Australia_Project_Guidelines_-_Colonial_Australia_1788-1900_Locations.png

Australia, Project Guidelines - Colonial Australia 1788-1900, Locations

Privacy Level: Public (Green)
Date: [unknown] [unknown]
Location: [unknown]
This page has been accessed 702 times.

'Draft' - This is currently a work in progress and not yet approved.

The purpose of this page is to start the process to identify locations relevant to Colonial Australia and how they are integrated into the existing structures/processes, such as categories, stickers and 'location' error correction.

Contents

Colonial Australia

Current day 'Australia' was known as Terra Australis prior to 1824 when it was officially named Australia. 'Australia' will be the top level, however we recognise that for the purpose of categorisation of locations on Wikitree we will have three distinct periods:-

  • Terra Australis, pre 1788;
  • Colonial Australia 1788-1900; and
  • Present day Australia, post Federation in 1901.

The Aboriginal Nations location structure for Indigenous Australians applies throughout.

This document is focussing on Colonial Australia and will define the approved locations to be used on Wikitree during this period.

The following colonies existed in Australia and will be our highest level location categories for Colonial Australia (1788-1900).

Location Category Information Boxes (CIB) will be used on all landing-level place name categories and to new place names where there have been name changes.

Colony of New South Wales (1788-1900)

The Colony of New South Wales managed many parts of Australia before they became seperate colonies. Where this applies the 'Colony of New South Wales (1788-1900)' category will be linked to those states and territories and the details about the history included in the state/territory category description. This even included New Zealand until 1840. Refer Wikipedia.
The Colony of New South Wales was quite large and in 1826 nineteen counties were identified which formed administrative regions. These counties include many places that still exist today. Refer Wikipedia. Current day Australian places that existed within the 'county divisions' for Colonial New South Wales can be easily connected via CIB's (Category Information Boxes).

The nineteen counties were:

  • 1. Gloucester - includes Port Stephens;
  • 2. Durham - includes Dungog, Seaham. West of Gloucester and south to Hunter River;
  • 3. Northumberland - includes Hexham, Munmorah. North to Hunter River and south Hawkesbury River;
  • 4. Cumberland - includes Sydney, Parramatta, Windsor, Liverpool, Appin to the south;
  • 5. Camden - includes Camden, Picton, Berrima, and the Shoalhaven River to the south;
  • 6. St Vincent - includes Jervis Bay, Bateman's Bay and Braidwood. From the Shoalhaven in the north to the Moruya River in the south;
  • 7. Hunter - includes Wollemi, Colo. West of Northumberland to the Hunter River in the north.
  • 8. Cook - includes west of Cumberland county and south of the county of Hunter;
  • 9. - includes
  • 10. - includes
  • 11. - includes
  • 12. - includes
  • 13. - includes
  • 14. - includes
  • 15. - includes
  • 16. - includes
  • 17. - includes
  • 18. - includes
  • 19. - includes

Van Diemen's Land (1826-1856)

The main locations during this period were:-

Swan River Colony (1828-1832)

The main locations during this period were:-
  • King George Sound (Albany)

Colony of South Australia (1836-1900)

The main locations during this period were:
  • Kangaroo Island;
  • Adelaide
The Colony was also known as the Province of South Australia (1832–1842).

Colony of Victoria (1851-1900)

The main locations during this period were:-

Colony of Tasmania (1856-1900)

The main locations during this period were:-

Colony of Queensland (1859-1900)

The main locations during this period were:-

Colony of Western Australia (1832-1900)

The main locations during this period were:-
  • King George Sound
  • Freemantle
  • Albany

Categories

The 'Colonial Australia' location categories will sit within the existing 'Australia' structure.

States and Colonies will be linked horizontally by Category Info Boxes (CIB), as will town/city landing level categories that have changed names.
A map showing the structure is in progress of development.
  • [[Category:Australia]]
  • [[Category:Colonial Australia 1788-1900 ]]
  • [[Category:Colony]] eg.[[Category:Colony of Tasmania (1856-1900)]]
  • [[Category:Town or City, Colony]] eg.[[Category:Hobart, Colony of Tasmania]]

Where a place existed that was part of a colony and later a state or territory, then that place will have separate landing level categories. For example, Albany, Western Australia (previously King George Sound, until 1831), would be linked to all three relevant higher level location categories. Please refer to the following, as an example:

Location Example

Each of the separate Australia Project Colony, State and Territories (CST) Teams will develop the lower level 'place names' that sit within the broader Colonial Australia structure for their relevant CST, in conjunction with the Australia Project Category Team.

The Australia Project 'Location Category Guidelines' page is the most up to date document relating to these guidelines for the project and can be found here.

Project Stickers

Some existing stickers can be set up to automatically populate to these categories. For the full list of templates please click here.

NOTE: This need to be set up in templates when locations and categories are decided.

Data Doctor Location Errors

The drop down menu used for selecting locations on Wikitree is defined by Family Search Places. To check them, please click here.

Work needs to be undertaken to decide firstly how we wish to define our locations and secondly whether any Wikitree error reports need to be developed. If you can help with this please contact Veronica Williams. Volunteers were called for in early May 2020, but so far no takers!

NOTE: The Data Doctor Location Errors will be determined once the location review is finalised.

The following are locations on Family Search identified to date. It appears they need to be searched individually. Please add others to this page or contact Veronica Williams





Images: 1
Location Example
Location Example

Collaboration


Comments: 16

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
Is this topic still (2024) relevant? If so, who is the individual WT member 'in charge'?

Lots of comment about SA - but what about QLD?

posted by Phil Grace
Hello Phil - yes this is a valid project page even though it is incomplete. For quite some time we have been asking for a volunteer to help lead this work. If you are interested in helping with Queensland we can talk off line via PM. I'm currently overseas but available on and off.

Veronica

I apologise for raising (again) an old complaint.

I will not support the category name of 'Colony of South Australia'. SA was firstly established as a British Province by UK parliament in 1834. The self-administration only lasted until 1842 however the official name carried on until federation.

posted by Steve Thomas
edited by Steve Thomas
I also don't use Category: Colony of South Australia (1836-1900).

Many official documents use the terms colony and province interchangeably. I think I found at one stage consecutive annual almanacs in the 1890s that had the same paragraph in the introduction, but with those two words swapped from one year to the next.

My guess is that technically, the "Province" referred to the land/territory/spatial extent and the "colony" referred to the European settlers in it, but I don't think the terms were rigorously used that way, then or now.

posted by Scott Davis
For colonial South Australia, suggest setting up categories for counties and hundreds as summarised at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lands_administrative_divisions_of_South_Australia

Maybe the following as additional significant locations:

  • Burra (and associated townships like Kooringa etc)
  • Kapunda
  • Mount Gambier
  • Port Lincoln
  • Port Pirie

Are towns in the Adelaide Hills (Mount Barker etc) included in Adelaide? otherwise that could be a separate list item.

posted by Troy Phillips
There are a lot of hundreds, and not all have been used on official records. It may be that registration districts are more useful as they are larger?

I have a number of ancestors and their relatives with events registered as "Hundred of English, district of Kapunda" Hundred of English is north and northeast of Eudunda. it includes present-day towns of Robertstown, Point Pass, Geranium Plains, but isn't really in the Kapunda district (any more?).

Some of the district names seem to correspond to hundreds, too.

posted by Scott Davis
Agree that there are lots of hundreds - maybe only the ones used should get setup (I assume that location categories are only setup when needed?)

Using registration districts did seem promising, but it looks like the district boundaries moved around (some background at https://www.genealogysa.org.au/south-australian-certificates-story). Just looking at some examples with my ancestors: - 1866 birth in Auburn in Clare district, 1868 birth in Auburn in Upper Wakefield district - 1849 birth in Bowden in Adelaide district, 1894 birth in Bowden in Hindmarsh district - 1872 birth in Grunthal in Mount Barker district, 1873 birth in Grunthal in Nairne district - 1878 birth in Gum Creek in Burra district, 1888 birth in Gum Creek in Clare district

posted by Troy Phillips
It's already been agreed previously by the project that, at this time, there will be no parallel location structure under colonial Australia, due to the relatively small number of Australian profiles we have, and the unnecessary work required to set up the categories, move profiles, and to correct the inevitable suggestions for Died before / Born after Category time frame. we already get these from the small number of dates on timelines on CIBs that we have. The exceptions may be a very small number of places that changed name and there are a large number of profiles, ie a state team or a member is working on a particular area. See the example in the above text (King George Sound /Albany). As the above text says, "Each of the separate Australia Project Colony, State and Territories (CST) Teams will develop the lower level 'place names' that sit within the broader Colonial Australia structure for their relevant CST, in conjunction with the Australia Project Category Team."

Where place names have changed, (and we have a few that changed as a result of WW1), the categories are linked horizontally by the timeline in the CIB, or a link on the category page, they are not linked vertically as sub-categories. The currently approved location structure https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Australia%2C_Project_Guidelines_-_Australian_Location_Categories does not include interim mid-level categories between the state/colony and the landing level categories.

ALL categories, not just location categories, should NOT be created "ahead of time", ie with no profiles (this is Categorization Project policy). There are very few exceptions. If in doubt in creating a new category as to how or if it fits into the existing category structure, add the request to our category request page, https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Space:Categories_Waiting_to_be_Added_or_Renamed

The district boundaries changed over time. A place could be in district A, then district B and then back to district A within 20 years as the boundaries changed. Most people won't know when the districts changed and what they were changed to over time. The district name can also be misleading. For example, the early district of Adelaide was huge. At one stage Port Pirie was in the district of Clare and in 1935 it became the district of Pirie. If someone lived in Port Pirie, how is it useful to know they were in the district of Clare? Some people may think of it as being the town of Clare, which would be very misleading as they are over 100km apart. If categories are worthwhile using, they need to be functional. It's useful to know when a bunch of families live within a few km of each other. Not so much when they're 100 km apart. Towns may change names but they don't move around, and most people know how to find out where a town is located.
posted by [Living Ford]
OK, I accept that registration districts was an unhelpful brain fart.

Some hundreds seem to be used more than others. I haven't worked out a pattern for which ones were used. Is it possible I'm noticing the ones that do not have an identically-named town, and that the town is assumed for others that were not intended to be that precise?

posted by Scott Davis
The examples I have seen where hundreds are mentioned on birth and death certificates is due to the location being a farm or station.
posted by [Living Ford]
I refer to your comment "Some of the district names seem to correspond to hundreds, too."

I speculate that the early surveyors and settlers imagined that a hundred, similar to a civil parish in UK, would be able to form a local government. One of my ancestors pushed for a local council in the Hundred of Waterloo. SA split the cadastral divisions from local government administration. A hundred is a sub-division of a county in SA. I think your relatives registration "Hundred of English, district of Kapunda" is a mixture of the location (the hundred of English) and the local government administration district (Kapunda). The boundaries of the hundreds and counties are lines on a map and very rarely change. The boundaries of LGAs are very fluid.

posted by Steve Thomas
I contribute South Australian history and geography on Wikipedia too. A lot of the early district council boundaries in the mid north matched the Hundred boundaries. They don't seem to have a close association with registration districts which seem to be much bigger and possibly reflect either court houses or the predecessor of ServiceSA offices (maybe that is the same thing).
posted by Scott Davis
There are several categories for towns in the Adelaide Hills, e.g. Aldgate, Bridgewater, Stirling, Eagle on the Hill. They are requested when we identify profiles needing them.

Adelaide should refer to the square mile in the centre, not the entire metropolitan area. We have categories for many suburbs too so they can be used to identify smaller areas which may be helpful for cluster research.

posted by [Living Ford]
I agree that categories should only be created when they add value.

Scott missed Troy's opening suggestion to use the 49 Counties in South Australia. Not surprising. Who knows that they still exist in SA? Unlike the Registration Districts, the County boundaries barely change. For the purpose of connecting different families I am close to creating a category for the County of Stanley. I am very interested in a history paper 'James, M Stephanie, 2010 Becoming South Australians? The impact of the Irish on the County of Stanley, 1841-1871, Flinders University, School of International Studies' https://theses.flinders.edu.au/view/841111ec-616c-4695-a4de-f216541ea4dc/1

Later edit for a different comment. I agree with the statement "Adelaide should refer to the square mile in the centre, not the entire metropolitan area.". The current Category of Adelaide includes all the suburbs. Is it possible to rename this category as 'Greater Adelaide' and create a new category for the square mile? If this is too hard, one alternative could be to leave the current category alone and create a new category 'City of Adelaide'.

posted by Steve Thomas
edited by Steve Thomas
Yes, i did miss the Counties suggestion. They are bigger (there are 49) and (like hundreds) don't move as they are part of the land ownership system. I've noticed that they sometimes match registration districts in the early parts of closer settlement (such as County of Daly).
posted by Scott Davis