On Sun, 2 Jun 2013 15:41:32 +1000, "Kiwi in Aus" <Wwftw_98@Yahoo.com> wrote: >How do others deal with this, you might start off with a place that is in >Essex at time of birth, but by the time a person dies same place is now >called Greater London, or South eastern Essex or what ever do you stay with >same place name or change with the passing time, I guess change with time >is >more correct, Nowadays, I try to record only what is written in the source domement. If I wish to create a narrative from that record, I will give what I consider to be an adequate explanation in the narrative. (I'm not fond of letting my commercial software make the narrative, but it's usually easier to start with that and then hand-edit it.) There are still problems as quite often the source document is inadequate. For example, many of the London parish registers on Ancestry say Middlesex long after the parish became part of the new county of London, sometimes because the registers had the name of the church pre-printed, other times because the vicar was, I assume, a dinosaur. In Bedford, St Pauls Parish marriage registers refer occasionally to White Horse Street, up to 1874, even though the road had been renamed Harpur Street sometime before (I believe) 1841. Steven

"Steven Gibbs" <stevenng4@sgibbs1.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:b1juhcF4im2U1@mid.individual.net... > On Sun, 2 Jun 2013 15:41:32 +1000, "Kiwi in Aus" <Wwftw_98@Yahoo.com> > wrote: > >>How do others deal with this, you might start off with a place that is in >>Essex at time of birth, but by the time a person dies same place is now >>called Greater London, or South eastern Essex or what ever do you stay >>with >>same place name or change with the passing time, I guess change with time >>is >>more correct, > > Nowadays, I try to record only what is written in the source domement. If > I wish to create a narrative from that record, I will give what I consider > to be an adequate explanation in the narrative. (I'm not fond of letting > my commercial software make the narrative, but it's usually easier to > start with that and then hand-edit it.) > > There are still problems as quite often the source document is inadequate. > For example, many of the London parish registers on Ancestry say Middlesex > long after the parish became part of the new county of London, sometimes > because the registers had the name of the church pre-printed, other times > because the vicar was, I assume, a dinosaur. In Bedford, St Pauls Parish > marriage registers refer occasionally to White Horse Street, up to 1874, > even though the road had been renamed Harpur Street sometime before (I > believe) 1841. > > Steven > > I found this a particular challenge in looking at my relatives in the Newington area of south London, particulalrly in censuses at the end of the 19th century. The older ones insisted on calling their birthplaces by the "old" area ie Surrey whereas the younger ones opted for London even when it had been Surrey when they were born. Some even put both. The census takers seem to have gome along with this rather than impose one rule. Brian Austin