IGI - advice and guidance please!

[Genevieve]

Further to a message a posted about accessing parish registers online which was kindly responded to by Peter Goodey, I am sitting here with a small sheaf of prints of 'Individual Records' from the IGI which may or may not relate to my attempt to trace my COOKE ancestors back beyong 1837.

I've not used IGI before. From what I have read previously it seems to come with more of a health warning than other secondary/tertiary/quartenaray(?) sources.

What I'd like views on is:

How strong is the health warning?

How complete is it in terms of coverage? e.g. I have found a family that I have reasons to suspect the individual whose birth/christening I am looking for belongs to but, he is not listed though siblings either side of the birth year I have for him are.

Aswell as providing verification (or otherwise of the IGI info), is there any additional information that can be obtained from the parish registers?

Any other hints/tips/warnings etc.

Many thanks for your help as I enter uncharted waters!

[Geoffers]

I've not used IGI before. From what I have read previously it seems to come with more of a health warning than other sources.
What I'd like views on is:How strong is the health warning?

It can be variable. The information from transcripts is reasonable though the dates are often inaccurate - interpretation of names is often difficult so I wouldn't be too harsh there. The information supplied by patrons/members (I forget the term they use) in my experience is sadly often nothing more than a work of fiction.

How complete is it in terms of coverage?

Coverage varies from county to county. I have found that for some parishes, not all entries in registers, ATs/BTs have been included in the IGI.

[As well as providing verification (or otherwise of the IGI info), is there any additional information that can be obtained from the parish registers?]

The IGI is a basic index which can be very helpful research aide. The parish registers can contain lots more information and should always be checked for the full detail.

Examples of the sort of information that can be found in registers is in the following thread
https://www.british-genealogy.com/for...ead.php?t=1591

Geoffers

[Rod Neep]

The health warning is very strong indeed. However, you will learn to spot the iffy ones. Anything that is extracted from a parish register is usually pretty good. It is always worth checking the original though, not only for confirmation, but for the additional information that may be contained.

See our own "help" pages here on British-genealogy.com and click on the link for "Parish Regsiters" to see what information was in the registers for different periods. It is pretty compreheensive, with examples.

Things to watch out for on the IGI are entries that:
a. are duplicated
b. have "ABT" (about) for a date
c. have "of xxxxx" for the parish

Those are downright guesses and almost always innacurate by the person who submitted the entry to the IGI.

If you have queries or doubts:
1. ask here and quote the example
2. always look at the original parish register and obtain a photocopy

Regards
Rod

[Peter Goodey]

On the Individual Record Screen you'll see an annotation along the lines of "Extracted birth or christening record for the locality listed in the record". This means it's from a systematic transcription from the source.

You can treat that as being as reliable as any transcription ever is (in my opinion).

If you click the link under "Source Call No." you'll get to a page which describes the actual source. It's wise to check this. If for example it's a bishop's transcript, the IGI entry will be a transcript of a transcript (more scope for errors!)

If the annotation is NOT "Extracted record..." eg if it says "Record submitted by a member of the LDS Church", well, let's just say it's what someone submitted with no indication of sources and no quality control. Make your own judgement how much credence to give those.

It's generally accepted good practice to check any transcription against the original (or if the source was a BT, against the PR itself). Depending on the period and local practice you may well find useful additional information quite apart from errors and omissions. Even bits which have been crossed out in the PR and don't make it to a transcription can provide useful clues.

Before starting to use the IGI, a useful resource is Hugh Wallis' IGI Batch Numbers

I've heard suggestions that it may not be totally up to date but nevertheless it is invaluable.

I don't know if that ramble was any help.

[Genevieve]

Before starting to use the IGI, a useful resource is Hugh Wallis' IGI Batch Numbers

I've heard suggestions that it may not be totally up to date but nevertheless it is invaluable.

I don't know if that ramble was any help.

Ah - so that was where you got the batch nos. from - very useful. As is your 'ramble'.

Thanks

[ChristineR]

It's probably useful to know that not all the persons in the Latter Day Saints holdings are indexed online. I didn't realise this until I looked at their online catalogue of films, etc. Whilst none of my Harwich RANDALLs show up in the IGI, the LDS do hold the filmed parish records for the Church Of England, Saint Nicholas - which it will be my pleasure to get to a look at today, after a 40 minute drive for a one hour viewing. My first trip to an Family History Centre.

Looking at the Parish registers reveals all sorts of information. I have an ancestor who's father was his mother's sister's husband - as noted in the margin complete with exclamation marks by the priest. The sisters both had children by this man baptised the same day.

Christine
Australia

[Guy Etchells]

Further to a message a posted about accessing parish registers online which was kindly responded to by Peter Goodey, I am sitting here with a small sheaf of prints of 'Individual Records' from the IGI which may or may not relate to my attempt to trace my COOKE ancestors back beyong 1837.

I've not used IGI before. From what I have read previously it seems to come with more of a health warning than other secondary/tertiary/quartenaray(?) sources.

What I'd like views on is:

How strong is the health warning?

How complete is it in terms of coverage? e.g. I have found a family that I have reasons to suspect the individual whose birth/christening I am looking for belongs to but, he is not listed though siblings either side of the birth year I have for him are.

Aswell as providing verification (or otherwise of the IGI info), is there any additional information that can be obtained from the parish registers?

Any other hints/tips/warnings etc.

Many thanks for your help as I enter uncharted waters!

I am surprised that nobody has mentioned what the IGI actually is, a grave ommission as without knowing the reason behind a source (any source) one cannot understand the limitations and strengths of that source.

The IGI is simply an index of the ordinances (baptism, sealing & endowment) of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and when used as such is 100% accurate. It is not an index of parish registers even though genealogists use it as such.

This means it indexes events that happened in the Church temple recording the names & dates used in that ceremony only. This seems to cause much confusion amongst the genealogical community.

The IGI should be used as any other index, as a clue to the possible existance to a parish register entry, in the same way as the National Burial Register may be used as a clue to a possible entry in the burials register.
Cheers
Guy

[BeeE586]

This may or may not be true but it was told to me by a volunteer, who was a member of the Church, at the LDS centre at Grenoside north of Sheffield many years ago. I have no way of checking the accuracy of the statement.

"During the second World War and subsequent conflicts, many church members in the US were conscientious objectors and 'work' was found for some of them indexing baptisms and marriages world wide, not only UK records. They worked from 'copies', never saw the originals since they never left the US, had little interest in what they were doing but it was better than having to fight."

The man who told me was possibly biased since he too had been a CO but had worked in military hospitals.

The IGI, like any other index, is a tool to be used with care and this can never be stressed too much. If any posters have the information it might be interesting to know how reliable the records are for countries overseas. If you check the address for 'Source of Information' it is invariably in the US and I have written to several but never yet had a reply.

-- Eileen

[Cornish Maid]

Early on in my research I wandered onto the IGI and from there to the Pedigrees. I was utterly entranced to find a family which looked like mine, complete with dates, baptismal places etc, I was thrilled and wrote everything down. I then found another Subscriber, who had ALMOST the same family, hm, a few differences to check, perhaps...another one..another one..till I finished up with a poor woman who had 44 children, married her own son before he was born. I then emailed all the five subscribers. This was about three years ago - I am still awaiting a reply from any of them.


As for the IGI, I frequently use my local Family History Centre and was told by the Manager that when she is transcribing local registers, she never transcribes illegitimate children or couples who married and produced a child in less than nine-and-a-half months. When I asked her why not, she said that "some people do not wish other people to know their family secrets".

I was a bit taken aback by this and hope that not many other transcribers feel the same! However, what we must remember is that the IGI is the property and work of the Mormon Church, and as we are "playing with their ball" we have no option but to put up with this if we want to use it.

Cornish Maid

[Rod Neep]

The IGI is NOT an index of parish registers. It is not an index of marriages or baptisms or births.


It is a list of people who have been baptised (posthumously), into the LDS faith, (and even if they have been baptised into other faiths of their own) - or sealed in marriage for eternity by them. (Even if they are dead, separated or divorced).
As such, it is a totally accurate set of records. That is why errors cannot be corrected, or duplicates removed.