How to use the IGI

[georgec]

Can any one give any pointers, advice or short cuts when using the IGI.

I started of well but the further I go back the trail is not so easy.

Thanks

[Cornish Terrier]

Hi George - the IGI is really only useful as a 'finding tool' in my books as it gives only the basic details of any PR entry.

You really need to refer back to Parish Registers (or their Transcripts) to find more detail and then determine whether or not you have a correct family link.

Nother problem with IGI is that the people submitting data to it have, on numerous occasions, made errors - some of which I have been able to prove by comparing original PR entries with what is included in IGI.

The other main problem is with events occurring prior to the Julian to Gregorian Calender change.
What many submitters have done is taken the entry from the original record (e.g. 5th March 1703) and produced it in IGI as 5th March 1704.

If you are unfamiliar with this - the Julian Calender (up until about September 1752 in England) began 25th March and ended 24th March.

When the Gregorian Calendar was introduced the year then began on 1st January.

Very confusing, I know.

Please let me know where you are trying to search and I will see if I can help you and point you in the right direction.

[trencrom]

The IGI is a useful finding tool for possible christenings and marriages of your forebears, but as Cornish terrier says you should always check the PRs or BTs. It does not show where there are gaps in the PRs, and does not necessarily include entries from the BTs for such years where there is BT coverage but no PR coverage. Furthermore it may not always identify the burials of minors whose christenings are included therein.

[Zenobia]

A helpful hint:

If you wish to do a last name search only (which is often quite useful), you must do it by parish and you must include the batch number.

Here are some of the batch numbers for individual parishes:

(Ones starting with M are marriages, those with C are christenings, P is christenings or mixed)

Phillack: C023191, C023192, C023193, M023192, M023193
Camborne: P02071, M02071
Gulval: P002771, P002772, M002771, M002773
Gwinear: C025711, C025712, C025715, M025714, M025716, M025717
Illogan: C035671, C052801, M052801
St. Erth: C021861, C021862, C053461, M053461
St. Hilary: P020981
St. Ives: C023291, C023292, P014781
Madron: C001693, P001691, P001692, M001691, M001694
Ludgvan: C020961, C020962, M020961
Morvah: C021932, M021931, C052912
Towednack: C022791, M022791
Lelant: C022561, C022562, M022561
Zennor: C022831, M053301

[Zenobia]

trencrom said:

The IGI is a useful finding tool for possible christenings and marriages of your forebears, but as Cornish terrier says you should always check the PRs or BTs. It does not show where there are gaps in the PRs, and does not necessarily include entries from the BTs for such years where there is BT coverage but no PR coverage. Furthermore it may not always identify the burials of minors whose christenings are included therein.

On a few occasions also I've found the IGI listing an infant baptism and also burial with the entry, when I know for a fact that the burial entry is really an adult of the same name, who just happened to die within a few years of said infant's birth...

[trencrom]

Is this the online version that you are referring to?

[Cornish Terrier]

Regardless of whether it is the online version or otherwise I would strongly suggest that the source be noted as 'IGI' and, at the earliest opportunity, have all such information checked against the original PRs or BTs.

There are many PR/BT Transcriptions available online which are very useful as, in most cases, the transcribers have included all relevant data from each entry.

However, these also must be checked against the original documents for confirmation.

Thankfully most, if not all, of these transcribers include a note with their transcriptions acknowledging the possibility that they 'may' have made an error here or there due to legibility.
They encourage people using their transcriptions to try to verify their work by utilising original documents.

[Zenobia]

trencrom said:

Is this the online version that you are referring to?

Yes, the online one. It's been well over a decade since I looked at the ones on fiche at LDS...

Ian is 100% right - the original PR should always be checked when possible. I do quote IGI sometimes in my source material when I have info from an 'incidental parish' (ie: one I don't have many people in, and hence do not have the PR on film), but I only use the entries whose batch numbers show it as a transcript, rather than any that are private submissions. I always source it as:

"International Genealogical Record, transcripts of various Cornish parish registers"

[georgec]

Hello

Yep I use the on-line version as a guide and the try to match up with the PR.

Things start out ok but the further back you go in the IGI the harder it becomes, as Cornish Terrier points out the spelling changes re: BRYANT,BRIAN, BRYAR

Any one have a favorite web site for the PR/BT Transcriptions

[Cornish Terrier]

G'day George

Try the following.

You may have to do some navigating, especially with the rootschat link, but you should find anything that is currently available.

www.rootschat.com/forum/

www.cornwall-opc.org/

[trencrom]

admin said:

trencrom said:

Is this the online version that you are referring to?

Yes, the online one. It's been well over a decade since I looked at the ones on fiche at LDS...

Personally I do not like the online version. It is far easier in my opinion to use the fiche, although other people may feel differently, as you can just focus on the county in question and the entries therein are in chronological order by name.

It seems to be also more difficult to do a "parent search" on the online version than it was on the older computer version - at least, that's my experience.

As the burial are not crossreferenced in the original registers themselves with any christening or marriage records, I do not think they should be linked to them on the online IGI either.

[Cornish Terrier]

Trencrom - I totally agree.
I have also had problems trying to find some information that seemed much easier in earlier versions of the computerised index.

And the Death/Burial information supplied online can be quite dodgy.

The only time I take these details at all seriously is where I know there was more than one child in a family with the same name and it is reasonably clear that the earlier child had died.

But I still try to have the information checked against more reliable records.