Thank you all for your input. I currently use Rootsmagic v.5, which lets me put in whatever I want for the place name. I can put in present-day names for the location or I can put in the names of the places as they existed back at the time of the event (which is how I prefer to do it). When did the jurisdictions of Pfraumberg and Tachau come into being? Would I use them in this citation? I want to cite the location as it existed in 1865. The record has columns where the creator of the record could mark whether the marrying parties were catholic, protestant, their ages, single or widowed, with additional space for signatures of witnesses and notes. It looks like the priest (or whoever created the record) went back to original church books to look up the birth dates of the bride and groom, as there seem to be book and folio numbers. According to the Actapublica website, this is a record of the Roman Catholic church. Brandt

Brandt, "When did the jurisdictions of Pfraumberg and Tachau come into being?" Pfaumberg was a well established town and independent of the castle by late Medieval times. According to Wikipedia, the "Tachov district" is mentioned as early as 1126. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/P%C5%99imda http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okres_Tachov "Would I use them in this citation? I want to cite the location as it existed in 1865." You're probably creating a marriage fact/event in Rootsmagic, so you'll include the location as part of the fact, not the citation. Some genealogists record the place name in the fact exactly as its written in the source document or as implied by the source material. In this case, unless otherwise stated, the parish that created the marriage register is the presumed location. Some genealogists further interpret that place information by more fully qualifying the parish in the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church at the time of the event. (Before the dawn of civil records, this was often the only relevant jurisdiction.) Others translate the place information to the political location that existed at the time, even if it doesn't relate to the source material. The former place information is relevant to the researcher while the latter is possibly easier to understand by someone else who is looking at the family tree. I make note of both myself as well as the contemporary location. They're all meaningful. The Parish of Rozvadov today is in the Diocese of Pilsen in the Czech ecclesiastical province. The Diocese of Pilsen was formed in 1993, so who knows what it was in 1865? My guess is Roßhaupt was part of the *former* Diocese of Budweis as established in 1785 or perhaps part of the former Archdiocese of Prague. It's an academic point, however, since actapublica.eu presents the registers at the parish level without regard for the historical jurisdictions. I could be mistaken, but I believe that Roßhaupt in 1865 was politically part of the Tachau District of the Pilsen Region of the Kingdom of Bohemia (Königreich Böhmen) in the Austrian Empire (Kaiserthum Oesterreich). The empire didn't become the Austro-Hungarian Empire until 1867. In your source "citation", which is only concerned with the source material, you should cite the Catholic parish. Here is an example of how the source information might appear: Roman Catholic Church (Roßhaupt Parish), Book 18: Marriages (1848-1930), Img. 15. Marriage Registration: Johann Zitzmann + Theresia Dörfler, 17 Oct 1865; digital images, Státní oblastní archiv v Plzni.