Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Familysearch IGI

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Familysearch IGI

    Quick question. Are these records accurate?

    When I was at Winchester record office I found the baptisim of Thomas Payne 14 March 1784 son of Thos and Sarah Payn. Beaulieu.

    On IGI it states Thomas Payne 14 March 1784 son of John and Sarah Payn. Beaulieu.

    I have a horrible feeling about this....
    Jules

    I'anson of Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. Bannister of Lincolnshire. Burnett of Northumberland. Carter of Sussex and Hampshire. Goldring of Sussex and Hampshire. Fitzgerald of Goodness knows where. Smith of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Dixon of Lincolnshire. Payne of Hampshire

  • #2
    Jules

    If you have looked at the original register then that is what was written at the time of the baptism.

    The IGI is only a transcription of church records and like all transcriptions anywhere, it is what the transcriber THINKS they see.

    OC

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks OC. I'm getting really worried about this one. I don't even know for sure that Thos and Sarah are the parents. I have them down as possibles at the moment, but at the time I couldn't see any other Thomas Payne in Beaulieu in the PR.

      The IGI record is submitted, I guess that means someone gave them the info. Is there any other kind of record on IGI other than submitted?

      Actually, this IGI record might explain why other people researching the same tree have a different father for Thomas, I have asked how they got the info, but unfortunately some peoople are only collectors of info and not sharers! Maybe they got the info from IGI (I wonder which of us is correct).

      **Picks up phone to book a reader at Winchester RO**
      Jules

      I'anson of Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. Bannister of Lincolnshire. Burnett of Northumberland. Carter of Sussex and Hampshire. Goldring of Sussex and Hampshire. Fitzgerald of Goodness knows where. Smith of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Dixon of Lincolnshire. Payne of Hampshire

      Comment


      • #4
        Without doubt, if you looked at the original, or a fiche of the original in Winchester that one is correct. BUT was it the original or a transcript?

        If it was a transcript (used by the RO for convenience) then there is always the possiblility that the IGI was actually taken from the original - if you see what I mean.

        Then there is always the probelm of 'was the vicar correct'. I have my suspicions about a baptism in my ancstors which is preventing me going further back. The vicar wrote the father as William Clarke but I can only find a Henry Clarke in that parish having kids at the time in question. I don't hold out much hope of ever knowing!

        Anne

        Comment


        • #5
          It was fiche of the original, but stupidly I didn't get a copy of it (I was a virgin researcher then lol).

          I think I'm going to have to go back and take another look and get copies.

          ANOTHER QUESTION...

          A marriage cert from 1840. Is it likely that someone in the GRO wrote the info onto the cert? What I see isn't the original as such is it?

          Just wondering because in the main text area the name of the bride is Jane, but on the signature line she is Jean. Just wondering which bit would be the error.
          Jules

          I'anson of Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. Bannister of Lincolnshire. Burnett of Northumberland. Carter of Sussex and Hampshire. Goldring of Sussex and Hampshire. Fitzgerald of Goodness knows where. Smith of Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Dixon of Lincolnshire. Payne of Hampshire

          Comment


          • #6
            GRO certs are transcripts.

            As you have the original cert, it might be worth phoning the LOCAL Register Office which will hold the original record and asking them to confirm the name on the cert. As you already have the cert then there shouldn't be a charge for this.

            There are two kinds of records on the IGI - submitted and extracted.

            Submitted records are a free for all - anyone can submit anything, it doesn't have to be accurate, no one checks it.

            Extracted records are transcribed from a primary source (usually) and their accuracy depends on the person who transcribed them, but they are a very good indicator that a given event took place.

            An extracted record on the IGI is normally described as such on the individual page where you find the person and the event.

            OC

            Comment


            • #7
              Certificates from the GRO are always copies. They are copied when they are first sent there into the GRO records.

              Also - if your certificate is too faded - the GRO present staff will copy it again so you can read it.

              If this marriage certificate is also in the Winchester area, you can see it in the parish records!!! That one should be more authentic.

              Anne

              PS for 'copy' read transcribed - I just realise the word copy can have different implications.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Anne in Carlisle View Post
                If this marriage certificate is also in the Winchester area, you can see it in the parish records!!! That one should be more authentic.

                Only if it was a church marriage, of course - if it was a register office marriage there is no copy in the PR's.
                KiteRunner

                Every five years or so I look back on my life and I have a good... laugh"
                (Indigo Girls, "Watershed")

                Comment


                • #9
                  Oooops - yes forgot about that possibility. Sorry :o

                  Anne

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I have a photocopy-image from a fiche of the PRs of Edlesborough in Bucks, where the vicar gave the bride's family name as ASHPOLE (which is how it appears in the GRO index), but she and her father have signed clearly as ASHPOOL (which is how they appear in the censuses).

                    Christine
                    Researching: BENNETT (Leics/Birmingham-ish) - incl. Leonard BENNETT in Detroit & Florida ; WARR/WOR, STRATFORD & GARDNER/GARNAR (Oxon); CHRISTMAS, RUSSELL, PAFOOT/PAFFORD (Hants); BIGWOOD, HAYLER/HAILOR (Sussex); LANCASTER (Beds, Berks, Wilts) - plus - COCKS (Spitalfields, Liverpool, Plymouth); RUSE/ROWSE, TREMEER, WADLIN(G)/WADLETON (Devonport, E Cornwall); GOULD (S Devon); CHAPMAN, HALL/HOLE, HORN (N Devon); BARRON, SCANTLEBURY (Mevagissey)...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by JulesSmith View Post
                      Quick question. Are these records accurate?

                      When I was at Winchester record office I found the baptisim of Thomas Payne 14 March 1784 son of Thos and Sarah Payn. Beaulieu.

                      On IGI it states Thomas Payne 14 March 1784 son of John and Sarah Payn. Beaulieu.

                      I have a horrible feeling about this....
                      The IGI is 100% accurate recording the details given at the Temple Ordinance it records.

                      If using the IGI for any other purpose then it may not show what one expects it to show.

                      Remember the IGI indexes Temple Ordinances it does not index parish registers.
                      Cheers
                      Guy
                      Guy passed away October 2022

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        But the thing is, Guy, most of us are using the IGI to research our family trees, and most of us aren't interested in finding out about Temple Ordinances, what we are doing is finding information which has been taken from parish registers or bishop's transcripts and then trying to confirm whether the information we have found is as it appears in those PRs / BTs. Of course any Mormons doing their family trees may find the Temple Ordinance information invaluable.
                        KiteRunner

                        Every five years or so I look back on my life and I have a good... laugh"
                        (Indigo Girls, "Watershed")

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by KiteRunner View Post
                          But the thing is, Guy, most of us are using the IGI to research our family trees, and most of us aren't interested in finding out about Temple Ordinances, what we are doing is finding information which has been taken from parish registers or bishop's transcripts and then trying to confirm whether the information we have found is as it appears in those PRs / BTs. Of course any Mormons doing their family trees may find the Temple Ordinance information invaluable.
                          It makes no difference, one cannot use a telephone directory as an electoral roll.
                          It may seem to contain similar entries but the details will differ.

                          The wise researcher will use the IGI as a rough guide then check the Parish Register and the Bishop's Transcript (when available).
                          The naive will accept the IGI entry.

                          Note I wrote "then check the Parish Register and the Bishop's Transcript (when available)."
                          One should always check both the Parish Register and the Bishop's Transcript as they may contain differences.

                          One should also be cautious of those Parish Register entries which have been transcribed from the earlier paper registers onto parchment.
                          If this is the case try to check the "original" paper Parish Register as well as the parchment transcript.
                          But in all cases be aware the Parish Register is a transcript of the day-book.
                          Cheers
                          Guy
                          Guy passed away October 2022

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Guy,

                            you wrote: Note I wrote "then check the Parish Register and the Bishop's Transcript (when available)."
                            One should always check both the Parish Register and the Bishop's Transcript as they may contain differences.

                            As the BTs are copies of the parish register entries they may well show differences but are these differences ever going to be more than copyist errors?

                            Peter

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Peter

                              In my experience, yes, there can be some marked differences between original prs and BTs. People omitted from either/or, extra entries in either/or, completely different forenames in either/or and most importantly (from my point of view) the Vicar's personal comments are almost never transcribed to the BTs.

                              OC

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Also sometimes the PR's have faded, been water-damaged or eaten by mice(!) and you have to look at the BT's to be able to read anything at all.
                                KiteRunner

                                Every five years or so I look back on my life and I have a good... laugh"
                                (Indigo Girls, "Watershed")

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  OC,

                                  Thanks for that comprehensive answer. In my experience BTs can be more legible than the PR but the content tends to be slimmed down and since they are copies they must have more errors but I take the point.

                                  Peter

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Peter

                                    Best practice is - the more primary and secondary sources you look at, the more accurate the facts become.

                                    I have to admit that I rarely look at BTs, only if I cannot find the original PR, or as Kate says, it is unreadable. I ought to, though.

                                    I am involved on another site, in a wrangle about a specific difference in one entry between the original PR and the BT. They contradict each other completely, but I am choosing to go for the entry in the PR, as it makes more sense than the one in the BT!

                                    (It's all to do with whether someone WAS or WAS NOT, baptised. PR states clearly, on a page headed "Not baptised, fined one shilling". BT states "baptised". I choose to believe the primary entry)

                                    OC

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Originally posted by Olde Crone Holden View Post
                                      Peter

                                      In my experience, yes, there can be some marked differences between original prs and BTs. People omitted from either/or, extra entries in either/or, completely different forenames in either/or and most importantly (from my point of view) the Vicar's personal comments are almost never transcribed to the BTs.

                                      OC
                                      In addition, some vicars sent the original entries to the Bishop rather than a copy.
                                      I have seen instances where there are three versions of parish registers plus the Bishop's Transcripts, each with varying amounts of information.
                                      Cheers
                                      Guy
                                      Guy passed away October 2022

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        My great-great grandmother Susanna Barnes' baptism entry is followed later by this note:

                                        "The entries commencing on p.18 with Susanna dau of Mark & Ann Barnes and ending on p. 19 with Henry son of William & Ellen Paxton were taken from the impositions of the parents after the death of the late Mr Burrell [the curate] there having been no entry made during the current year since the 15th January at the time of my entering upon the curacy in November 1825. Thomas Beckwith, Curate"

                                        So her baptismal date is dependent upon her parents' memory!
                                        ~ with love from Little Nell~
                                        Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X