advice on 1050 on burial record

[garstonite]

Hi...I have on Cheshire Parish records Thomas M******* burial 11 june 1831 age 1050 is this 105 or 1 and 5 months...if someone could advise me please...allan

[Little Nell]

It's a mistake, but without seeing the original, its impossible to say what it should be. Any one of those digits could be wrong.

[Rosie Knees]

is Thomas's surname a rude word

[Olde Crone Holden]

*Tries to think of rude word beginning with M....*

[Rosie Knees]

did it get auto-modded?

[Margaret in Burton]

Try the National Burial Index, if its listed.

Don't have my disc around at the moment and would need the surname anyway. :D

*can't think of a rude word beginning with M either, perhaps we are naive*

[Margaret in Burton]

Is the baptism on the IGI Allan?

[garstonite]

its a burial recxord on www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~cprdb...
Mounfield Thomas 8310611 ......could someone have a look and tell me what they think....I was looking for a babtism for a Thomas Mounfield b 1818 in Whitegate, cheshire...couldn`t find his babtism..cheers...allan;)

[Margaret in Burton]

Can't get that link to work Allan

[Margaret in Burton]

Can't see anything on the IGI

[garstonite]

sincere apologies Margaret...I`d typed .lic instead of liv...clumsy typist .lol.could you try the link again....cheers...allan..

[Margaret in Burton]

No, still not working Allan.

Try copying and pasting the address from your address bar when you have the page up instead of typing it.

[garstonite]

and I had the forward slash in the wrong place...I`m useless on keyboards..lol...could you try again please...once again,apologies...allan:o

[Margaret in Burton]

Well I got in and it does say that, but what a confusing site.

Where did work you out the date from?

All I get is 8310611 for a date.

Update

All of the ages say something stupid. The next one in the list says 3700.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Margaret

I have deliberately kept out of this thread because that site drives me screaming up the wall! Never seen anything soooooooo complicated in all my life.

(But I do know WHY it is so complicated, now)

OC

[Christine in Herts]

All I get is 8310611 for a date.

I'm not sure if I've visited the same site, but I've certainly seen this before - where they are trying to keep the number of information cells to a minimum. It is presumed all the year-dates in the genealogy will start with 1 - so you don't need to include that. If you put the dates in the form (Y)YYYMMDD they can always be sorted into date order using the computer sorting process: numerical order and date order become the same. If you put the date the usual way around DDMMYYYY, then 01121850 (1 Dec 1850) comes before 02011830 (2 Jan 1830), for instance

On their basis "8310611" becomes (1)831-06-11 = 11 Jun 1831.

Irritating to look at, but not difficult if you understand what they're up to.

Christine

[garstonite]

Spot on Christine...It is a little confusing at first,but when you learn to navigate around the site I find it a superb site for cheshire research....I found my Oakes family back to 1750`s through this site....cheers..and now I`m laughing because I KNOW OC hates that site....allan;)

[Old Salian]

Hi Allan
I took a look at the site too and the ages are weird so no idea there...saw the entry below 's age at 3700. Unless this entry was 37 and yours was 10 and a half?? :D
What I did notice when I looked through the site was that there was an Oakes (John) listed as member of clergy between 1669-91. You've probably spotted that?

P.S. Still researching other branches of the Oakes tree myself.

[Christine in Herts]

Incidentally - I use that YYYYMMDD system for naming file-sets and back-ups so that they list automatically in date-order.

Christine

[Olde Crone Holden]

OK, since no-one asked, I'll tell you anyway!

The reason the site is so complicated is because it was set up in the 1970s, as a university project in using computers to store vast amounts of info.

In the 70s, computers were really in their programming infancy, and each data entry had to be done separately into separate fields, as the computer could not cope/programme an entry as complex as a baptism date, say, with church name, date and parents details etc. So every "part" of one single entry is stored separately and that is why you have to click so many buttons to get at one tiddly bit of information!

(I'll stick to borrowing the film from the LDS, thanks!)

OC