In the Pommern list the member Siegfried Rambaum wrote a very detailed article about the batch numbers and the International Genealogy Index (IGI) of the church of latter days saints short LDS. I have his permission to repost it to this list. It was written in reply to a question about batch numbers. "I have no clue, what you expect from the batch numbers. But you should not step into that mental of believing, that the IGI is a complete register of every person who ever lived. Many researchers believe exactly that and thus believe, that if they find couples with the right names in about the right area in about the right time, that that couple must be "theirs". Another misperception is, that the IGI is a kind of "Table of Contents" for the people whose records have been filmed by the Mormons. And thus, more people than not believe, that "if THEY are not in the IGI, THEY cannot be found in the microfilms either". The IGI is based on voluntary submission of patrons. Which in turn has the question surface, how it comes, that the IGI also contains quite a few "churchbook extractions" besides the "patron submissions" one thus would have to expect. The answer is very simple, and it boils down to "critical mass". In the initial days, the IGI was empty. And it experienced the same fate, that every database experiences, that is empty. People look at it, see how few is in there and thus do not feel inclined to add to what they perceive as a "nothing"... Someone realized this problem and realized also, that the IGI only would fly if researchers could find "something" in there. Thus, volunteer teams were trained in deciphering old handwriting and then randomly microfilms were pulled from the holdings and these teams extracted each and every genealogically significant name that showed in those films. Which explains, why some church books are completely transcribed, others have some years completely transcribed, and why you cannot find such extractions for lots of other parishes. You may strike gold, if you have an ancestor whose is recorded in one of those parishes, that were selected for the kick-start effort. But it may be a mixed bag, as you may not recognize your folks. Those extractions were done with absolute precision, transcribing each and every mistake of the record exactly the way it was recorded. And often, you simply cannot recognize a garbled name (not garbled by the transcribers, but garbled in the church book already) as being one of yours, if you have none of the corroborated information, which is in the church book, but which is not transcribed to the IGI. Because, the church book entries hold more information than shows in the IGI, like the actual place of residence (while the IGI only ties the people to the location of the church (where baptism or marriage took place), and not to their actual place of birth and/or residence). The extraction efforts were terminated, when the IGI had reached the necessary critical mass for the intended chain reaction, i.e. when the initial trickle of trickle of patron submissions (people submitted to the IGI by fellow genealogists) became a steady flow. The extractions were meant as a take-off booster for the IGI, but not as an ongoing feature. Which means, that the ratio of "extractions" vs "patron submissions" is steadily descreasing, as no church books are extracted anymore, and as thus the number of extracted records remains fixed, while the number of submitted folks increases day by day. Now, when you look at the IGI, how does one discern between a "extraction" and a "patron submission" ? It is simple, the batch number already tells you. IF the batch number starts with one of the following, then what you are looking at is a NAME EXTRACTION: C, E, J, K, M, P or number-blocks 725, 744, 745, 754, or 766 Every batch number, that does not start out by any of these is not referring to a name extraction taken directly (and very reliably) from a church book (i.e. from the filming of that church book). I already mentioned, that the entries in the church books show more information than appear in the IGI. How would one come by to that info? There are two ways to do so: (a) Go to the sources, make a note of the film number, order the film, look for yourself. (b) Go to the FHC, get a form called "Request for Photocopies - International Genealogical Index" and request a copy of the respective page from that church book. Fee: Two dollars. For a first impression of wether or not ordering the film, this is the cheapest and most conveniant way to go. Because, you send the request to Salt Lake City (at least, if you are located in the USA) and you reeive the requested copy back from SLC right to your mailbox ! Now, what would you do, if you find an entry, that is based on a patron submission? Most people, who know about the possibility of requesting photocopies, ignore those, because often it can be established that some of those patron submissions are based more on wishful thinking than on real evidence. At least, that is a common myth about those. I found them actually to be more rewarding than copies of the original church book pages. A submission form has space for submitting six people. And often a form shows six people. One of those six will be the one, you mighzt be interested in. The other five might look like they were "strangers". However, one researcher submitted them, as as research goes, a genealogist deals with one family at a time. Thus the odds are, that those others are kind of related to the interesting one, and that YOU only don`t know as your research has not progressed that far back in time. More interesting (in my eyes) are two other aspects: (a) you get the name and full address of a researcher, who obviously had a reason to research your folks. Now, what other reason might that person have had for researching "your guys" other than being related to those people he/she submitted him/herself??? Just this already is good enough a reason to request copies of those patron submissions. (b) Another aspect is that with every person on a patron submission, the source on which this submission is based on will be clearly indicated, though sometimes you need phantasy to figure, what it means. What would "GS" plus six digits means? Took me a while to fget the idea that it "Genealogical Society" (of Utah) and that the six digits were a film number (which I expected to be given in seven digits). Same holds true for "GSU" and any sequence of numbers (GSU = Genealogical Society of Utah) ... In nine out of ten reference to the original source, it will be the catalogue number of a microfilm. But the tenth reference might be a reference to a source you were not even aware of its existence. And if that submitter tapped that source, you can do, too. You need the same form, and that meanss, you need to pay a visit to your local FHC. However, with patron submission the fee is 25 Cents, and you receive (by mail, right into your mailbox) two copies, front and reverse of the submission form. Now, with postage being 34 cents, how do the Mormons do that and not go bankrupt? They insist that the total fee of your requests adds up to at least two dollars. Which means - either a request for ONE copy for an extraction, or - a request for EIGHT different patron submission sheets My personal favorites are the patron submissions, as they often turn out to be "surprise bags for genealogist", while the copies from churchbooks usually only verify what the IGI already told. And if you don`t know all the variants of a name being spelled or garbled, you wont find your folks in the extractions by the spelling known to you. That is, why these batch numbers are important, as they allow you to browse through all the extractions based on a churchbook filming. This browsing will allow you to see garbled names, too, which you instantly will realize to be garbled variants of the names you are after, but which you would not even figure in the extent of them being misspelled. And if they are misspelled in an extraction, they are misspelled in the orginal record, too. (Sometimes the mainly American transcribers couldn't even guess what a German or French name was supposed to be spelled like. Ina) I hope, this shed some light on what batch numbers are, and what to do with them, if you find some potential ancestors in the IGI. As long as you have not corroborated the entry in the IGI by way of checking the original source (with patron submission, you only will learn about the original source via the photocopy of the original submission) THOU SHALT NOT treat those people in the IGI as if those guys were actually your folks. Und für die Leser in Deutschland: Ich habe keine Ahnung, wohin man die Anforderungen für Ablichtungen aus dem IGI schickt, und wie die dortigen Gebühren aussehen. (And for the readers in Germany: I have no idea where to send requests for photocopies from IGI and about the fees) Siegfried"