TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2005-09 > 1125573517


From: "Jill Morelli" <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] Proper Terminology (OT)
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2005 07:18:37 -0400
In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20050831230613.0426ab60@mail.isomedia.com>


Barbara and others,

I found your "soapbox" enlightening, especially since 50% of my relatives
came from Germany (whatever that is!).

While still trying to have the most accurate answer to this issue is
laudatory, it can also make it extremely difficult to sort based on place.
So I have tried to be consistent....even if consistently wrong, so the
search function can work. Otherwise, I would not be able to get the LOP
based on village, a fundamental sort for me.

Another approach is to label the locales their current jurisdictions.
Another approach is to label the locales the same as LDS.

Ultimately, none of the solutions are "satisfying" but I am sure that the
creative minds on this list will come up with great ideas. I, too, like the
idea of having locale options the way we have name options.

Jill

-----Original Message-----
From: Barbara Zanzig [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 3:33 AM
To:
Subject: RE: [TMG] Proper Terminology (OT)

At 08:24 PM 8/31/2005, you wrote:
>>
>> I'm curious as to how other people handle the fact that in the US census
>> records (1850, 1860, 1870) so often it shows the country or birth as
>> Germany. When in fact this is incorrect.
>
>What makes you say this is incorrect. Where the folks lying back then?
...
>> But for the actual birth place, if
>> you don't actually know, I would rather not use "Germany."
>
>You would be denying the majority of European-Americans their heritage. Why
>would you want to do that?

Fred,

Because there was no "Germany" until 1871, and even then it was dominated by
"Prussia", and some of the things in Germany today were not part of
"Germany" in 1871. Before that, it was the Holy Roman Empire, which in 1648
had over 300 jurisdictions including bishoprics, kingdoms, duchies and
archduchies, principalities, electorates, margravates, and the like, and
became the German Confederation (independent states joined by treaty) in
1815 (but still the Holy Roman Empire). Do you write "German Confederation"
or "Holy Roman Empire"? Of course not. Do you want to talk about the
Hapsburg Empire or the Swedish Empire or the Spanish Empire, all of which
existed in parts of "Germany" at various times? Shall we call it "Roman
Empire"?

See http://www.rootsweb.com/%7Ewggerman/map/germanconf.htm and the
Hammond/London Times _Atlas of World History_ for some historical maps. The
history of Germany is probably more complex than almost any other (shall we
say, common genealogical) country, and "Germany" is a modern construction.

If we're being really accurate, none of it is "Germany", it's "Deutschland".
Following your logic, why not honor your ancestors by calling it what they
called it?

I assure you, my 18th and 19th century Hanoverians did not call themselves
German or Prussian, or even Deutsch. If you look at some of the censuses
where the census taker was instructed to write Germany instead of the state,
many of them wrote the state (that is, where the subject said s/he was
born), which was later crossed out (by an American) and re-written as
Germany (or Prussia). None of them were "Germans" until the late 19th or
20th century, which is where your argument about "denying their heritage"
falls down!

Just because our Bureau of the Census was, possibly willfully, ignorant and
Americentric and responding to changing political times, should we lump all
of it, with varying religions, customs, geography, etc. etc. together? Don't
ask what Americans thought it was, ask what Germans thought it was.

Places changed jurisdiction routinely in response to political events,
*especially* in Germany. In Germany, *especially*, with its 2000 year
history, you must know the history and it's important to be as specific as
possible or you can't find your people, because you have to trace who owned
the patch of land over time to find where the records are now. If you put
"Germany" for someone born in Posen, you would never, ever find the parish
records, which now reside in the Ukraine. Galacia, now part of Germany, was
part of Austria-Hungary in 1873. And so on.

Things that were part of "Germany" until 1918 are now independent countries,
like Poland, or provinces of other countries, like Alsace-Lorraine. In fact,
Germany as we know it didn't emerge until the end of WWI -- or shall we
count the expansion before WWII, or the contraction after WWII, or the
expansion in 1990? I think that this is what Kevin was getting at; "Germany"
is just not very satisfactory from a genealogist's viewpoint.

And so ends your German history lesson for today (steps gracefully down from
soapbox.) Obviously, this post pushed some of my buttons.

To get back to the point, what I have done before 1900 for convenience is
list all those subjurisdictions as the "State" and Germany as the "Country",
just so I keep them together and remember they're geographically related. I
acknowledge that it isn't historically accurate, but it helps me know where
to begin, considering the limitations of the source. Sometimes I change that
back and forth.

If I don't have anything more specific I put "Germany". I record the census
as it says, Germany, because that's what the source says. If I use it for a
birth, I use it but it gets a low surety, and when I have better info, that
source is demoted, and that's where I differ from Kevin. If I use it for a
census event, it gets a surety 3, because I'm positive that that's what the
record says. If I have two census events, one with a state and one with
Germany, I give the one with the state more weight. That's the beauty of
TMG.

I, too, would love to have place name variants, especially if they allowed
dates of effectivity.

Barbara

Barbara Zanzig Kirkland, WA, USA
http://www.isomedia.com/homes/hertz/
"You must be the change you want to see in the world." -- Mahatma Gandhi
¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,




==== TMG Mailing List ====
Send all messages and replies to <>.

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/86 - Release Date: 8/31/2005


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/86 - Release Date: 8/31/2005



This thread: