Indexed copies of birth records

[murf]

Martin Wynne, son of Michael Wynne of Cloonmakin and Susan Leahy, was baptised on 7 Nov 1878. The civil birth record (retrieved from
irishgenealogy.ie) turns out to be a copy (performed on 21 Jul 1879) of the original entry made on 28 Dec 1878. (see below)

WynneCopy.png (199.59 KiB) Viewed 4758 times

This original entry gives the date of birth as 11 Dec 1878, some 34 days after his baptism. On the face of it, this looks like a classic case of
fudging the birth date to avoid the fine, but on the offchance that a mistake occurred in making the copy, I decided to try and find the
original Civil entry.
The first step was to locate a match between a close by baptism to the civil record. I eventually found a match with the baptism/birth of Pat
Marrinan, son of Tim Marrinan and Mary Fitzpatrick on 27 Oct 1878, entry number 470. The Wynne entry was number 498, so I paged
forward two pages and found the original. (see below)

WynneOriginal.png (80.6 KiB) Viewed 4758 times

Comparison shows the copy to be a true reproduction of the original, and throws no further light on the discrepancy between baptism and birth. But I'm left to ponder the reason for the indexing of the copy in preference to the original, which is quite legible. Also, is this an isolated case or is it routine procedure to index a copy whenever available?
I for one would prefer to see the original entry and catch up on who else in the parish was having a baby around that time.

murf

[Sduddy]

Hi Murf,
That is interesting. When a record made by a Registrar was found by a “Higher-up” to contain an error, an amended record was made. I assumed that both records were always shown online – because I so often found both records - but now I see that such is not the case.
The “Higher-up” scrutinized the records very carefully and circled any errors he found. In this case the Registrar had described himself as Deputy Registrar when, it seems, he should have described himself as a Registrar.

Sheila

[Sduddy]

Hi Murf,

You say “so I paged forward two pages and found the original”. But how do you page forward, please? I’ve often wanted to do that, but I don’t know how.

Sheila

[Jimbo]

Hi Sheila,

Below is a screenshot of a sample baptism record and how to view the prior or subsequent pages by changing the number of the file name. This works on a batch of records. I'm not sure how many records would be in one batch, and batches might vary by size.

Civil baptism record.jpg (135.62 KiB) Viewed 4709 times

The baptism record that Murf showed was an amended baptism record - see expanded screenshot below. Notice how the file name is different from the standard baptism record and it ends in an "a". For this amended record, I couldn't go back to the prior or subsequent page using the same method as the standard baptism record.

Civil amended baptism record.jpg (101.02 KiB) Viewed 4709 times

I did not understand Murf's comment about the index. Didn't irishgenealogy simply index the hardcopy of all baptism records whether amended or not? Why did they go to the trouble of picking between the original and amended baptism return? Or was the starting point some index that already made the choice between the two records?

[Jimbo]

I decided to try and find the original Civil entry. The first step was to locate a match between a close by baptism to the civil record. I eventually found a match with the baptism/birth of Pat Marrinan, son of Tim Marrinan and Mary Fitzpatrick on 27 Oct 1878, entry number 470. The Wynne entry was number 498, so I paged forward two pages and found the original. (see below)

While the above method outlined my Murf does work, there is a much simpler method. Retrieve another baptism record from the same year 1878. I opened the other Martin Wynne baptism record from Glenamaddy registration district, but I could of used any other record (I think) from the same year as a starting point. This baptism record is 2076565.

You know the amended return for Martin Wynne of Ennistymon was 2076509a. Simply replace the "starting point" record number of 2076565 with 2076509 (dropping the "a") and hit return. And voila, the original return appears.

It is important that your starting point record is the same year and is not an amended return as the file names are completely different.

This method works 100% of the time, but I've only tried it once.

Example go from amended record to original.jpg (135.88 KiB) Viewed 4697 times

[Jimbo]

My second attempt was not successful. The file names are based upon:

Year/ 5 digit batch number / 7 digit record number.

I got incredibly lucky that Martin Wynne of Ennistymon and Martin Wynne of Glenamaddy registration districts were in the same batch number (02938).

Perhaps there is some intelligence to the batch numbers?

If not, a combination of Murf's method of going to the baptism register for a close by baptism record, searching on irishgenealogy, then I would next type in the amended record (dropping the "a") to hopefully arrive at the original baptism record if indeed in the same batch of records. Slightly more efficient than having to search the entire batch, just type in the number.

If the batch numbers had a geographic meaning that would be helpful, but I doubt that this is the case.

[murf]

Hi Sheila and Jimbo
Thanks Sheila for pointing out the error re the Registrar. I had overlooked that initially.
And thanks Jimbo for explaining the navigation of the register. The url for the page containing entry No 498 is:

https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/ ... 076509.pdf

In this case I had changed 06.pdf to 09.pdf, ie three pages forward rather than the two that I had previously guessed.
Another tool for navigating the register may be found at

http://www.irelandgen.com/tools/gro_img_nav.php

The page we are interested in contains birth entries numbered from 491 to 500, being variously taken by John Hill, Registrar, or Wm Marrinan, Dep Registrar. Examination of the entries suggest they were all handwritten by the same person, possibly the Deputy Registrar. The batch of entries is certified at the bottom of the page (presumably in his own hand) by John Hill, Registrar, and says in part ..."hereby certify, that this is a true Copy of the Registrar's Book of Births within the said District,"
Makes me wonder how many times BDM records were copied by hand prior to reaching the digital stage.

But perhaps I digress from my original complaint.
Jimbo, when I went searching for the birth of Martin Wynne, I was provided with an image of a handwritten copy (of a copy?).
I was not able to see (as with 99% of other searches) the birth entry within the context of contemporary births in the same district.
murf

[Sduddy]

Hi Jimbo and Murf

Thank you both for your help. I tried that method shown by Jimbo and, yes, it worked!
There are some situations, though, where going to the next page will not give you the information you think you should find. After a couple of straightforward cases (which worked perfectly), I then tried it on the Keeshan triplets born in Ogonnelloe registration district, Scarriff Union, March 1866. I had noted the report of birth of triplets in the Clare Journal of Mon 19 March 1866, and had then checked the civil records in order to find their names. I found that the births of Patrick and Agnus were recorded and I assumed that the third child was on the next page, but didn't know how to go to the next page. As it happened, there were very few Keeshans born that year, so I found, quite easily, that Cecelia Keeshan was the third child. Then today, I looked again and tried going to the next page, but she's not there. So the record of her birth must be an amendment of some kind, or category. There are some mysteries that I will never fathom, but, thanks to your help, I am making progress.

Sheila