Hi, Have filled the burial registrars in at the church and least nowadays you should look at the burial certificate and take the spelling of the name from there, but I know from experience  the burial registrars could have been spelt different, when receiving the messages there was a forecoming funeral and the names have been spelt how they thought it should have been spelt.  I do not know if I was more aware of this with researching family history or not. Denise ________________________________ From: Eric Harrison <eric.harrison@btinternet.com> To: staffordshire@rootsweb.com; Peter R Booth <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> Sent: Monday, 18 March 2013, 12:52 Subject: Re: [STAFFORDSHIRE] (Rugeley RC Baptism) Research Hi Ruth, can't disagree with what you have said, but what is the primary source? We can only ever get back to the 'Document'  that was recorded at the time, and that only contains what 'someone told someone else' and that person put down his/her interpretation of the conversation. And as many people were illiterate they could not question it. We tend to think that when a baptism took place the priest entered the information directly into the register, from my experience of transcribing many of them what seems to have happened is it was put down on a slip of paper (had some of them with the registers), which was then put in the vestry desk draw - to be entered later. That was providing it did not get mislaid etc. Many of the registers I have done have entries which are 'way out of date order' with a margin note saying - 'Missed or late entry' Marriages, "the couple are now going to sign the register"!! how many times have you heard that said at a wedding? I have seen many (some of mine included) for weddings that were taking place on the same day had information copied onto another couples certificate (as you know there was more than one register), and yes, they were filled in prior to the marriage taking place. We have had many examples of certificates crossed out and canceled entered across them while working on the Staffs BMD transcriptions. Also beware on Birth Certificates, simple things can be incorrect, "Registrar to Informant" - Mother's name?, the answer sometimes results in the informant giving the name of their Mother not the child's mother (had quite a few of these). So again - What really is the "Primary Source" We all need to be a bit of a 'Sherlock HOLMES' Eric ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth J" <ruthgenda@btinternet.com> To: <staffordshire@rootsweb.com>; "Peter R Booth" <pbo08596@bigpond.net.au> Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2013 11:20 AM Subject: [STAFFORDSHIRE] (Rugeley RC Baptism) Research > Hi Peter > > You say > > "For me the simple rule is > pre  1837  church records on FamilySearch > post 1837    civil registrations on FreeBMD" > > > Whoops!  We have to be careful here. > > The Golden Rule for authenticity in historical/genealogical research is > that sources must be Primary, not Secondary, or Tertiary as was and still > is the case with many LDS records.  The LDS transcripts/information > initially was taken from the Bishops Transcripts of Parish Registers. BTs > are Secondary Sources.  Each time you get a stage further away from the > Primary Source there are greater chances of errors. > > Free BMD is also a Secondary Source.  ANY transcription is a Secondary (or > more distant) Source and should always be verified; otherwise it should be > treated with caution. > > Research is not a casual business - it's very meticulous.  People will > want copies of actual records because they are the confirming evidence of > an event and often tell more about their ancestor than the partial > transcription.  They help to round them out - 3 dimensions instead of two. > That is very easy to understand. > > We are all, and I'm as guilty of this as anyone else, in too much of a > hurry to 'get back' to wherever we think we want to be, when what we > should be doing is confirming and cross-checking and taking time to do the > best job we can with the evidence that is available to us.  What is needed > is less 'might be', 'probably', 'likely', 'it's possible that' (my usual > cry), and more solid scientific practice. > > I'm very aware that it's difficult/impossible for people to research > original documents who are not living in the area in which they are > researching.  But that should not be used as an excuse.  As more and more > material is placed on websites the task is getting easier.  Sometimes I > think genealogy doesn't fit well with modern life.  Genealogy requires a > lot of patience and, as with much of Life, we can't have it all and we > certainly can't have it NOW.  But let's try to do it right. > > Ruth > ****************************** > ATTENTION TO ALL:- When replying please remove the details that do not > apply to your mail and change the SUBJECT LINE for best useage of ARCHIVED > MATERIALS. > ****************************** > PLEASE keep your Anti-Virus and Anti-Malware software up to date. BEWARE > of messages making it onto the List with a single URL. NEVER follow the > link. It's usually from an infected source! > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > STAFFORDSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message ****************************** ATTENTION TO ALL:- When replying please remove the details that do not apply to your mail and change the SUBJECT LINE for best useage of ARCHIVED MATERIALS. ****************************** PLEASE keep your Anti-Virus and Anti-Malware software up to date. BEWARE of messages making it onto the List with a single URL. NEVER follow the link. It's usually from an infected source! ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to STAFFORDSHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message