3 thoughts on “New at Ancestry

  1. Just checked the two England and Wales collections and I’m surprised to see that they are not accessible to someone with a UK only subscription – it appears I need to upgrade from UK records to world membership in order to see the new UK records. It could just be me being cynical, but is this a ploy to extract more money?

  2. Rebecca, I’d trust your instinct, there. One branch of my family left England in 1625; the Scots & Irish left either to avoid being murdered by Cromwell’s troops or were sold into servitude to Royalists in the Colonies. I would love being able to browse at will the UK records but, alas, another $75.00 on top of what I’m expending annually. I’d say you are correct. Cheers, your friend across the pond.

  3. Help ! I’ve searched around the description of the England & Wales Christening Records, 1530-1906 (and corresponding Marriage records) and can’t find any description the actual SOURCE of the records. Some spot checks result in all parish records, but this would Seem to duplicate what’s in familysearch.org. However a further check shows at least one (marriage) record in the England & Wales DB which is NOT in familysearch.org, although the LDS film number is cited in the familysearch directory. Apparently the England & Wales DB is a re-do of the same LDS films, but maybe more complete transcriptions. Is it Ancestry’s intent that the E&W DBs will eventually be a complete transcription of the LDS films ? If not, is there any mechanism to tell which version of the films are ‘most complete’, or must researchers try to work with both databases ? This isn’t too serious a problem for searching for individuals, but I am working on a One Name Study and trying to maintain and compare two competing ‘lists of all names’ would be onerous at best.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *