An oldie's lament

[joboy]

I remember picking up a baptism off of their hints - they'd attached it to the wrong child but it was the right family (the first Chrissie died when she was three and they'd baptised the next female Chrissie) the baptism was for the first Chrissie but suggested as a hint for the second

This is not unique to modern online sites.  One child of my great(x6) grandparents was baptized in 1711, and died two years later. A second son was baptized with the same name 2 years after that: all events recorded in the same parish register.  When the second son died aged 63 his burial record and gravestone record him as 68.

And a Victorian journalist made a similar mistake when recording the death of Pablo Fanque the circus proprietor (as in Sergeant Pepper).  The internet has just increased the chances of perpetuating error, just as it increases the opportunity for disseminating fact.

I agree...........I have the unusual circumstance of a direct male ancestor who had his first child of his second marriage baptised ' Grace' after his first wife who died a couple of years earlier.

[Fresh Fields]

Hello.

My beef are the transcriber's, who faced with a spread sheet, with a column for gender, have seen fit to award one, when gender WAS NOT assigned in the original Church records. I've found numerous parish records where, for at least a period, the baptism record stated; lawful [numeral like 3rd] child of XYZ; instead of the more common, lawful son [daughter] of XYZ.

While not helpful for confirming gender, it has been VERY helpful for finding gaps in the sibling order of family birth/baptisms being researched. Also draws attention to where Christian names have been re-assigned, for what ever reason.

Assuming gender is fraught with danger for the unwary.

- Alan.

PS And yes I am male.

[iolaus]

I agree...........I have the unusual circumstance of a direct male ancestor who had his first child of his second marriage baptised ' Grace' after his first wife who died a couple of years earlier.

My grandmother was Isabella, as was her father's first wife

[clairec666]

Hello.

My beef are the transcriber's, who faced with a spread sheet, with a column for gender, have seen fit to award one, when gender WAS NOT assigned in the original Church records. I've found numerous parish records where, for at least a period, the baptism record stated; lawful [numeral like 3rd] child of XYZ; instead of the more common, lawful son [daughter] of XYZ.

While not helpful for confirming gender, it has been VERY helpful for finding gaps in the sibling order of family birth/baptisms being researched. Also draws attention to where Christian names have been re-assigned, for what ever reason.

Assuming gender is fraught with danger for the unwary.

- Alan.

PS And yes I am male.

Rule number 1 of transcribing - NEVER guess the gender from the name. My pet hate at the moment

[ThrelfallYorky]

When really stuck I form a table and that often helps me to sort out who of several possibles is the right person. I put things down the side  axis like:
Parents
Baptism
1841
1851
1861
1871
1881
1891
1901
1911
Marr
Death
(or whatever is most useful,) then I create a column for each possibility bearing that name and approximate age, across the top (large sheet of paper) and enter in info, sometimes gleaned from hints - If it "goes beyond" info I know to be right, or "wrong" spouses / children, that helps a great deal to eliminate incorrect people. I think my record was 34 possibles, in columns - about 27 quickly vanished, but I never managed to get the final two sorted -  still don't know who his father was! Keep going back to him every so often, like a child picking away at a scab on a wound (ugh)

[3sillydogs]

Rule number 1 of transcribing - NEVER guess the gender from the name. My pet hate at the moment

Another Rule:  Never assume anything that is not on the document, gender, relationships etc if it is not specifically stated

[clairec666]

Rule number 1 of transcribing - NEVER guess the gender from the name. My pet hate at the moment

Another Rule:  Never assume anything that is not on the document, gender, relationships etc if it is not specifically stated

I used to transcribe for Familysearch, then was "promoted" to checking other transcribers' work. So often, I'd have to remove the gender from baptisms and burials, and worse still, if there was a female marriage witness, often they would be entered as the bride or groom's mother! Looks like a lot of people weren't reading the instructions properly before transcribing.

[Fresh Fields]

I agree...........I have the unusual circumstance of a direct male ancestor who had his first child of his second marriage baptised ' Grace' after his first wife who died a couple of years earlier.

My grandmother was Isabella, as was her father's first wife

Could be confusing for a researcher, especially if the rest of his children were named Patronymically.

- Alan.

[Nifty1]

Several years ago it was possible to access certain records freely. It seems that some my have been bought up by companies like Ancestry. This has the effect of making them less accessible to the general public.