Non geographical bounded entities

Help
1

After the subject of entering villages that have multiple meaning. I have one more to ask.

So any ideas on non geographical entities like church congregations that traditionally weren’t bounded by one church building or even by a single village? It is not uncommon for a congregation to have multiple buidlings in one village and even multiple buidlings in multiple villages.
Baptized within a congregation can point to a variety of geo-locations, sometimes even on the same day (That are not even always mentioned.)

2

I do not see an issue. It appears that the church/congregation can be named. While the location is not a singular point, the challenge would be to name the geographical area. The place record does allow the addition of notes could help define the entity.

Additionally, you can smaller assemblies of the main church/congregation that are enclosed by the larger entity. These smaller assemblies could have two hierarchical enclosed by paths. One to the church/congregation and another for their physical location.

Using the roman catholic church as an example, parishes have a physical location and a religious connection to a higher diocese. The long delayed, but much expected, place enhancement is expected to allow for multiple enclosed hierarchies for things like this religious one but also a legal one and allow the user to select which path was used.

3

Thank you.
Yes congregations can be named, but they do change names. Some even several times (mostly the protestants). F.I. (simplified example) during the 19th century a branch first changed name, then became a ‘state‘ church, then later the state withdrew and some reverted their name, others chose a new one, loads changed the specific church-direction they followed. All the while they also served varying villages or areas. Which makes constant naming a huge problem. All of these different entities may have their own church records.
Dealing with that side of religion-based records is quite complicated. Even my own church’s history, which I know well, is so super complicated. And thus also its records. In this case (and others like it) I just have simplified recording, just because I know its history so well. There are many books, only about our church, going into its history.
The place enhancement sounds like something I would use.

4

This isn’t a major issue in Gramps. You simply use the Congregation as a high-level entity in your Place Hierarchy. Under this, you can organize multiple Parishes, municipalities, towns, or villages by nesting them within their respective parent locations.

Below these, you can add specific churches, parish buildings, or any other structures. If a place changes its name over time, you handle this by adding Alternative Names with specific dates. Remember that even the ‘Preferred Name’ should have a date range attached to be historically accurate.

For every single entity here, you can link it to different parent locations based on time. This allows you to add new administrative borders or close out old ones with an end date. This way, buildings and geographic boundaries can live their ‘parallel lives’ within the hierarchy without conflict.

Personally, I maintain at least four different hierarchies for my places:

  1. The old Norwegian administrative structure, which saw significant changes.
  2. The new administrative structure, which has also changed multiple times with major structural shifts.
  3. The old ecclesiastical (church) structure, which changed frequently and becomes increasingly complex the further back you go.
  4. The modern ecclesiastical structure, which has been relatively stable over the last 60 years.

I use similar systems for Sweden, parts of the USA where I have relatives, and other countries with distinct administrative, legal, and ecclesiastical structures.

Additionally, I maintain a dedicated structure for ship owners and vessels that change ownership over time. These are also nested within the hierarchies mentioned above. Almost everything can be controlled by applying dates to relationships (enclosures) and alternative names.

The only real challenge is if you absolutely must draw geographic boundaries on a map. If so, you should create those maps specifically or store the map data as metadata files under Media with associated dates. Personally, I see little value in drawing ever-changing congregation boundaries on a map. It is far more important to know which specific farms and locations were connected to a congregation during a given period, rather than a generic line. If a specific boundary is crucial, I prefer to draw it for that exact date and save it as a map sheet or media file."

5

Thank you. I have tried to fit everything possibility in. But there always be exceptions. And will probably have to accept that. I have made a detailed flowchart of all denominations and how they are all related. Some denominations are very regional, others more spread.
Which could be a gramps file on its own possibly. I briefly thought about integrating, but that’s something I haven’t come up with a viable solution, other then referencing to my own research.
The solution I have chosen fits well for everything before 1812. But after that it is so fragmented sometimes. The flowchart has so many devisions, unites and reunites.

quote: when two protestants unite they form a congregation. When a third joins they are a large congregation. When a fourth joins they will fight and split and form two new congregations.

6

Actually, the ‘four Protestants’ problem can be solved directly within the Place function in Gramps by using a few key features:

  1. Enclosed by with Dates: This is the most powerful tool for your scenario. You can define that Congregation A was enclosed by Parish X until the ‘fight’ [Date], and then show how the two new congregations (B and C) were formed from that date forward.
  2. Date Ranges on Entities & Names: By adding start and end dates to the place entities and using the Alternative Names tab with specific dates, you can maintain a historically accurate trail through multiple parallel hierarchies.

The only real limitation today is that Gramps doesn’t support Events directly on Places. My workaround for this is to use ‘orphan events’ linked to the Places to describe specific incidents. I use this same method when documenting a change of ownership for a ship or when a military unit has a series of events at different locations. You simply link the event to the place to create that narrative anchor.

PS: If you want to apply this logic directly to People, it isn’t currently possible in Gramps—at least not that I’ve found. You would have to ‘convert’ these entities into Places and then link individuals to the ‘orphan events’ I mentioned. In these cases, you should avoid using ‘primary roles’ for the people; this creates a ‘pseudo-orphan event’ that is still linked to the persons involved without breaking the structure.

PS 2: It will be very easy to do this in software like Gephi, or even Obsidian. You need to think a little outside the box when using Obsidian (or Zettlr, Foam for VSC, etc.), but it is not a big job to find a good workaround workflow in those types of software.

If you post your flowchart, I can try to show you exactly how to map these ‘moving targets’ into the Place hierarchy. It’s all about using Time as the primary anchor for your geography!"

7

Here is one of my flowcharts. It begins in 1816 and contains only Protestant denominations. From this chart, most of the named denominations are included in my research.
It excludes Roman Catholicism and everything that happened until 1816. I have a separate chart covering that period (including the Reformation), another covering the Apostolic period, and one covering Islam.
The attached chart is not even completed yet. I omitted all charismatic factions, as they are too short-lived and too independent to attach anywhere.

Now that I have this one, I should start again, but I was too daunted by the task.
It is in Dutch and applies only to denominations within that country.

Diagram1
Diagram11920×1365 167 KB

8

I don’t read Dutch, but based on the arrows and the similarities to Norwegian, this looks doable.

You should start with the oldest and highest level of the hierarchy, just as you’ve done here. Then, add each entity one by one, using the dates as ‘limits.’

Over the next few days, I’ll try to provide an example of a tree structure or a network graph. Everything here seems manageable within the Gramps place hierarchy; it’s just a matter of handling a large number of entities. Because of this, it’s important to work on one branch at a time—for instance, moving from left to right in the chart.

Start at the top left and add entities with their respective start and end dates. Where there are branches, create them with their start dates in the ‘left column’ first, then move to the next branch and repeat.

This chart will definitely help. I did something similar using a network graph in Cytoscape for my own hierarchy. Unfortunately, a bad plugin corrupted my file, but since I had already finished the main structure in Obsidian, I didn’t bother recreating it.

9

Please don’t go overboard with making an example. I’ve been living with these flowcharts since I first drew them on paper in 1992.

Most names are just repeating older names and changing them slightly. In Dutch, we have Hervormd and Gereformeerd, which is not easily translatable, certainly not as “reformed,” since they are both. afscheiding / afsplitsing / scheiding = separation. verenigd = united gemeente = (similar to) assembly or council Buiten verband = ununited or separate Vrij = free pinkstergemeente = pentecostal leger des heils = Salvation Army nav overspel = after adultery (of their leader) Between ( ) are names of people

10

I look at it as an personal challenge… no worry, I choose myself what I use my time on… :rofl:

11

Very much appreciated