Re: Genealogy Standards: Names of Cities and Countries? #general


Eva Blanket
 

Subject: RE: Genealogy Standards: Names of Cities and Countries?

I can see some benefits to recording genealogical information utilizing
today's names first with yesterdays' names in say parenthesis. However, I
have a couple of issues with stating the information thus as it leads to
confusion.

For instance let us take the example that my mother was born in 1921 in
Nisni Vereczky, Carpathia-Rusyn, in the then Czechoslovakia, married in
Prague, Czechoslovakia in 1946 and emigrated >from Czechoslovakia in 1949.
By the way she herself, when asked what nationality she was, said she was
Czechoslovakian.

Now if I was to record her background history as of today using the method
of stating today's place names, I would record that she was born in Nizne
Vorota, in the Ukraine and married in Prague of the Czech Republic.
Accordingly, looking at this, someone would say she was Ukrainian. This
would be totally incorrect as she never lived in the Ukraine (nor the USSR
for that fact) and never considered herself as such. This gives a false
representation. Further, if in say 10 years this area would change hands and
become yet another country, the Ukraine would have no relevance, just as the
USSR doesn't have any relevance today even though for a period of about 40
years this same area was known as that.

I feel that the importance is the actual placename the person's event took
place. Today's name would be better placed in parenthesis with a date
perhaps and added to if someone in the future remembered to do that, but at
least the tree would be always correct at the time the event took place and
would give a better sense of background. Just because I've decided to do the
tree today should have no bearing on the actual place the person's event
took place.

Eva Blanket
Sydney, Australia

Join main@groups.jewishgen.org to automatically receive all group messages.