[APG Public List] APGPublicList Digest, Vol 12, Issue 38

LBoswell laboswell at rogers.com
Mon Nov 1 13:56:17 MDT 2010


If establishing the "actual physical location" is meaningless, then why 
would you want to try and establish coordinates for it?  There has to be 
some purpose for doing so that is perceived by the researcher.  But in the 
case you describe then the family did live in one location.  You might have 
been able to find more of that type of "record created in a nearby location" 
type of thing if you carefully used maps (whether establishing coordinates 
or not) and data tracking family and extended family.

If physical location and fact are going to be misleading then just like you 
would have to explain why the records were recorded in a one location, while 
the family lived in another location, _whether or not you also marked one or 
the other using a mapping tool_.

Larry
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ray Beere Johnson II
  To: APG Posting
  Sent: Monday, November 01, 2010 3:35 PM
  Subject: Re: [APG Public List] APGPublicList Digest, Vol 12, Issue 38


       Sorry, Larry, but I'm going to have to disagree with you here. Even 
if you establish the "actual physical location", it may be meaningless.
       Case in point? I have seen multiple instances in New England where 
the actual physical location was in one town, but where an event was 
recorded in a neighbouring town - because the families in question happened 
to find it more convenient to travel there. Often, this seems to have been a 
"cultural" issue, not necessarily a geographic one.
       I even found one specific event for a surname connected with my 
family recorded with records for another _county_. Why? Simply because a 
minister for a certain town performed the wedding ceremony in another town 
miles away - and the town clerk saw fit to record the event "their" minister 
oversaw.
       In other words, in at least some cases, actual physical location is 
highly misleading in research - _if_ the researcher is unwary enough to get 
too hung up on that point.
                               Ray Beere Johnson II

  --- On Mon, 11/1/10, L. Boswell <laboswell at rogers.com> wrote:

  > Sorry, maybe I'm missing something here, but I wouldn't say the
  > physical location is less important than the artificial boundaries.
  > How do you know which boundaries apply if you haven't established the
  > actual physical location first (or early on in the research process)?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <../attachments/20101101/7afd1cb6/attachment.htm>


More information about the APGPublicList mailing list