitzSpatrick ( ie incorrectly spelt) Margaret HEANEY So,Tim, it must be worth checking one more film before you commit yourself to copying all 28. Once you have started ,it's very difficult to stop. I'm now on 1940...and that's a lot of films! ******* Going back to UNNAMED births: I jumped ahead to 1872,where I had another unnamed birth,and sure enough,I could not find it via the usual search on the IGI. Again,I went back to batch search,and this time ,the <female> WAS on the batch list,shown as O'Donnell <female birth> Nothing I did could bring it up via a regular search. I even typed "O'Donnell" into the "FIRST name" spot,leaving surname blank,and surprisingly,that brought up several names,mainly deaths, and none from the CIVIL REG, and not the missing birth. If I had to guess,I'd say they didn't initially know how to enter births where the child wasn't given a name. So they left them out of both the batch and the IGI record Then they may have decided to enter them in the batch,but still unsure how to cope with the IGI. Remember,this info was put on CD when computers were in their infancy for genealogy. I imagine,when they first went online,they simply copied the CDs straight to computer. When I first started using their CDs many years ago, ( and our FHC is still using the same ones-they have not been updated) there seemed to be many gaps in the Irish births,which then only went as far as 1871/1872. The VRecords 1+ 2 filled these gaps,and more recently,the website has got to 1880 (where I am sure it will stop,as they have not filmed 1881-1899). It's certainly been an interesting exercise. What is surprising is how inflexible the LDS spelling seems to be. You would certainly expect to find all variants of Fitzpatrick listed together,whereas Heaney/Heanue I can see as different names. My best advice is to always check the batch number,if you can't find the name where you expect it to be. Takes a bit longer,and you need to be a bit creative with your spelling! Regards Cathy