GRO Index Page intrigue

[Mitch in Notts]

The new GRO website has one birth for a William HALES in Depwade Q3 1846 vol. 13 page. 58 (nee BILHAM).
Findmypast (and one transcription on freebmd) has page 38. The image on FMP is clearly 38 not 58.
A search on freebmd produces 0 entries for all names on page 58 of volume 13
A search for volume 13 page 38 produces an expected 12 births. I am therefore presuming the GRO site is incorrect, in which case where does the source for the 58 originate?

Thanks

Mitch

[Pam Downes]

I suspect that the indexing for the Historic births and deaths was done from the page with all the entries which are on page 38. Human error misread 38 as 58.

Do write and tell the GRO about this error. They will be very pleased as it helps to make their service more accurate.

And brownie points to you for obviously persevering to find out what the problem was.

Pam

[almach]

I suspect that the indexing for the Historic births and deaths was done from the page with all the entries which are on page 38. Human error misread 38 as 58.

Do write and tell the GRO about this error. They will be very pleased as it helps to make their service more accurate.

And brownie points to you for obviously persevering to find out what the problem was.

Pam

Yeah! Mitch, I agree with Pam, well done you in digging in finding the probable right page number

[Peter Goodey]

The sites such as FMP and FreeBMD contains transcriptions of the 'old' GRO index.

My understanding is that the 'new' GRO index is a new indexing constructed from the GRO register volumes without reference to the existing index.

Does it really matter whether 38 or 58 is 'right'? It's 'right' if it gets you the certificate you wanted.

By the way, FreeBMD thinks the page range for that quarter for Depwade is 29-52 and that page 58 relates to the Docking district. It really is worth while looking through the FreeBMD information pages.

It's irritating that it's different because it easier to use FreeBMD first before checking the new index and the anomaly ought to be reported to GRO.

[Peter Goodey]

PS The page range for Docking for that quarter is listed as 53-69

Presumably Mitch knows from other sources that the proper registration district is Depwade and not Docking?

[Mitch in Notts]

Thank you Peter - I did seek confirmation that the GRO were indexed using a different 'source'. Really the page number is only relevant for referencing on my family tree! And yes I know Depwade Registration District like the back of my hand - and as the birth is usual in Forncett St Peter it is definitely Depwade. Be interesting to see what GRO has to say over the page differences. Thanks again.
Mitch