In a message dated 2/21/04 8:01:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, WLS-CARDIGANSHIRE-D-request@rootsweb.com writes: Kathi: Re the IGI and the Parish Registers. When the information for the IGI was extracted it was not extracted from the Parish Registers of Wales. It was extracted from the BT. The Church of Wales will not permit the Mormons to film the Parish Registers but they were able to film the BT because it came from the Public Record Office in London. You need to have someone look at the Parish Registers. I'm sure there is someone at the National library of Wales or at the CRO that can do it for you. They may charge you, I don't know. I would say that the Parish Register is more accurate than the BT. However, I have seen both on some parishes and I would say that, sometimes, the BT is more accurate. It depends on the minister, what he wrote and on the parish. Also, when you were looking at the Blaenpennal records, did you also check the Parish of Llanddewi Brefi? You need too. Blaenpennal was once a chapelry of the Llanddewi Brefi. I've found records for Blaenpennal in Llanddewi Brefi. So always double check that. The primary evidence should be the death certificate. However, the death certificate is only as good as the informant. If the informant didn't know, then it coudl be wrong. Actually the only person who knew would have been dead. However, she also might not have known when she was born. When you have large families, the ages of the children can be wrong. The 1841 census is not too great because it doesn't show relationshiips. You can't say that the man and the woman and the children are related. I had that brought home to me when I was sure that one of my ancestors had a child. Years later, I discovered that he and his wife could not have children and the child listed was a nephew. Instead of having two men with the name of David Lloyd, I found that they were the same man and I wasted so much time trying to find the second David Lloyd when I had him all the time. Annie > A question about accuracy in the parish records. I have verified the > information I found about the family of Thomas D. Davies from the IGI. The parish > records I found listed the birth dates and christening dates of four > children to this family. (There were others, but I may not have been aware of them > when I was looking.) My question is this: > > My gr-gr-grandmother, Elinor (or Ellen) Davies, is listed on this record as > having been born on July 16, 1835 and christened 13 Sep 1835. However, EVERY > other record I have found, including the 1841 census of Blaenpenal, > Cardiganshire, the 1850 Census of Jackson County, Ohio, her death certificate and > written family records put her birthdate in August of 1834-- almost a year > earlier. > > Should I go with the parish record? I suppose it is possible that she > didn't know her real birthdate. I welcome suggestions, on or off the list. > > Thanks, > Kathi Jenkins Elliott > > ______________________________ > > X-Message: #2 > Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 21:32:54 -0600 > From: "Kathi and Jim Elliott" <kjell@evansville.net> > To:

----- Original Message ----- From: <Cardi2@aol.com> To: <WLS-CARDIGANSHIRE-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, February 22, 2004 5:06 AM Subject: [WLS-CGN] Parish Register > In a message dated 2/21/04 8:01:04 PM Pacific Standard Time, > WLS-CARDIGANSHIRE-D-request@rootsweb.com writes: > > Kathi: > > Re the IGI and the Parish Registers. When the information for the IGI was > extracted it was not extracted from the Parish Registers of Wales. It was > extracted from the BT. The Church of Wales will not permit the Mormons to film the > Parish Registers but they were able to film the BT because it came from the > Public Record Office in London. No, the BTs were transferred from the individual diocesan registries to the National Library of Wales in the 1940s. They have never been in the Public Record Office in London. The BTs "for all the Welsh dioceses were microfilmed in the early 1950s by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" (see "Parish Registers of Wales" by C J Williams and J Watts-Williams). "Many of the early returns went unfilmed, because the records had not been fully sorted at that stage." So the BTs were microfilmed at a relatively early date. Maybe it was only later that the question of allowing the Mormons to microfilm individual parish records started to receive much wider consideration and thence became a source of controversy? Many pre-1837 nonconformist registers (including Blaenpennal Calvinist Methodist christenings 1813-1837) were transferred to London in the 1840s - initially being held in the custody of the Registrar General. Since they were nonconformist records (and at first without official legal status) they were never included within the BTs. But subsequently (in London) they were also filmed for the Mormons. AJ