Hi again Mike No fight required thank you <g> It was just from your first post that it implied there were no UTTINGs other than Norfolk so just wanted to point out the deficiencies of the surname atlas with regard to the more unusual names With insufficient information one can sometimes draw an incorrect conclusion It is certainly significant that over 50% of the UTTINGs were in Norfolk in 1881 There are 811 UTTINGs in the 1881 census of which 463 were born in Norfolk, 507 UTTINGs were living in Norfolk (so 57% of UTTINGs were born in Norfolk and 62.5% of UTTINGs were living in Norfolk) Far more than any other County, all the other Counties I checked had a smattering of UTTINGs In 1841 an almost identical percentage were living in Norfolk Using the LDS as a guide is also prone to distortion as not all Parish Registers are extracted to the IGI Not sure what you are using on The National Archives ? Yes you can draw a general picture by using population figures through the years but I would certainly disagree with an assumption that because there was only one of a given name in a certain place it might be the origin of that name, there are far to many variables for that assumption although your research seems to give a good indication in your case The SMITH related to SMITH over the years is something that would require a fair amount of research, frankly I have better things to do with my time <g> Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > Nivard, > Well said. I'm not looking for a fight - I don't have the height, > weight or reach. Of course, extracts of the record will often chart the > method of extraction and not much else. But is it not significant that > in 1881 fully 50% of enumerated Uttings were in East Anglia? The LDS > and TNA seems to suggest the same geographical emphasis. What actual > numbers are we looking at? Where did the other 50% say they were born?