I’ve been lurking on this conversation for some time as I too have been frustrated with how to enter place names, particularly those of Pennsylvania (where I and most of my ancestor have lived). For my two cents, here is how I have handled it.
I do a great deal of courthouse research and most documents deal with legally incorporated geographical entities in Pennsylvania such as cities, boroughs, townships, and counties. I do several things 1. I use place names as they were AT THE TIME OF THE EVENT which helps greatly with research. 2. I organize my places as (township, or city, or borough), county, state, country. 3. If an event occurred in a village, as they are unincorporated in Pennsylvania, I use the incorporated township in which the village is located and notate the village name in the description. (I do the same with cemeteries.) So, Scott, with reference to your illustration from Lycoming County, an event which happened in Muncy Township would have a different organization than one that occurred in Muncy, the borough. They would successively be: Muncy Township, Lycoming, Pennsylvania, United States Muncy, Lycoming, Pennsylvania, United States I realize this doesn’t totally solve the issues we have with entry into Legacy, but for me it does pretty much what I want it to. The suggestions and ideas on this thread are really helpful. I may have to rethink things. Logan From: Scott Hall Sent: Sunday, August 4, 2019 10:53 AM To: Legacy User Group Subject: Re: [LegacyUG] Location names for Pennsylvania I wanted to chime into this conversation because I find entering place names to be a challenge as well, and Pennsylvania is a perfect example. First, I concur with those who say enter the place name as it was at the time of the event. Those who enter the modern address and add the historic address in the notes have an interesting alternative, but it's not the preferred method as place names (even modern ones) can change. But, that's not really what I wanted to talk about. Early on I discovered a challenge when more than one "root name" exists within a larger administrative division. For example, in Lycoming County, there is both Muncy Township, and Muncy, a borough. Muncy, the borough, is part of Muncy Creek Township, not Muncy Township. This is far from an isolated case -- numerous counties in Pennsylvania have a township and a borough with the same name that are separate administrative divisions and where the borough is not located within the township. Now, the commonly accepted place recording convention, as far as I understand it, is that descriptors like village, town, county, etc. are not recorded unless officially part of the name. Even New York City should be recorded as "New York" with the appropriate county (New York, Bronx, Richmond, etc.) recorded--but that's a different discussion. Back to Pennsylvania....when you come across a record that simply says "Muncy", which Muncy is it? Let's say you can figure it out...you know it's the Township. Now, generally you'd record it as Muncy, Lycoming, Pennsylvania, USA -- but if you do, when you (or someone else) comes back to it -- which Muncy did you mean? So, to solve this problem, I've started to include the word "Township" in the record -- "Muncy Township, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, USA". And, of course, that means I also have to use "Borough" -- "Muncy Borough, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, USA". But what if Muncy was a city? Would I enter "Muncy City, Lycoming County, Pennsylvania"? Or perhaps, "Muncy (city), Lycoming County, Pennsylvania, USA"? I'd prefer not. Perhaps only Townships should get that designation, as generally I found that they are the one entity that tends to bear the same name as another administrative division. But in much of the northeast, like New York, there are no townships, only towns, which often have villages or cities bearing the same name contained within them (e.g. Canandaigua is a city wholly contained with the Town of Canandaigua). While in places like Pennsylvania, Michigan, or much of the midwest people may refer to a township by saying the word "township", in New York they certainly don't. No one says Canandaigua town, nor Canandaigua city. So, same problem. This latter issue is less significant than the Pennsylvania problem, though, as at least one entity is contained with another. But, in Pennsylvania, as I pointed out, they do not always bear this relationship. Thoughts? On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 5:47 PM Connie Laubach <bluecorab...@gmail.com> wrote: Trying to decide how to input the location names – I have townships that are made up of villages and boroughs. How are others handling it? I have thought of the following: Village, township, county, state, United States or township-village, country, state, United States (I like this as all villages within the township would be listed together) Thank you, Connie. Sent from Mail for Windows 10 -- LegacyUserGroup mailing list LegacyUserGroup@legacyusers.com To manage your subscription and unsubscribe http://legacyusers.com/mailman/listinfo/legacyusergroup_legacyusers.com Archives at: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/
-- LegacyUserGroup mailing list LegacyUserGroup@legacyusers.com To manage your subscription and unsubscribe http://legacyusers.com/mailman/listinfo/legacyusergroup_legacyusers.com Archives at: http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup@legacyusers.com/
