RootsChat.Com
Census Lookups General Lookups => Census and Resource Discussion => Topic started by: susan williams on Sunday 20 June 10 19:02 BST (UK)
-
Has anyone else ever come across errors on the IGI ??? When comparing copies of some Parish Records I have to the IGI there were quite a few discrepencies, in fact it did make me wonder which records were in fact correct - The Parish Records or the IGI - made me go back to the very beginning and re do a lot of the research just to make sure I was following the right family. Have to say that I am still in a bit of a dilemma over some of the information but without the help of any census researching in the 1700's relies heavily on both the above records - mind you I do live in hope that someone somewhere just might have an old family Bible with all the names neatly written down !!!
Susan
-
I'd say that the Parish Registers are the closest to being correct. You have, of course to allow for the fact that many people were illiterate and unable to spell their names and they therefore went with whatever the Parish Clerk/Vicar wrote down, as they wouldn't know if their name had been mis-spelt.
With the IGI what you see are transcriptions of the original records so there are bound to be mistakes. Clarity of handwriting varies greatly and when you are transcribing you are supposed to put down what you see and not what you think the name might be.
I once searched for ages for an ancestor named Gardiner. When I eventually found him and looked at the original I could see why the transcriber had him down as Garolmer - the handwriting was awful.
Emeltom
-
You also have to be very careful of submitted IGI entries. These are frequently inaccurate
-
The IGI is not done for our convenience. It is an index of temple sealing for members of the LDS church. There are bound to be errors as these were amateurs transcribing the registers in many cases. It does not profess to be full coverage of all parishes and even those that are on it often have chunks missing. Use it as a tool to point you in the right direction but the original registers must be checked too.
Regards
Andrea
-
There is an article on the IGI at https://wiki.familysearch.org/en/International_Genealogical_Index_%28IGI%29
Stan
-
So relieved that someone else has also had similar problems with the records on the IGI. The Lancashire Parish Clerks Project have some excellent records for those researching Lancashire families and it was through that site that some of the differences with the IGI info were sorted out. However the main line I am following does have a really difficult problem- the IGI lists a marriage in 1810 in Hindley when an Elizabeth Taylor married a John Lowe - there is also an entry for a Betty Taylor who also married a John Lowe in Hindley, The children listed all say To John Lowe and Elizabeth Taylor but one does say to John Lowe and Betty Taylor and that was not my gt. gt. grandad - he on the John Lowe Elizabeth Taylor " list " The entry in the Hindley Parish records lists the marriage as
John Lowe to Betty Taylor - not Elizabeth. Burial records are in the name of Elizabeth - she died in childbirth aged 29. So here the IGI says one thing and the Parish records say another hence why it all seems just a bit confusing and I just don't know what is the right information.
Susan
-
Hi
I don't think you have really taken in what has been said. The marriage which names Elizabeth is a member submitted one. Those must be treated with caution as you have no proof that they are correct. Many are pure guesswork. This one obviously has more than a grain of truth though as the other record which names Betty is an extracted record ie taken directly from the parish register. You should always look at the original source which in this case means searching the church register. The IGI is a transcription not an original source and we all know that transcribers make mistakes.
Regards
Andrea
-
The entry in the Hindley Parish records lists the marriage as
John Lowe to Betty Taylor - not Elizabeth. Burial records are in the name of Elizabeth - she died in childbirth aged 29..
Susan
Hi,
Regarding the extracted record ( which is the one taken from parish records ) John Lowe to Betty Taylor and the difference between the burial records which says her name is Elizabeth( I assume you have her burial record from the church) -why do you think this marriage is wrong? Betty is a nickname for Elizabeth.
Many people married under their known as name and not their full birth name. I have a great uncle who married and died by his middle name and not his christian name ( as he went by his middle name to all that knew him). My g grandmother Elizabeth - married under Lizzy and died under Elizabeth , her registered birth name was Elizabeth .
Hope that helps
Kind regards :)
-
Very many thanks for all of your help - and the name Betty had not gone un-noticed as being a shortenend or family name for Elizabeth - all of this research was in fact done through the Parish Records before a computer came into our lives - and yes some of the entries on the LDS site are indeed open to transcription errors which as with the census documents is really only to be expected.. Re-visiting this research on the computer was an attempt to find another generation as age no longer enables such visits to libraries and Record Offices that hold the Parish Records. Just happy that I have indeed got the right family and the correct information
Best wishes
Susan
-
Some times one does wonder a lot when reading the IGI.
After 18 years of research I finally managed to trace one of my Danish great-great-great-grandmothers in the IGI and I was surprised to see that her exact date of birth was stated, as was her brother's. I had a look at the webpage with all Danish parish registers online (scanned an use is free, excellent service btw), and this particular parish register began in 1814, and she was born in 1774. I studied the first two Danish censuses, from 1787 and 1801, and then went on to the probate records, which said nothing, and then the protocols of deeds. In Denmark deed were read out loud at the local court and written down in full text in protocols of deeds and mortgages. And here I found that my gr-gr-gr-grandmother had remounced all claims in the estate of her parents as she had received a be-cube and some linnen. To prove that she was the correct heir both her and her brother's birth certificates had been read at court and thus were entered in the protocol.
So the IGI can be surprising in more than one way.
My major problem with this family was that my gr-gr-gr-grandmother and her husband lived in one county but seemed to come from another. By searing for a Anne Kirstine Frederiksdatter with a mother called either Helene, Else or Hedevig I found her in seconds.
Ulrich
-
That is certainly fascinating to read about your research and just goes to show that some records are available online that with a bit of searching can prove successful. My mother's family are Dutch and they too have some excellent sites re births marriages and deaths, which has certainly made the search a lot easier, they too are free like the site you mentioned and the freebmd here in the UK which is also free. I do not however speak Dutch which can be a bit of a disavantage when using these sites. However earlier Parish records are becoming available online for Lancashire being transcribed by volunteers for the Lancashire Parish Clerks Project. Yes , the years do seem to fly by when doing family history research - I started 12 years ago without a computer.. suppose I would call them the good old days . Computers like the IGI can be confusing
Susan
-
Even the "extracted" items in the IGI can have problems. Some baptism registers, for no apparent reason, have only female children listed.
Also, some "marriage" registers have dates from the Banns. The marriage may have taken place much later, elsewhere, or not at all, and such a register does not mention marriages by Licence,
As mentioned before, use the IGI as a hint at what to look for in the proper registers.
Some "proper" registers have problems too - the Bishops' Transcripts rely on the clergyman not getting things wrong. Some clergymen kept two books, attempting to write the same in both, and some spent a week copying things for the Bishop. Errors creep in whichever method is used.
In my direct paternal line, the "proper" baptism register turns out to be a copy from some genuine original register, and has a mistake in the name of my gggg gf. The BTs have his name correct, along with hs birthplace, a whole column omitted from the "proper" register.
-
Perhaps the only true record of family births and maybe marriages would be an old Family Bible. My grandfathers family originated in Halesowen and I was lucky enough to make contact with another descendant of the family. I could hardly believe it when he said he had the old family bible with all the names of the children and their dates of birth it had been passed down in his family for " generations " - it also included one of the marriages that of his gt gt gt grandmother who had married a gentleman called " Smith " listing all of their children also. He very kindly sent me a photocopy which was so beautifully written. Maybe the family Bible should be re-instated and even beginning now people could write down the information from all the certificates that they have within the family for future generations , or maybe all of the family history researches will be able to " leave " near perfect family trees for all to see. I decided to put all of my research into book form collecting as many old pictures along the way as possible, it was certainly not the way I had thought of spending " early retirement " It has been very intersting though to read all the replies re; the IGI and other records and that there is no real certainty with the old records, but now and again pieces of information do come to light - that make such a difference to the family history jigsaw puzzle. Thank you all very much for taking the time to answer this - a fresh look at a problem can sometimes make all the difference.
Susan
-
By definition I believe there can never be such a thing as a 100% accurate record, specially in Parish Registers. The clergyman writes down what he hears, or possibly what he thinks he should have heard, which may or may not be correct. Then the document is transcribed or copied, the more times it is copied is yet another opportunity for an error to occur. I had serious difficulty with my wife's great grandfather. All of the family were baptised in a small village near Doncaster. His birth occurred according to the census (another source of possible error) in 1800. His older and yournger siblings all appeared in the Baptismal register, yet he was missing. There was a note in the front cover of the transcription book in Doncaster reference library to the effect that the clergyman for the parish at that time wrote the details of ceremonies performed down on a scrap of paper stuck it in his cassock, and then copied it into the register later if he remembered. I have seen thios practise referred top in other parishes in other areas too. The transcriptions at the London Guildhall have a warning about the accuracy or rather lack of it of the IGI in the cover of the record transcriptions. Having said all that, the IGI is a most useful tool, but everything should be confirmed with the original record if at all possible.
-
Many thanks for your reply and all of the information re the reliability of early records. It was only when I noticed that my copies of the Parish Records did not match with the IGI - when we finally joined the computer age - that I ever really gave much thought to the records on the IGI . Many new researchers seem to put such faith in everything that the computer tells them re family records when researching a family history - the IGI being a site well known to everyone . Having said that the computer has enabled my research to travel all over the world and contact many descendants that I would never have had the opportunity of knowing. Contact with Cemeteries in Australia , America and Canada is also a part of the research that would not have been possible without the computer and its records. So I do hope that all the information written here will be of some help to all new researchers when looking at the IGI
Susan
-
Perhaps the only true record of family births and maybe marriages would be an old Family Bible.
My wife has a Bible in which her great-grndmother has entered the date of her father's death - incorrectly. Unless he was buried a year before his death...
-
Just goes to show that no records are perfect even the Family Bible can have an off day - bit like the IGI - I found an entry that stated that one of my relatives was buried before he was born!!!!
-
Where family bibles really come into their own is with infant deaths. They are very hard to find from records, but fairly easy to confirm, once you know about them. My g. grandmother lost her first two children (twin boys), who would have remained in obscurity, had they not been written into her family bible.
-
True, I haave been attempting to trace one of my grandfather's many brothers, Zebulon Ayres, born sometime between 1870 and 1890. The only thing I know is that my mother mentioned him as an uncle, a brother of her father. The 1911 census shows that his parents had 11 children 6 of whom were living in 1911. He appears on no census and neither his birth or death appear to have been registered. Any suggestions welcomed?
-
Such an unusual name no doubt transcribers through the years have had a field day working out what to put. Was Zebulon the first child ?? my gt. gt grandparents first child was born out of wedlock and was registered in her mother's maiden name in all official records. Then I have a family bible entry for another branch of the family - the very first name was a child that is not listed in any records, was born before the parents married, but the Bible entry still lists him by his father's name, this child has remained a mystery.
Susan
-
No, the first child was my grandfather, Samuel, born in Feb 1868 after the marriage in December 1867! As they say in East Anglia born in the vestry. Zebulon could have been born almost at any time between 1870 and 1890 as there are several gaps. He clearly did not survive to be recorded in any census. There is also a Non conformist (Baptist) complication.Any suggestions welcomed.
-
Hi Redroger.
Could it be a still-birth? I seem to recall reading that such births were not registered but I suspect they would be included in a family bible
Andy
-
Thanks Andy, I don't think this was likely as my mother recalled him being talked about as a child by her father.
Roger
-
Re Zebulon Ayres.
I have just typed the name in on the Findmypast site and under that name there are these records.
3 Births at Sea, 1 Record in the Parish Registers, 1 Record of marriage and 1 Record of Divorce. The name is also mentioned once under the heading " other records " For those not too interested in football then Findfmypast are allowing a free 90 minute search of their files whilst England are playing. You do have to register but there is no charge for that but if I read it properly the 90 minutes starts from the moment you sign in on Sunday so best have all notes and queries ready . Hope this helps - might not be your Zebulon but at least it will be worth a look for free
Susan
-
Thanks Susan, Unfortunately being away yesterday I have only just got back on the site, so I have missed the free time. I watched the football and would have been better employed on here. Am as sure as I can be that the births at sea, marriage and divorce are not him, but the parish record does look interesting.Will check that out.
Roger