New Records on FamilySearch: Week of May 7, 2018

May 8, 2018  - by 

New archived records from around the world are published on FamilySearch every week to help you find your ancestors. This week, the new additions include over 140,000 records from Panama, over 130,000 records from Brazil, plus more from Cape Verde, Guatemala, Denmark, Slovakia, Portugal, Germany, and Peru. Nearly 300,000 images and indexed records from BillionGraves Index were also added this week.

See the official announcement to learn more or search these new free records:

New Historical Records on FamilySearch: Week of May 7, 2018

Over 6 billion searchable historic records are available from around the world on Records are published with the help of thousands of volunteer indexers who transcribe digital copies of handwritten records to make them easily searchable online. To help make more historical records from the world’s archives available online, volunteer with FamilySearch Indexing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


  1. While I applaud the addition of new records to the Family Search collection I cannot help but feel that ‘haste makes waste’. Many of the new transcriptions are incorrect, duplicated by other transcriptions that are correct, and just not very helpful. Searching and finding three different records for the same event, each with differing information, is not my idea of progress. The records were better when genealogists familiar with the people and places they were transcribing did the work.

    1. I have found many of my family’s records that were transcribed incorrectly. Nevertheless, the fact that they had been transcribed at all made it possible for the computer system to send the documents my way and let me look at them. As long as the image is available as well as the transcription, I find an incorrectly transcribed document is more helpful than one that has not been put into the system. I’m in favor of moving the work forward as quickly as possible, even with novice transcribers who are still learning and making mistakes.

      1. That comment should have read “several” and not “many” of my family’s records that had been transcribed incorrectly.

    2. I agree. Whilst the records on family search are helpful. I always try to confirm them from other sources. My major area of interest is British India, which is fairly specialised, I always make a note of where the information comes from and my introduction says that data from LDS (Family Search)may not always be 100% correct.

    3. Sorry to say, I agree with you, which is why I stopped indexing. My understanding was that two people enter the same record separately to assure accuracy. If the records don’t correspond, then a third person reviews the entries and decide which was correct. I tried to be very conscientious when entering records, because I wanted them to be accurate. Many records I received were typewritten, which makes it hard to rationalize someone entering the information totally wrong. It wasn’t as if you were trying to read or interpret a handwritten document; clean typewritten documents require no interpretation. If I reported errors, I was told it was open to interpretation, and no changes were made. It became so frustrating to see so many blatant errors overlooked or otherwise left unchanged that I stopped indexing. Hopefully the right people will read these comments and act on them. I know that I want the information I research for my trees to be correct, and presume that most researchers feel the same.

      1. I couldn’t agree more, same reason I quit indexing. I was familiar with the area I indexed and the names of the people who lived there. When I reported errors no changes were made or I received no response. I wanted to ‘pay it forward’ for all those indexed records that had helped me but the frustration of this repeatedly happening became too much.

  2. I am trying to uncover information on my great grandfather Adam Henry Black (Mariner) born 1836 in Hanover, Germany and died in Australia in 1890.

  3. My great-grandmother, Laura Frederikke Hansen, is recorded with the incorrect mother, one who was her step-mother, name Lauritzen, actually. Fortunately I know the correct information so all is not lost for me but others who may be searching will get it wrong.

      1. The information cited is for correcting the parent or spouse in a family tree. I have an eMail on file from the LDS telling me that not even they have the ability to amend an incorrect transcription. Which is it you are trying to do? If the former, follow their instructions, if the latter, you are out of luck.