Add historical information for a place?

StefanoBianchi2

Hi all,

this issue was discussed many times, but I'm not sure I have found a final answer to my question.

How do I associate a different name to a place in a different historical period?

An example should be clear about what I really mean. Acuto is a small town close to Rome, in Italy. It is standardized in FS in two epochs:

https://www.familysearch.org/research/places/?searchTypeaheadInputText=acuto&text=acuto&focusedId=7059405

reflecting the change of district of the town in two periods. However, before 1871, Acuto was of course not in Italy (not existing at the time!), but part of the Papal States. After searching the forum, I realized the best thing I can do now is to associate to a person born in 1840 the standard place of Acuto (irrelevant if before or after 1927), and then write what I want in the birthplace field. For example in this case (GHDQ-569), I used:

Acuto, Delegazione Apostolica di Frosinone, Stato Pontificio

which, as far as I know, should be correct for 1840.

I may be happy with that, but I would be happier if I could contribute to FS by actually adding this nomenclature to the standard Acuto place, in order for it to appear as the correct name before 1871 (not exactly true, other changes are needed in previous epochs). Moreover, in the standard information that person will be considered as born in Italy, but this is not true.

I don't understand if it is possible at all. Should I suggest an improvement for that place, specifying that it's historically inaccurate and the other name should be added before 1871? Is there any other way? Does it make any sense at all?

Thanks,

Stefano

Maile L

@Gordon Collett, can you help

Gordon Collett

It sounds like you are entering the names correctly in that you are putting in the correct historical name and linking it to the best standard available. The best way to look at the standards is that they are not really names. They are points on the map, that is, a specific latitude and longitude. That one point can have as many historic descriptors as needed, however.

The programming doesn't really look at the text of the standard, as far as I am aware, only the underlying co-ordinates. So as far as the program is concerned, in the example you posted above, it will not consider the person to have been born in Italy. It will consider the person to have been born at 41.7929, 13.1732.

But in addition to their main purpose of designating a place on the map, the other roles of standards are to provide guidance on correct historical usage and to provide for rapid data entry.

You can only contribute to improving place names by using the Suggest New Place and the Improve This Place links in the Places database or by posting requests in the Places group here in Community.

However, it looks like someone (certainly not me) saw your post and made at least a partial improvement. Using the link you posted above, I see that Acuto now has three historical periods. It doesn't have the full name as you use it, but it can still be linked as the standard.

StefanoBianchi2

Thanks for the swift reply!

As far as I understand, 'Suggest a new place' is not the right option, since it's not a new place, but only alternate names of the same place depending on the date. Moreover, a new place requires a 'parent place' which apparently needs to already exist, and it will not work in this case.

So, it seems that the 'right' way to proceed is to use 'Improve This Place', suggesting the correct name for a certain historical period. I will try that.

Thanks!

Stefano

Julia Szent-Györgyi

"Papal States" is in the database, as an earlier time period for Vatican City, but Acuto is currently its only daughter place. I don't know what to suggest for getting everything else added that belonged under this umbrella at some point in history. (Heck, I'm not sure how to even determine this information.)

There are contexts where the standardized location's labeling makes a huge difference. For example, if you choose the "birthplace" option for coloring your Fan Chart, it takes the birthplace from the final jurisdiction of the standardized birth or christening place. So if you standardize Acuto to Italy, then your 1840 ancestor will be labeled/colored as being Italian-born. (Likewise, if my distant cousin standardizes our common ancestor's birthplace as the current jurisdiction, then said ancestor becomes a time-traveler on the fan chart: he can be labeled as being born in a country that didn't exist until centuries after his birth.)

StefanoBianchi2

By the way, I think it's wrong to have the Papal States as an earlier period for the Vatican City. The Vatican City was actually 'founded' in 1929, to solve the issue raised in 1870 with the annexion of Rome in Italy. Before 1870, there was not such a place as the Vatican City, the whole city of Rome was simply the capital city of the Papal States. So this should be fixed in my opinion. Again, I would be happy to get documentation for that, but I don't understand how to proceed, apart from giving suggestions through 'Improve that place', but it's rather an inefficient process for significant changes like these.

Julia Szent-Györgyi

The database is perhaps guilty of some oversimplification with that association: it's basically treating "the capital of the Papal States" as equivalent to "the Papal States". But it was either that or confusion between Rome and Vatican City. I don't know if there's a better way to squash the facts into the data structure.

russellwaltgeorge1

Any time you find a place that needs correcting, instead of suggesting a new place, you can just send a email to  placefeedback@familysearch.org.  Just document what changes need to made to the specific place.

I hope this helps.