GRO indexes on gro.gov.uk !

[Nick_Ips]

It seems the search method is a bit pedantic - for example searching including a volume number requires the volume number to be in the correct format to get any results - e.g. using '4A' gives the response "No Matching Results Found". The 'correct' format is "04A".

Using a wildcard (e.g. "04*") gives the angry red response "Invalid Volume Number Supplied"

But you don't get this warning if you miss the leading zero off - and I've not commonly seen a leading zero used in the volume numbers so it isn't something I'd add by habit.

So beware - a "No Matching Results Found" may just be that you need to add a leading zero to the volume number

[iolaus]

Just a quick word of advice,  the index on this says 14years, when she died at 14 months

[Jon_ni]

Yes my great great grandad's surname (b 1841, 2 weeks after census day!),which is Rogers,is down as Rogirs.

Would only know for sure if you already have the paper copy, as equally well the transcription could be factually correct and the Register wrote it the incorrect way back in 1841.

[Jool]

Thanks for posting this pstainthorp, it has been really useful already and will keep me very busy for some time  .

I have found and reported an error, my great grandmother is indexed a Luzzie, she was actually Lizzie.  Obviously a typo.

[coombs]

I have got the odd "Fatal Error" when searching for Coombs deaths in Clerkenwell district 1850-1855.

[JAKnighton]

I've finally tracked down the correct entry for my 3x great grandmother Mary Ann Smith thanks to this. Also discovered that she had three more brothers (two who were twins) that died shortly after birth.

[carol8353]

Would only know for sure if you already have the paper copy, as equally well the transcription could be factually correct and the Register wrote it the incorrect way back in 1841.

Yes I've had the original cert for over 20 years now and the GRO index is attached and clearly shows the surname as Rogers,as are all the rest on that page.He's the Marylebone one.

Carol

[lanercost]

Another possibility is that the mother has, for some reason, used both names at different times.

I've got someone who was born and baptised with the surname Wood.  But when she married she used the name Ellis, which was her mother's maiden name, and her father is shown as John Ellis when he should be John Wood.  I'd assumed that either they were trying to cover their tracks (both were under 21 and perhaps a parent didn't approve), or that there was a misunderstanding somewhere. 

However, searching through the registrations of her children, several are registered with mmn Ellis and others as Wood.  So I conclude that she did use the surname Ellis at some stage before marriage.  Why, who knows.  There's no illegitimacy or step-parents involved, and there is no doubt that I have the right family.

Good point Sloe Gin, thanks for sharing

[Milliepede]

I didn't quite get the gist of it at first but now I can definitely see the benefits - thank you GRO.
Just think I might at long last find the right death for my missing George