Hear Ye! Hear Ye! I agree wholeheartedly. I work at a desk and I certainly would not call it a workstation either. I am of this day and age, but tend to be mighty old fashioned. I am not French, Finnish, Scottish, etc., BUT "of French, Finnish, Scottish ancestry etc.". My two cents worth <grin> Antoinette waughtel@oz.net Roy Stockdill wrote: > Cyndi wrote..... > > >>Actually, you explained my reasoning for me. I use the term "locality" > because there is no "nation" called Benelux and a site like GENUKI covers > more than one nation as well (the United Kingdom and the Republic of > Ireland). Of course, a site such as that for Federation of East European > Family History Societies (FEEFHS) represents numerous nations that exist > today or existed at some point throughout history in what is now Eastern > Europe. Therefore the word "national" doesn't describe the contents of the > > list, but "locality-specific" does. In genealogy we research based on > localities, not on nationalities (just ask anyone with Prussian > ancestors...)<< > > I TAKE your point - it was just the term "locality-specific" that somehow > smacked to me of Harvard Business School-type jargon which I abhor, just as > I hate government civil service officialese and gobbledegook terms like > "workstations" (I still call them desks) and "downsizing" (I call it giving > people the sack) and "interpersonal workplace relationships" (bonking > somebody in the office, we call that!). > > I would agree with you about genealogy often transcending nationalities and > national boundaries and I can sympathise with people whose ancestry is > rooted in countries that no longer exist. However, it's not so much of a > problem in Britain since the last time we were successfully invaded by > anybody and had our nationality seriously challenged was by a fellow called > Bill of Normandy in 1066 (unless you count all those Yankee GIs and airmen > in World War II who walked off with half our womenfolk!!!). You don't > really hear people talking much about having Norman ancestry, since the > number who can actually trace their pedigree back over 900 years to the > Normans is infinitesimal. And even those who can wouldn't think of > themselves as being French! > > Likewise, coming from Yorkshire for many generations I undoubtedly possess > some Viking ancestry, but I certainly don't think of myself as being Danish > or Norwegian since the likelihood of my being able to trace my ancestry > back to the 8th and 9th centuries, when the Vikings arrived in Yorkshire, > is absolutely zilch. Nor do we think of ourselves in the wider context of > Europeans - that is an entirely political concept which Mr Blair is keen to > foist onto us. Genealogically speaking, we are English, Welsh, Scottish and > Irish, with influxes of Jews and Huguenots in earlier centuries and Asians > and Afro-Caribbeans in more recent times. > > It would seem to me that the longer a people become settled in a country, > then the more likely they are to think of themselves in "national" terms. > > Roy Stockdill > Editor, The Journal of One-Name Studies > The Stockdill Family History Society (Guild of One-Name Studies, FedFHS) > STOCKDILL PREST YELLOW BOLTON WORSNOP > GIBSON MIDGLEY BRACEWELL SHACKLETON BRADLEY MOODY in Yorkshire North & > West Ridings > MEAD YOUNG in Somerset, Wiltshire & Gloucestershire > Web page of the Stockdill Family History Society:- > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/roystock > ”Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does he will tell you. > If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith (scholar and > humorist 1771-1845) > > ==== NEWGEN Mailing List ==== > NO BIT OF INFORMATION OR TIP IS MINOR WHEN IT CAN LEAD TO A MAJOR FIND.