IGI vs FHC vs Parish Registers

This will probably come out all wrong, but hopefully one of you can
understand what Im getting at.

As I get deeper into Genealogy, my mind is still drawn towards Parish
Registers from a local records office, Parish Registers at an LDS FHC,
and the LDS IGI.

Obviously, I use IGI quite extensively at the moment, because it's
easiest to get to.

But I understand it's not complete, and so I should head off towards
Parish Registers.

Eve McLaughlin...

The IGI is merely an index, extracting certain basic parts of the
information to be found in a parish register.
At different periods, the parish register contains entries written in a
certain style - sometimes the total information is as bare and limited
as the IGI, sometimes should appear as standard extra details.
For instance, after 1812, a baptismal entry should include the
occupation of the father and, at least in a town, possibly the street
address or close location where the family lived.
From 1837, marriage entries include the occupation/s, marital status,
ages from about 1870, and the name and occupation of the father (a
limited 'extra' with father's name is given for BVRI extracted entries
but not the original IGI.)
At any period, the clergyman may choose to add extra information about
the persons involved - and this is not included in the IGI.
There is also the hazard that a certain number of the extracted
entries, and many of the 'submitted' entries have been wrongly
transcribed.
So yes, always check what you find in the IGI against the original
registers (on film through LDS if you cannot get to the Archives
concerned). Use the IGI as an index and indication of where to search
only, not the last word. If you just build a pedigree on the IGI, you
are asking for trouble, and will miss such a lot.
.

However, at this point, I become confused as to whether one will give me
more than other, either visiting a records office, or going to a fhc.

Steve Hayes...

The IGI is not a transcription, but an *index*. It is therefore not complete.
It is also not just an index to parish registers, but it is an index to
genealogical information from various sources, some more reliable than others.

The IGI was trashed a few years ago when it suddenly included a lot of
information from anonymous sources, so you have no way of seeing the original
information -- that's like having the index to a book without having the book
itself.

I look at parish registers in LDS fhcs, on microfilm, because I live in South
Africa and the FHC is 70 km away, whereas the parish churches our country
records offices are several thousand kilomtres away. Of cours not all parish
registers have been microfilmed, but a good microfilm copy is almost as good
as having the orginnal register.

So it depends on how far you are from the FHC and the place where the
registers are kept, and whether the registers are microfilmed which you
choose.

The IGI, however, is just an index, and now a very unreliable one, as I've
pointed out.

Yesterday I found an entry in the marriaqge register for a couple who were
married in Crowle, Lincolnshire. The IGI has the date right, but says they
were married in Epworth. Unless they travelled there on the same day and got
married twice, that cna't be right.

But the IGI simply says that the information was submitted by a patron, but
they don't give any identifying information. If I knew that it was daft cousin
Mollie in Durban, who found a totally erroneous wife for my great grandfather
from the IGI, and then submitted that marriage back to the IGI, I'd know what
the information was worth, but as I said, the IGI is now like an index to a
book when you don't have the book, so it's not even much use as an index any
more.

I understand that the IGI is made from transcriptions from Parish
Registers. But I understand it's not complete. I understand that these
same Parish Registers however, are stored on film. There are film
numbers provided by the FHC Library to order film. Are these "complete"?
Are the films themselves "complete" on the IGI?

Charani...

The IGI isn't made from transcriptions. Some of the entries are,
these are the extractions and so are reasonably reliable. The
(?)majority of entries are patron submissions. At best they are a
result of someone's research but at worst they are pure guesswork
based on assumptions such as girls married at 21 and boys at 25.
These are the patron submissions and should be treated with extreme
caution.

I don't use the LDS FHCs but I understand that the parish registers
they can have on film are complete although they don't have all of
them. Not all Record Offices/churches allowed the LDS to film the
registers. Those more familiar with the centres will be able to
advise you better.

You'd have to check the opening hours of the relevant record office in
Yorkshire because they may not be open every weekend :))

It seems previous films I've ordered from the FHC, are, pretty well
transcribed into the IGI. Is this the case, or are there gaps in the
transcription of each film? Would I be wasting my time in getting a film
from the FHC where I know (at least) parts of the film are already on
the IGI?

Also, are there gaps in the parish registers that the fhc have on film?

I don't much want to spending Ł3.50 and driving over to sutton for a
film of Castleford, if I find that there's still only approx 12
Dean(e)'s born upto 1812 matching the IGI. Much the same, I don't
particularly fancy driving a 300 mile round trip to Yorkshire every
weekend to flick through parish registers if they're going to be the

roy...

A few pointers for you.....

1) You CANNOT do all your research from the IGI because.....

a) it is an index only and does not contain additional material
which may well prove vital, especially in identifying two different
people of the same name, i.e. occupations.

b) as has been explained to you, whilst the extracted entries are by
and large reliable (though they contain errors of transcription and
omission), the private submissions by LDS members MUST be treated
with great caution.

c) the IGI is by no means complete; parts of the country are well
covered, whilst others are only sparsely covered, moreover there are
gaps even in those parishes that are well covered.

2) Many of the extracted IGI entries are taken not from the parish
registers but from the bishop's transcripts, which are copies of the
registers made from 1598 onwards. In many places the LDS were unable
to film the original registers because of religious objections by the
incumbent, so they went to the county record office and filmed the
BTs instead.

3) You should ALWAYS check the original registers AND the BTs as well
if possible, since though the latter are supposed to be exact copies
of the PRs, very often they are not! This is because they may have
been done by a different person, i.e. the vicar may have left it to
his curate or a clerk to do the copying and if they had difficulty
reading his writing.....well, plenty of room for errors.

4) I am an acknowledged Yorkshire expert and if you tell me
precisely which particular parish registers/BTs you want checked, I
will consult my reference books and tell you their whereabouts. It
may well be that we have copies either in printed form or on
microfilm at the Society of Genealogists' in London, where I am on
the Board of Trustees. If you live anywhere near London, then this
may save you a trip up to Yorkshire. Go to the SoG website -
go to Yorkshire and look for Castleford. There are/were a number of
churches in Castleford, but you don't say which one.

Roy Stockdill

"There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about,
and that is not being talked about."

Oscar Wilde

same as what I could get at the FHC?

And before anybody tries to suggest that I don't actually want to
research, don't get me wrong. I just don't want to overlap my research.
I don't want to find the same information in three places. I want to
make the most efficient use of my time.