I would agree with Caroline regarding differences between original records and those the public are allowed to see. I have done a fair amount of research on the records of Shortwood Baptist Church, Horsley, Gloucestershire. Many of the records had been deposited by a local historian, who had found them in her attic. She had transcribed one set of records, which are available on the shelves in Glouucester Archives. I asked to see the original but was told to use the transcription. I then copied the transcription to computer. Another researcher, well known at the Archive, was also interested to see the records. She was far more persuasive and the originals were produced. We checked them against my copy and the book on the shelves. We were able to add names and make corrections to what was available to the public. One affected my family, where a name had been transcribed as Mary, but on looking more closely was an abbreviated form of Margaret, who is my direct ancestor. So, how do we proceed? By producing academic qualifications to back up our credibility as researchers? Or, maybe, by finding someone to vouch for us.... Janet Heskins In a message dated 08/04/2014 20:30:52 GMT Daylight Time, caroline.gurney@blueyonder.co.uk writes: Hugh Ainsley wrote: > Would that the problem was confined to the TNA - but its undoubtedly becoming a trend. And a very worrying trend from the point of view of accurate and thorough research. Those filming records to supply digital images for websites can and do make mistakes. It is yet another way for errors to creep in - just like with indexes and transcripts. I have come across this problem with the Masters' and Mates' Certificates on Ancestry, the originals of which are in the National Maritime Museum. When I was working on the BBC's recent "Clydebuilt" documentary about Cutty Sark I asked to see the original files of several crew members. An NMM staff member told me that was not necessary because they were all filmed and on Ancestry. I insisted on seeing the original records and discovered that not all the documents had been filmed. Replacement certificates were issued when one had been lost - for example in a shipwreck. So it is not uncommon to find more than one Master's or Mate's certificate for an individual in a file, together with two application forms - often dated some years apart and containing details of different ships and voyages. In some cases Ancestry don't seem to have realised this and have only filmed one certificate and its supporting documents. Important information is thus lost to researchers who think they have seen everything on Ancestry. Thirty odd years ago, when I first joined SoG, one of the lessons that Anthony Camp and others drummed into our newbie heads was "Always look at the original record". That remains equally true today but it appears that TNA and some Record Offices have forgotten it. Caroline Gurney ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to SOG-UK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message