Transcription Questions

[ProspectHill]

Hi.

I am re-formatting a list of marriages for FreeREG. They are in chronological order. Sometimes the date was not readable (to the original transcriber, not me). If the dates of 3 marriages go ... "31 May 1678, ? ? 1678, 3 July 1678", can I put June as the month of the second marriage? You know, months make a big difference! Or is there a uncertain but likely notation? Or do I put "betw. 31 May and 3 July?" in the Notes column?

Thanks a lot,
Ellen

[Dave]

Answered direct

Dave

[Guy Etchells]

I note Dave answered privately but it may be of interest to others.

Parish Registers are transcripts of entries of day books or notebooks. That being the case every entry is not guaranteed to be in chronological order.

When transcribing an entry whether for personal use or otherwise copy verbatim, anything else is simply a guess and possibly misleading.
This includes expanding abbreviations such as Eliza to Elizabeth etc., etc.
Cheers
Guy

[rangerc]

Hi all

I'm transcribing Aberdeen Parish Registers 1735+. I've come across this phrase on a few occasions. Can you explain what it means, please?

..... Baptised by Mr George Bartlet Minister at foot Dec ...

Sometimes it's written ... at foot of Dec ...

What does this phrase mean?

Thanks
Colleen

[v.wells]

The latter part of December?

[Chasing Caseys]

Hello Colleen

Is it not Foot Dee as in the place in Aberdeen ?

Footdee is an area of Aberdeen, Scotland known locally as "Fittie". It is an old fishing village at the east end of the harbour. The name is actually folk ... Google it and see what you come up with


Tracey

[rangerc]

Thank you both for your suggestions. The place name 'Foot Dee' would seem to fit nicely as the abode for the Minister and/or witness.
Thanks for your time.
Colleen

[Kirk Dawson]

Use this thread for questions on how to transcribe

[katerimmer]

Sorry if this has already been answered somewhere before - I'm new to FreeREG transcribing.

I am doing marriages at the moment, and have come across a few entries with more than two witnesses, in which case I have just been putting the extra names into the "Notes" field. But I'm just wondering about one I have found where witness number 2 is a "serial witness" but witness number 3 isn't. Would it be o.k. if I swap their names over so that witness number 3 would come up on a name search, do you think?

[Kirk Dawson]

Sorry if this has already been answered somewhere before - I'm new to FreeREG transcribing.

I am doing marriages at the moment, and have come across a few entries with more than two witnesses, in which case I have just been putting the extra names into the "Notes" field. But I'm just wondering about one I have found where witness number 2 is a "serial witness" but witness number 3 isn't. Would it be o.k. if I swap their names over so that witness number 3 would come up on a name search, do you think?

Kate

One often finds the "professional" witness; often a member of the church or local gentry.
It is better in this case that the non professional witness be entered as the second witness.
There is another option when you have 3 or more real witnesses and that is to duplicate the entry but with the other witnesses placed in the witness fields. That makes them searchable. If you do that please add a note that record is a duplicate but with different witnesses.
Kirk Dawson
FreeREG