It is always difficult to review a County Directory, especially when it is old as is this volume. Criteria to test are simple to list - 1) Does it provide entries for a large number of places? 2) Does each place get an adequate and accurate historical account [allowing for the state of contemporary historicity} ? 3) Is there a reasonably extensive listing of residents, their occupations and their locations [house numbers were rare outside large cities a hundred or more years ago] ?

When the Directory was published, people read it on the assumption that these questions were all answered in the affirmative. It would be read to obtain information. To some extent we [as historians] do the same today. But we have to be critical. We must check what we obtain from the Directory with data obtained from other sources such as Registers, Deeds, Newspapers &c.

I know enough of Lincolnshire to answer "Yes, except for small hamlets" to Q.1, and the hamlets are usually put in with nearby villages, and there is an index to help. My own specialism is Holbeach and its many hamlets, so I can confirm much of the history for that town, excepting a few myths from unscholarly times such as the occupant of the Littlebury tomb, a "Yes" for Q.2. And it is the same answer for Q.3. for I have studied the names and occupations and locations in the Parish Registers and Census Returns, although, of course, the lower classes [mainly labourers and paupers] and women and children are not included. The entries for people also give an indication of the Street or Hamlet by use of number codes. I can only assume this holds for the rest of the Directory.

I short, this seems a sound directory and a valuable historical source, in contrast with White's 1826 Lincs Directory and contemporary Directories such as Pigot's which is more of a Trade Directory. ( )