Hmmm... original research!

[Merry]

I was just looking for inspiration for the 'This Day in History' entry for tomorrow. I thought I'd post about Elizabeth Fry as online biographies (inc Wikipedia and the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography) have her dob as 21 May 1780.

For reasons I don't really know, I decided to look at her birth entry on Ancestry, only to discover she was (apparently) born on 17 May 1780! So, which is right and where did the date of 21st come from?

(and now I'll have to find something else to post for tomorrow!)

[kiterunner]

That's interesting! Wikipedia doesn't seem to have a reference for where they got the dob from but probably from somewhere like the ODNB.

Here are links to the birth records for anybody who is interested:
http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7097/41815_b0153299-00043/137356?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk% 2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fMS_AdvCB%3d1%26db%3dUKQuakerBMDReg %26rank%3d1%26new%3d1%26so%3d3%26MSAV%3d2%26gss%3d ms_r_db%26gsfn%3deli*%26gsfn_x%3dXO%26gsln_x%3dXO% 26msbdy%3d1780%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msfng0%3djohn%26msf ng0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dnor*%26gskw_x%3d1%26dbOnly%3d_C 000000F%257c_C000000F_x%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

http://interactive.ancestry.co.uk/7097/41815_b0153086-00109/435985?backurl=http%3a%2f%2fsearch.ancestry.co.uk% 2fcgi-bin%2fsse.dll%3fMS_AdvCB%3d1%26db%3dUKQuakerBMDReg %26rank%3d1%26new%3d1%26so%3d3%26MSAV%3d2%26gss%3d ms_r_db%26gsfn%3deli*%26gsfn_x%3dXO%26gsln_x%3dXO% 26msbdy%3d1780%26msbdy_x%3d1%26msfng0%3djohn%26msf ng0_x%3d1%26gskw%3dnor*%26gskw_x%3d1%26dbOnly%3d_C 000000F%257c_C000000F_x%26uidh%3dvm5&ssrc=&backlabel=ReturnSearchResults

[Merry]

The ODNB has a list of sources including:

· digest registers (births), RS Friends, Lond. [London and Middlesex quarterly meeting

But that may refer to the births of her children rather than her own birth (in Norfolk), perhaps?

[kiterunner]

And the ODNB doesn't give a specific reference for where they got the dob from but they have a list of books etc. Odd that the biographer wouldn't have looked at the Quaker birth records though. (Sorry, I was posting at the same time as you, Merry). They do mention Norfolk RO.

[kiterunner]

Here is a genealogist who has the date from the Quaker records:
http://genealogy.links.org/links-cgi/readged?/home/ben/camilla-genealogy/current+c-gurney371+2-2-0-1-0

Googling for elizabeth fry "17th may 1780": 6 results
elizabeth fry "17 may 1780": 2050 results
elizabeth fry "may 17 1780" 1370 results
elizabeth fry "may 17th 1780" 1 result

elizabeth fry "21st may 1780" 4520 results
elizabeth fry "21 may 1780" 2270 results
elizabeth fry "may 21 1780" 1730 results
elizabeth fry "may 21st 1780" 160 results

So the internet mostly says 21st May!

Added: Out of the public trees on ancestry, 68 have her dob as 17th May and 187 as 21st May.

[kiterunner]

One of the results that came up when I was googling was the Encyclopaedia Britannica but it seems to be a summary with no references. I'll try to find the proper entry later but have to go out now.

[kiterunner]

Hmph, my local library's website gives me access to the online Encyclopaedia Britannica but it is just the same entry. I had a look on Google Book Search, but although I found a lot of books that give her date of birth as 21st May 1780, I couldn't see any which said where they got this date from.

There is a "contact us" page for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, so you could contact them pointing out the discrepancy?
http://global.oup.com/oxforddnb/info/contact/

[Merry]

I might just do that!

Thanks for doing all those google searches etc!

[Merry]

Message sent. I wonder if they will reply?!

[kiterunner]

Let us know if they do!

[Merry]

Initial response:

EDIT: I've removed this response from the ODNB as I've just noticed I'm not supposed to quote them. Positive reply though.

[Phoenix]

The Thomas Cooks of the academic world!

[Olde Crone]

...if they require any further information?????

OC

[Merry]

Reply from the research editor:

EDIT: just read I'm not supposed to quote their reply anywhere, so just to say I have had a positive response! They still have to investigate further before changing anything though, which is fair enough.

[Olde Crone]

Translated to mean:

Oh, you pest, you have now given me untold hours of work.

Well done Merry. It really does go to show that no source is ever impeccable unless you have seen the original YOURSELF. Something which my old headmaster constantly stated but which I didn't understand at the time.

OC

[kiterunner]

Glad to hear they are going to look into it.

[Mary from Italy]

Good result. I've amended things on Wikipedia a few times when I can prove that I'm right.