ESSEX-UK-L Archives

Archiver > ESSEX-UK > 2005-03 > 1112043287


From: "Jenny De Angelis" <>
Subject: 1837online,Ancestry,the PRO and the 1861 census index.
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2005 22:54:47 +0200
References: <BE6CA781.A49A%ruth@macs.hw.ac.uk>


Regarding the comments on the Essex list today about the indexing of the
1861 census being done in Asia etc., and the possible involvement of
QinetiQ. I wonder if anyone else has come across the same little mystery as
myself regarding who would end up with putting the 1861 census online.

Back in February I saw on the PRO website census information pages that they
were plannning to allow Ancestry to have the ealier censuses indexed on it's
system. For those who don't already know, Ancestry already has indexes to
the 1871-1901 census on it's website.

Then suddenly the 1837online site began adding the 1861 index to it's site
and they say that this census is exclusive to them. At the same time the
mention on the PRO site of Ancestry being allowed to put the early censuses
on their system disappeared from the PRO census pages. Why did the PRO
change
it's mind and give exclusivity to1837online instead?

I wonder if it is the PRO who have had, or are in the process of having, the
1861 indexed in Asia, via QinetiQ. Rather than the people at 1837 online
having
the transcribing done in India and Sri Lanka. Perhaps the manner in which
the 1861 is being indexed is what has made the difference between one online
company and the other getting this census?

As other's have said 1837online is a commercial venture after all and, after
the mess made of the1901 indexing, you would have hoped for better with the
1861
indexing.

Does anyone know who does the indexing of censuses for Ancestry? When I had
a free trial to their site earlier this year I found, though the indexing
wasn't 100% perfect, the Ancestry site did at least let me find everyone I
was looking for in the 1871,1887 & 1891censuses on their site. Though the
1901 on Ancestry appears to be that indexed by the PRO as it has the same
errors of transcription.

Regards
Jenny DeAngelis.
Spain.

>> On the 1837online site they say the census pages were transcribed by
>> people
>> in India and Sri Lanka to save costs, but they are checked in the UK.
>> Haven't
>> they learn from Qinetiq's mistake?
>
> Clearly not - and if I can cross-check against the ESFH fiche I suppose
> they
> could have done the same. I note that there are several entries for
> various
> popular first names I checked where the family name is given as '....'.
> This
> makes me doubt that any checking has actually been done at the UK end. The
> quality seems to me to be less good even than the 1901 index.



This thread: