Attention: This site does not support the current version of your web browser. To get the best possible experience using our website we recommend that you upgrade to a newer version or install another browser
This is the first time I've indexed records that are prior to a country changing to the Gregorian calendar, so I'm a bit confused. The Field Help (purple question marks) examples show the dates are indexed "as written", but the Project Instructions state to convert Julian calendar dates to Gregorian calendar equivalents. A Conversion Table can be viewed but it totally bamboozles me! Am I missing something here? Am I correct in thinking that England changed to the Gregorian calendar in 1752?
The record I am indexing starts at Nov 1710 and proceeds through Dec 1710 to become Jan 1710, and then changes to 1711 around Mar 26 when I checked out the Reference Images.
Do I index "what is written", or do I need to convert the dates?
I have seen a discussion about this topic in this forum before, but am unsure if it was resolved either way.
Looking forward to your thoughts!
Thanks, Patrick
Hi Patrick,
Yes, there was a big discussion a few months ago about this topic, but I don't remember there being any definitive answer from those in charge.
My own feeling is that it is totally wrong to convert dates. The absolute essence of indexing is to "write what you see", the aim being to make records searchable. We are not allowed to correct obvious mistakes (or even to indicate that we think there is a mistake), calculate dates from other informatiom, or even (in many cases) attribute a surname to a member of the same family. Why, then would we deiberately index an incorrect date? In some cases, agreed, the difference is only 10-11 days; in other instances, though, it could be a different year, month and day. How does that help a researcher to find their ancestor - or even to confirm that that is the correct person? I would be happy to use the dual notation for the year, often employed in the records particularly in the years nearer the change (i.e. 1713/14) for the first 3 months of the year, but I don't think the system allows this.
I have reviewed many records in the relevant year range since this directive came out and have found hardly anyone is actually converting. I would not myself.
Those are my thoughts!
Hilary.
Thanks Hilary. Yes, it seems that it is still unresolved. It would be helpful for more information from a moderator or other users of FamilySearch about this issue and their thoughts about how to index and review it. Here's hoping!
Patrick
