RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Essex => Topic started by: Trevor Rix on Friday 07 June 19 07:52 BST (UK)
-
On 5th June 2019 the Ancestry card catalogue shows that Ancestry posted four huge datasets of indexes to Essex parish registers.
https://anglo-celtic-connections.blogspot.com/2019/06/ancestry-adds-huge-essex-church-of.html
So, I can search a dataset, click View Record on a hit, click ". at Essex Archives Online", click Open Website, which takes me to
https://www.essexarchivesonline.co.uk
As I already have an annual subscription to Essex Archives Online (SEAX) and am logged in, how do I view the image without paying the £2.99?
The ERO terms and conditions include ...
"1.3 Online access to images of parish registers, wills, electoral registers and some other items is subject to a charge. All charged images can be viewed online by registering for an account and by taking out a timed subscription.
1.4 Within Essex Archives Online, wills are individually indexed but parish registers are identified only by parish, event (i.e. baptism, marriage or burial) and date range. Ancestry have created name indexes to the images of parish registers contained in Essex Archives Online. Users of Ancestry’s indexes may click through to Essex Archives Online and buy a copy of the indexed image. This service is accessible only through Ancestry’s indexes. The ERO does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of these or any other indexes.
1.5 In some parishes, the images of baptisms and marriages available to subscribers to Essex Archives Online extend later than the dates indexed by Ancestry. The ERO does not maintain indexes to these later images and they are not available through this single-image service. The service covers only those images of parish registers indexed by Ancestry."
-
I now have the answer ...
"Thank you for getting in touch and for trying the new service.
The arrangement with Ancestry is quite independent of our subscription system. It does not require users to subscribe – but on the other hand subscribers cannot view an indexed image automatically. We can see that this might be a useful feature and we will consider it for future versions of the software.
In the meantime, you will have to treat Ancestry as an index only, noting the information including the parish name and the precise date of an image, which in most cases should allow you to find the same image via a login to your subscribed area.
Duty Archivist
Essex Record Office, Wharf Road, Chelmsford CM2 6YT
Essex County Council"
-
I found these indexes last night and I shall be a busy bee as most of my ancestors were from Essex. It has been a long time coming for a vast Essex database to come online.
-
Ititially I was excited by this development, but on closer inspection (having paid for a new Ancestry subscription and willling to pay for a new SEAX subscription), I found that the majority of hits are merely "name, father, mother" with no date or parish attached, which renders those hits no better than a random name generator.
So unless this is a work in progress and parishes and dates will be added to those later it is very disappointing and makes me wonder why they bothered.
-
You need to progress two more steps.
For those hits that do not show a parish etc. when clicking on View Record, click "View Record At Essex Archives Online", and click "Open Website". Then scroll down where you will see the information to enable you to eventually find the image via your SEAX subscription. You will be able to determine the parish and the dataset reference, but alas no indication as to the year.
I have asked the ERO for a solution.
-
The arrangement with Ancestry is quite independent of our subscription system. It does not require users to subscribe – but on the other hand subscribers cannot view an indexed image automatically. We can see that this might be a useful feature and we will consider it for future versions of the software.
Well that response has saved me from moaning at them via email but it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect having access to the images from the thumbnails rather than having to go look for them. Some of the parishes are large and some have records all over the place, especially in early registers, so it would really make life a lot easier. That said, depending on the accuracy of Ancestry's indexing which can often leave something to be desired unfortunately, it is a definite improvement on what has been available up until now although not surprisingly I'm finding mistakes.
-
You need to progress two more steps.
For those hits that do not show a parish etc. when clicking on View Record, click "View Record At Essex Archives Online", and click "Open Website". Then scroll down where you will see the information to enable you to eventually find the image via your SEAX subscription. You will be able to determine the parish and the dataset reference, but alas no indication as to the year.
I have asked the ERO for a solution.
OK, thanks that's a help.
Unfortunately it doesn't help with date specific searches though; if I enter a date range it omits all of those hits and of course if I omit a date range I get loads of irrelevant hits. I have experimented with saving the small image and then zooming in an image viewer and can sometimes, but not always, read the date. Oh well, it's better than nothing, which is what we had before.
On the plus side I have now found the baptism record for one of my brick walls along with his parents marriage; I've been searching for him for years without success. It's a very unusal name so I'm sure he's the one and he hadn't travelled that far. Silver linings, etc.
I'm confident enough that there's sufficient new stuff there to sign up for a one month SEAX subscription, which should be enough if I put in the hours.
-
Delighted to see this news, I have also made a breakthrough due to these records and as it is another unusual name I am confident he's mine
I can see it being worth another sub this year for me.
Kind Regards
Amanda
-
I have been appreciating the new records, yes you still have to look at SEAX to see the images but the new records have helped me to break down some brickwalls and have been a valuable finding aid for SEAX. I bought a sub for SEAX yesterday due to the new records on Ancestry.
I think when you do type a date range, you get lots of name, spouse and children results but have to scroll further down to get the hits. Ancestry has been iffy for ages though.
-
I followed up this issue with the ERO ...
"For many records in these new Essex indexes on Ancestry, the parish and
date are not shown when clicking View Record.
If I click "View Record at Essex Archives Online", then "Open website" I
can see the parish and the dataset reference, but not any indication of
the year of the record. So, if I go looking for the image using my SEAX
subscription, I have to browse though all of the images in that dataset.
What is the resolution to this issue please?"
And received their reply this morning ...
"We have no control over Ancestry's indexes, but we queried this point last week. They say that these entries in the baptism index - relating to the parents of those baptised - should not appear there and they are working to remove them."
-
Some brickwalls have come crashing down into dust. But on the flip side I have found more "possibles" for ancestors with more common names such as Moss, May and French.
I am still investigating the strong possibility of a West Ham marriage in 1769 being my ancestor's marriage. They ended up in Brentwood then Rochford.
-
Thanks for the notification, Trevor, think this is going to be very useful.
To get rid of the name, father, mother entries (which are referencing the parent rather than the child), simply type Baptism in the Event Type search field and you only get the references to the child complete with date and parish
Type Burial or Marriage to restrict the list to those records
-
This will be very useful for me as I have RSI and combing the SEAX parish records with no index has caused me a lot of pain in the past. Worth getting another subscription now.
-
This is proving to be a very useful resource, but with some limitations:
Whilst I have had a fair amount of success in finding additional children and burials for some early ancestors and a significant number of modern (post 1837) baptisms, marriages and burials in large registration districts (e.g. Romford), which made gradually sorting through all of the distict's parish records very time consuming, I have unfortunately had only very limited success in breaking through long standing brick walls, specifically early baptisms and marriages. This could either mean that those ancestors were not baptised and/or married in Essex or that the indexing project is incomplete; some records may of course be damaged or missing too. On the bright side it also means that my >10 years of painstaking research both at the ERO and online was pretty accurate and I (probably) haven’t missed much.
I'm pretty confident that I'll easily be able to get everything I need with just one month Ancestry and ERO subscriptions and I'll then be pretty confident that Essex is done. For now...
-
Don't forget that non-conformist register images are not on SEAX.
Many are on Ancestry though.
https://www.ancestry.co.uk/search/collections/uknonconformistvitals/
-
Also common or commoner names have thrown up several candidates. My ancestor Hannah Reed was born c1758 but there are 4 or 5 Hannah Reed's to choose from born c1755-1762. Witnesses to her marriage seem to be from the grooms side. As we all know, it gets harder the further you go back, unless they were well off and left wills or were from gentry, royalty.
I have managed to break down several brickwalls. It has certainly made Essex research a lot, lot easier.
-
The latest Lostcousins newsletter has an article about getting to the image from Ancestry's transcription. It's a bit long-winded, but may be of use to some of you:
https://www.lostcousins.com/newsletters2/endjun19news.htm#EssexTip (https://www.lostcousins.com/newsletters2/endjun19news.htm#EssexTip)
-
Good tip thanks.
I can understand the bloggers frustration of trawling through many unindexed parish records for Essex. These indexes do give you a lift up past the census and civil reg era. I have spent many years trawling through unindexed parish registers on SEAX and in the record offices. Genealogy is so big that the demand for records to come online has never been higher.
My ancestor was Mary Cromsel/Cromful who wed John Kellock in Cressing in 1779. A Hannah Cromful wed in 1784 and one of the witnesses was John Kellock. Cromful seems to be a variation of Cromfield. A Hannah and Mary Cromfield were baptised in 1751 and 1756 respectively in Belchamp, so they are under investigation.
-
I haven't seen any mention so far on Rootschat of the new Essex transcriptions on findmpast. Perhaps not quite as many records as on ancestry, but an awful lot (I mean millions)
The indexes are free to search, so they may be of help
Baptism Index here, with links to the marriages and burials
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/search-world-Records/essex-baptism-index-1538-1920
I found the coverage given in the parish list was not always accurate.
-
FindMyPast seems to have better search features than Anc, although this is just my own experience. I am pleased that FindMyPast Fridays have released some Essex records. Still unable to find the baptism of my ancestor Nathan Jackson Quilter, perhaps his family were nonconformists. However the new Essex records have helped me break down many brickwalls.
-
The latest Lostcousins newsletter has an article about getting to the image from Ancestry's transcription. It's a bit long-winded, but may be of use to some of you:
https://www.lostcousins.com/newsletters2/endjun19news.htm#EssexTip (https://www.lostcousins.com/newsletters2/endjun19news.htm#EssexTip)
Thanks, very useful. I am not sure when this occurred, but SEAX have now hiked the subscription prices by £10 across the board, so 1 day is now £20, 1 week £30 etc. ::)
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=816124.msg6775926#msg6775926
Have we been informed if the indexing is complete or not by Essex or Ancestry? There are also many Essex transcriptions on freereg
https://www.freereg.org.uk/
-
I haven't seen any mention so far on Rootschat of the new Essex transcriptions on findmpast. Perhaps not quite as many records as on ancestry, but an awful lot (I mean millions)
The indexes are free to search, so they may be of help
Baptism Index here, with links to the marriages and burials
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/search-world-Records/essex-baptism-index-1538-1920
I found the coverage given in the parish list was not always accurate.
I think they may have all the same transcriptions now that ancestry have.
-
I haven't seen any mention so far on Rootschat of the new Essex transcriptions on findmpast. Perhaps not quite as many records as on ancestry, but an awful lot (I mean millions)
The indexes are free to search, so they may be of help
Baptism Index here, with links to the marriages and burials
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/search-world-Records/essex-baptism-index-1538-1920
I found the coverage given in the parish list was not always accurate.
I think they may have all the same transcriptions now that ancestry have.
I'm not sure whether the transcriptions are identical on both sites, but it's worth searching both anyway. I've found a couple of records on Findmypast that I couldn't find on Ancestry.
-
I haven't seen any mention so far on Rootschat of the new Essex transcriptions on findmpast. Perhaps not quite as many records as on ancestry, but an awful lot (I mean millions)
The indexes are free to search, so they may be of help
Baptism Index here, with links to the marriages and burials
https://search.findmypast.co.uk/search-world-Records/essex-baptism-index-1538-1920
I found the coverage given in the parish list was not always accurate.
I think they may have all the same transcriptions now that ancestry have.
I'm not sure whether the transcriptions are identical on both sites, but it's worth searching both anyway. I've found a couple of records on Findmypast that I couldn't find on Ancestry.
Interesting, possibly indicates they used their own transcribers? They usually tend to be better than Ancestry overall.
-
Getting the image from the Anc transcriptions does seem a lot of faffing around. FamilySearch has some images for Essex parish registers but they are hit and miss. FreeREG is good but many of the marriages 1754 onwards are transcribed from BT's or Phillimore, which omit the vital witness names. But many are from original PR's which have transcribed the witness names. Names of witnesses to marriages is fundamental.
-
Despite these new transcriptions, I'm still going to carry on transcribing Essex records for FreeREG.
-
Despite these new transcriptions, I'm still going to carry on transcribing Essex records for FreeREG.
Keep up the good work as well. I think sadly the 1754-1774 marriage for Burnham on Crouch were destroyed in a fire one time, as people researching the Richmond family found this out. I am sure my James Hurrell married his 2nd wife Frances there c1767-1772. I descend from their son Jeremiah Hurrell born 1772. Fanny Hurrel died in 1814 aged 72 so born c1741/1742.
I have a strong feeling as to Frances' maiden name anyway as a Fanny Argo was baptised in Danbury in 1741 and an awful lot of Argo's witnesses marriages of James Hurrell's children, plus James Hurrell witnessed a marriage of a brother of the Fanny Argo/Argol baptised in 1741.
-
Keep up the good work as well. I think sadly the 1754-1774 marriage for Burnham on Crouch were destroyed in a fire one time, as people researching the Richmond family found this out. I am sure my James Hurrell married his 2nd wife Frances there c1767-1772. I descend from their son Jeremiah Hurrell born 1772. Fanny Hurrel died in 1814 aged 72 so born c1741/1742.
Yup, I'm descended from the Richmonds in Burnham so the gap of marriage records is a bit frustrating.
-
Despite these new transcriptions, I'm still going to carry on transcribing Essex records for FreeREG.
Keep up the good work as well. I think sadly the 1754-1774 marriage for Burnham on Crouch were destroyed in a fire one time, as people researching the Richmond family found this out. I am sure my James Hurrell married his 2nd wife Frances there c1767-1772. I descend from their son Jeremiah Hurrell born 1772. Fanny Hurrel died in 1814 aged 72 so born c1741/1742.
I have a strong feeling as to Frances' maiden name anyway as a Fanny Argo was baptised in Danbury in 1741 and an awful lot of Argo's witnesses marriages of James Hurrell's children, plus James Hurrell witnessed a marriage of a brother of the Fanny Argo/Argol baptised in 1741.
Have you tried wills? There is the Essex wills beneficiaries index on findmypast, and the actual wills can be searched on SEAX, and there will also be some proved at PCC which are on Ancestry.
-
Clare I think I also descend from the Richmonds of Burnham. Sarah Richmond born 1740 seems to be the one who wed Nathan Jackson Quilter in Woodham Fererrs in 1776. A William Richmond witnessed the wedding in 1776, and his siganture matches that of the William Richmond who signed his 1761 marriage licence to Mary Hunick. While the 1754-1774 marriage register may not survive, any licences for people who wed in Burnham or who were of Burnham does survive. I looked at the the original on FamilySearch. I think William was the son of Jonathan and Mary like Sarah was. A Jonathan Richmond wed Mary Smith in Colchester in 1730 or 1731.
Melba, I shall certainly have a look at the Essex wills beneficiaries index on FindMyPast. Thanks.
-
This might be of interest to some of you. Today I've found loads of burials for my relatives which appear in the Ancestry transcriptions but aren't on Findmypast. I've used exactly the same search terms on both sites, so I'm wondering if some parishes aren't covered on Findmypast.
I'd previously found a few baptisms on Findmypast which weren't on Ancestry, though I managed to find most of them on Ancestry by using wildcards.
So if you haven't already, it's worth searching both sites. :)
-
There are indeed gaps in the coverage on findmypast.
List here (and again I'm not convinced it is totally accurate, in fact I know it isn't!)
https://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/essex-parish-lists
So yes, more records on ancestry.
The transcriptions on findmypast may though contain more detail.
FreeReg continues transcribing Essex registers, and we know there are quite a lot of Essex records on FamilySearch
For people with Essex ancestors the situation is now vastly improved!
John
-
Essex parish records online were very sparse 10 years ago. Today it is much easier. FindMyPast is better with surname variants. Shame that Suffolk records online are still quite patchy and many of the new IGI records have vanished when being transferred from the much better old IGI site. Several of my Essex ancestors have ancestors who can be traced back to Suffolk. Lots of Suffolk people settled in the Rochford/Foulness area of Essex in the 1700s and 1880s, and that end of Essex is one of the furthest areas of Essex away from Suffolk.
Nonconformist ancestors can be harder to trace.
-
There are indeed gaps in the coverage on findmypast.
List here (and again I'm not convinced it is totally accurate, in fact I know it isn't!)
https://www.findmypast.co.uk/articles/essex-parish-lists
So yes, more records on ancestry.
The transcriptions on findmypast may though contain more detail.
FreeReg continues transcribing Essex registers, and we know there are quite a lot of Essex records on FamilySearch
For people with Essex ancestors the situation is now vastly improved!
John
Yes I don't think that findmypast list has been properly updated with the new transcriptions. I have found that the transcriptions on Ancestry and Findmypast are definitely from different sources. On Ancestry I have found several silly mistakes in transcription, such as the wife's parish being given as her name, which means, i.e, when searching for a John Smith who married an Amelia c. 1780, it finds nothing on Ancestry, but if I put the same query in findmypast it turns up the correct marriage. So if you don't find what you are looking for on Ancestry, definitely check both findmypast and freereg.
-
Yes I don't think that findmypast list has been properly updated with the new transcriptions. I have On Ancestry I have found several silly mistakes in transcription, such as the wife's parish being given as her name
On that note, I assumed there was a transcription error on findmypast when I found a marriage of Little Wakering to Hannah Laver in Steeple in 1761. Little Wakering is a village not too far away from Steeple, so I assumed the transcriber had put the groom's parish in place of his name.
No mistake - here's the register itself:
-
Yes I don't think that findmypast list has been properly updated with the new transcriptions. I have On Ancestry I have found several silly mistakes in transcription, such as the wife's parish being given as her name
On that note, I assumed there was a transcription error on findmypast when I found a marriage of Little Wakering to Hannah Laver in Steeple in 1761. Little Wakering is a village not too far away from Steeple, so I assumed the transcriber had put the groom's parish in place of his name.
No mistake - here's the register itself:
How curious claire :), I wonder if they were a foundling found at Little Wakering? In my entry's case, it was definitely wrong on Ancestry, the wife was correctly given as Anne on findmypast.
-
How curious claire :), I wonder if they were a foundling found at Little Wakering?
Quite possibly. I can't seem to find any more about him - Findmypast doesn't have a baptism or burial for him, or any baptism of his and Hannah's children. The marriage register says "married by license with consent of parent", but I imagine this is Hannah's parent since she is a minor.
-
How curious claire :), I wonder if they were a foundling found at Little Wakering?
Quite possibly. I can't seem to find any more about him - Findmypast doesn't have a baptism or burial for him, or any baptism of his and Hannah's children. The marriage register says "married by license with consent of parent", but I imagine this is Hannah's parent since she is a minor.
His baptism may just be recorded as 'a foundling' in the register. They often state where they were found and who found them.
-
This might be of interest to some of you. Today I've found loads of burials for my relatives which appear in the Ancestry transcriptions but aren't on Findmypast. I've used exactly the same search terms on both sites, so I'm wondering if some parishes aren't covered on Findmypast.
I'd previously found a few baptisms on Findmypast which weren't on Ancestry, though I managed to find most of them on Ancestry by using wildcards.
So if you haven't already, it's worth searching both sites. :)
Thanks for that list location I wasn't aware there was one.
Looking at Coggeshall in that lists explains why I couldn't find the marriage of a William Denton to Jane pre 1680, mind you I can't find it on Free Reg, Family Search, Ancestry, The genealogist or the Coggeshall Museum transcripts (they start at 1780). ;D
On the subject of the Essex Parish Register Index (EPRI) on Ancestry, I have come across some beauties, here's just three.
John Theobald & Hannah Marriage married 7 Apr 1741 Lt Tey, Essex.
EPRI: John Reobald & Hannah Marjays.
Ruth Marriage baptised 19 May 1728 Markshall, Essex
EPRI: Pith Marriage.
Elizabeth Theobald buried 1743 Lt Tey.
EPRI: Elizabeth Theeleld buried 4 Dec 1742 Lt Tey.
Regards
-
I see that pm 9 January 2020 Ancestry have "updated" some of their ERO records (specifically births and baptisms 1813-1918 and marriages 1754-1935).
Since this could mean anthing from one correction to thousands of additional records, does anyone have any indication of what it really means? I have grown tired of looking for missing records when this has happenened before and have never finding a single record I need and am therefore very reluctant to pay for a new subscription and search through all my missing persons again without at least some hope of success.
-
It says there are now 3,939,834 births etc
And 1,970,323 marriages
All C of E
I don’t know how many were there before
-
It is a shame that you cannot view the images on the Essex Ancestry collections. And they have hiked up the prices for SEAX. I still had to take a sub out on SEAX to view records I had found on Ancestry.
-
It says there are now 3,939,834 births etc
And 1,970,323 marriages
All C of E
I don’t know how many were there before
Anglo-Celtic Connections blog told us in 2019
https://anglo-celtic-connections.blogspot.com/2019/06/ancestry-adds-huge-essex-church-of.html
Looks like they have added a couple of thousand records to each of those two databases.
-
Anglo-Celtic Connections blog told us in 2019
https://anglo-celtic-connections.blogspot.com/2019/06/ancestry-adds-huge-essex-church-of.html
Looks like they have added a couple of thousand records to each of those two databases.
Thanks for that. Funnily enough I've just seen an email from yesterday saying that they've added thousands of new records to the Essex collections.
Yeah right, a couple of thousand. Not worth a new subscription for me then.