Any prospect of smarter FreeBMD and Ancestry searches?

I'm often faced with looking for evidence that A married B at a certain
place within a certain time range. Whilst FreeBMD doesn't, of course,
provide absolute evidence, it gives reasonable clues if two people with the
right names appear on the same page as each other.

When searching FreeBMD's marriage records for a single name, you can often
get dozens of hits - particularly if both names are fairly common - and you
have to examine each one to see whether there is a matching name on the same
page.

All of this makes me wonder just what would be involved in providing an
option - just for marriage records - where you specify *two* names (or parts
thereof) and where it only returns results in cases where *both* names
appear on the *same* page. Coming from an IT background, this doesn't seem

Alan Summerfield...

FreeBMD has this facility already, that's what the "Spouse/Mother
surname" box is for!

Geoff Pearson...

but it doesn't work - I think

Graeme Wall...

Free BMD does that already. If you are working through Ancestry have a look

JohnB...

I find this all very frustrating at times! A week or so ago I found
what I thought was a likely marriage to do with my family, in this case
John Harrison (b 1826, Bolam) m Mary Welch (b Whalton 1842) in Morpeth

CWatters...

No problem for me...

Marriages Dec 1861
Dalton Ann Morpeth 10b453
Fleming James Morpeth 10b453
Harrison John Morpeth 10b453
WELCH Mary Morpeth 10b453

1861. Last night I thought I'd look to see what I could find and see
if I could verify that this marriage was the John and Mary I have (1881
census living at The Glebe, Whalton, N'land). I spent a good while
looking and can't find it now! Couldn't actually find any trace of a

Roger Mills \(aka Set Square\)...

So it does! Aren't I glad I asked! [Sorry about the grammar - "am not I"
doesn't sound right either!]

So how about looking for families in Ancestry - is *that* already lurking
there, somewhere?

Mary Welch and don't know how to verify if this is the Mary I want.
The lesson is "make notes of where you find stuff" which I do for
census stuff but I've never kept records of the BMD discoveries
(FreeBMD, Ancestry or FamilySearch - anywhere else?).

I presume the fault is mine and that searching in the same place for
the same things twice will give you the same results? :-)

to me that it should be too difficult to implement - but I'm not aware of
the detailed database design, of course.

Cast-it Admin...

This is simple enough and is how you search in marriages in Cheshire:

octiger...

... and in most (probably all) of the other local BMD sub sites of

also used in North Wales on http://www.northwalesbmd.org.uk/bmd_welcome.html

I have identified a similar 'nice to have' concerning census records in
Ancestry. As users of this NG will know, there are frequent requests to help
to find a family which has 'disappeared' from one of the censuses - usually
because the surname has been mis-transcribed. It can be very difficult to
guess what the (mis)-transcribed record *might* say - and if you leave the
surname blank you often get hundreds - or even thousands - of hits.

What I would like to see is a 'smart' search where you can specify more than
one family member, and where it only returns results when it finds them all
present in the same family. So, if you knew all the first names but
suspected that the surname might be wrong, you could find families with the
right combination of first names.

Does anyone have any thoughts about the feasibility of this?

Hugh Watkins...

you can so this on the 1881 cds using FolioViews
see help menu for advanced search

Roger Mills \(aka Set Square\)...

I assume you mean CDs - as in Compact Discs - rather than an on-line
facility? (in which case I haven't got any!)

What does Folio Views actually do? I am aware that, on Ancestry, if you know

Roger Mills \(aka Set Square\)...

Are you saying that this works in Ancestry? I'm happy with wildcards, using
? and *, but how do you enter Boolean operators in a field if, for example,
you want to find occurrences of Smith OR Jones?

Roger Mills \(aka Set Square\)...

Yes, but I *think* that Stan is saying that Advanced Query on Ancestry does
the same thing as Folio Views on the CD set.

Daniel Morgan...

I don't think that's right. I've never found a way to make Ancestry do
the sort of search you want. It would be a very useful feature, 'tis
true.

For 1881 only, you can use the FamilySearch.org version, which lets you
specify the name of the head of household as well as the person being
sought. So for example, if you're looking for Joseph SERCOMBE and his
wife Mary, you can search for Mary SERCOMBE, with head of household
Joseph. But this isn't quite what you want, since it will also turn up
Josephs with daughters or maids or lodgers named Mary, and it won't
turn up the couple you do want if they're in someone else's household
(e.g. their parents, or a lodging house keeper).

Roger Mills \(aka Set Square\)...

No, that's right. I'd like to be able to find households which contain (say)
Fred, Mary, William and John - without worrying about which (if any) is the
head.

That is what I'm trying to clarify.

Roger Mills \(aka Set Square\)...

Fair enough. Thanks for the clarification.

Hugh Watkins...

it does not

Hugh W

the Piece/Folio/Page/Household Schedule reference you can go straight to the
family (provided the Household Schedule has been transcribed, which isn't
always the case!) - but if you don't have this information, or don't know
fairly precisely where the family was at the time, it doesn't get you very
far.

I suspect I may be missing something!

and I have asked ancestry for this a couple of years ago

freebmd and family search and world connect allow a spouses name in a
search

Hugh W