GENMSC-L Archives

Archiver > GENMSC > 2002-05 > 1022621290


From:
Subject: Re: Lewis Conklin, b. late 1800's, d. early 1950's, Morris Co., NJ
Date: 28 May 2002 21:28:10 GMT
References: <acfq04$d5q$1@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>, <acslha$sc55q$1@ID-71976.news.dfncis.de>, <ad0h3a$tl5$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>


Someone who looks an awful lot like Kelv <> wrote:

> Yes, in the sixteenth century. Today, as has been the case for many years,
> no-one would seriously consider Wales to be part of England. Even in the
> legal context, laws apply to "England & Wales" - the very term implies that
> England and Wales are two separate entities.

True, but if I had an ancestor in that time and place, I'd give the location
of their (event) as Town, Wales, England, and include the standard note
which goes something like "This location is at (geographical coordinates
in degrees latitude/longitude", and in the year 2002 is known as "Town,
Wales, UK" or whatever the case would be. Lots of changes over the
centuries, particularly in some of the northern european areas I'm working
on.

> The "Act of Union" today is merely a historical anomaly which legislation
> may or may not have corrected.

Well, sure, but if it was in place at the time the record is from, it
should at least be noted. Just as spelling may have been modernized
since that time, and using the correct spelling for that century is
appropriate.

IMHO, of course...

Dave Hinz


This thread: