ISLE-OF-WIGHT-L Archives

From: Richard Riggs <>
Subject: Re: IGI
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1998 09:48:11 -0700

Donna, Thank you so much. I believe this kind of information is invaluable to
beginning researchers and maybe even some of the "pros". Richard

wrote:

> There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about the IGI.
>
> First of all, you have to know something about the Mormon religion to
> understand why the LDS church is putting forth such an effort to make an
> incredible amount of information available at no cost.
>
> Mormons believe that people are saved in family groups. Church ceremonies
> called ordinances are done to make family relationships permanent, even in the
> afterlife. Since the religion is quite young, most of the worl's inhabitants
> died before the religion came along. If church members gather their families
> together and have the temple ordinances done, even posthumously, they can be
> saved. This is why genealogy is so important.
>
> All the people who have had these temple ordinances are contained in LDS
> records which are actually kept in caves in the mountains outside of Salt Lake
> City.
>
> A young Mormon is expected to volunteer two years on a mission for the church
> doing work the church feels needs doing. This includes missionary work. It
> also includes going to foreign countries and filming records valuable to
> genealogists. Around 80-90% of the church records in England have been filmed.
>
> Once they are filmed, other volunteers participate in an extraction program
> whereby they read the names from parish and other records, enter the
> information into computers and it eventually gets into the IGI. Extracting
> parish records is a huge job because everything is entered twice to help
> promote accuracy (some handwriting just can't be read!). If you find a name in
> the IGI that is from a parish extraction, then you can order the film for the
> parish and pursue your research in the original records. (Death records are
> not extracted. they feel birth and marriage are more important and the
> energies are concentrated there are this time.)
>
> The IGI is made up of the extractions plus many of the older temple
> submissions. There is also a separate computer database called the Ancestral
> File which is made up of research done by individuals so that other
> researchers can see who is researching the name and contact those with similar
> interests. I have submitted my research to the Ancestral File and have had
> many contacts from people doing similar research.
>
> I feel it is unfortunate that the older temple submissions are part of the IGI
> rather than being put in the Ancestral File. Many have no sources and no
> submitters name so you have no way to judge the validity of the research.
> However, they are in the IGI.
>
> By looking at the source number in the IGI, you can determine where the
> information originated. If it is parish records, you can find the film number
> and order it. If it came from temple submissions, it will tell (in the
> computer version) whether there is any further information on the record, the
> submitter name is included and if sources might be included.
>
> Quite frankly, if the IGI entry is for temple work, I tend to ignore it. If it
> says that the submitters name is included and there might be sources, then it
> might be worth getting the film for clues but you should not take the
> information without verifying it.
>
> I have found that in the Urry names in the IOW, a large number of them are
> members submissions and there are not a lot of parish extractions.
>
> The rule is you should never take the IGI alone as your source. It is an index
> and should only be used for that purpose. You should go to the original source
> and check it. The name may have been misread - old handwriting is difficult
> and volunteers may not get it right. You may be able to see this if you know
> name it should be and can see how the handwritten name could be misread.
>
> Sorry this is so long, but people need to understand what the IGI represents
> when they use it.
>
> Donna Przecha
>

This thread:

• IGI by <>

  • Re: IGI by Richard Riggs <>