Hi Not the usual question of which is better Does anyone know if they use the same scans or not? I just noticed that on Ancestry the 1841 census for Derbyshire/Edensor/district 11 starts with children aged 8 and 3, and the page number opposite is 8 so I reckon there must be a chunk missing. Is it possible that FMP would have it or do they just index the same images?
"The present is the key to the past" - Charles Lyell
gardener wrote:Hi Not the usual question of which is better Does anyone know if they use the same scans or not? I just noticed that on Ancestry the 1841 census for Derbyshire/Edensor/district 11 starts with children aged 8 and 3, and the page number opposite is 8 so I reckon there must be a chunk missing. Is it possible that FMP would have it or do they just index the same images?
They do use the same images, but sometimes get them out of order. I told Ancestry about a mistake a few weeks ago. They had a head of the house on one page and then the next page was a wife and children of a different family. You could see by the folio and page numbers that they were out of order, and they used ditto marks for the surnames of the wife and children. Luckily I knew of both families. They had put that particular one right now.
Thanks Mark. Good to see them compared like that. They must be from the same film though. Do you have a subscription to the Genealogist? If so could you possibly look for Maria Booth born 1938 living Derbyshire (Bakewell/Edensor). On the Ancestry site she is at the top of sheet one, with her brother John. Does the Genealogist have any entries before this?
"The present is the key to the past" - Charles Lyell
I thought each scanned their own and transcribed from that?
Sometimes if you look at scans for bmd on ancestry and look at early scans on freebmd there is a difference and no wonder somethings are missing or incomplete from freebmd. As a transcriber for freebmd you are only to transcribe what you are sent and not meant to look at other scans.
I thought you could ask for a correction or alteration or say pages were missing or wrong on most things. Jo
It is on FMP gardener and the image is very poor. Cicking for previous pages a message come up saying its free to view as the images are poor.
1841. Edensor, Edensor & Chatsworth
BOOTH, James M 40 1801 Derbyshire VIEW BOOTH, Elizabeth F 40 1801 Derbyshire VIEW BOOTH, George M 15 1826 Derbyshire VIEW BOOTH, Charlotte F 12 1829 Derbyshire VIEW BOOTH, Abraham M 10 1831 Derbyshire VIEW BOOTH, John M 8 1833 Derbyshire VIEW BOOTH, Maria F 3 1838 Derbyshire
I found a missing wife on FMP! On Ancestry I found the ships record for John Howard Jinks on his emigration to Canada. I'd also found his immigration documents on arrival in Canada. On FMP I found his wife and daughter - I rechecked Ancestry, noticed that John was the last entry on the page, the next page was missing. I then searched the immigration records for his wife Alice and found her, but no record for their daughter. I'd have never have found out about the rest of the family if it hadn't been for FMP having different records! I may try the genealogist next time I'm up for a subscription renewal!
Snoopysue
Logic merely enables one to be wrong with authority.
grangers14 wrote:It is on FMP gardener and the image is very poor. Cicking for previous pages a message come up saying its free to view as the images are poor.
Fantastic! I'll have to get a new subscription as soon as I can afford one Thanks a lot!
"The present is the key to the past" - Charles Lyell
gardener wrote:Hmm, these are just missing (only 4 pages in the file anyway). Perhaps I'll just see if my sister can go to the archives Thanks for replying
If the pages are out of order you might see them in order if you to to the top of the page and click on the District Number