Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Just curious over how you name yours ...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Just curious over how you name yours ...

    Hi

    How do you lot 'name' your ancestors?

    I have started researching a line of family (3x great grandmother's line) and her name - and that of her parents and siblings - changes between Bretton (her marriage), Britton (her birth), Britten (name of father at marriage) and Brittain (sisters name at birth).

    I am happy that they are mine and are the same people - but how would you list them in your trees?

    Currently I have her as Bretton (because that's the latest spelling) and the others listed as I found them but am aware that this isn't satisfactory as most of the family members have different spelt surnames and maybe I should just take a plump for one spelling and make a note of the various spellings.

    Any thoughts gratefully received.

    Many thanks

    Jo
    :D Charney Jo

  • #2
    Hallo Jo

    I usually take the most settled (usually the most recent) spelling, but I always note exactly what it says on the certificate or wherever.

    I've got a Maling/Mealing family who are spelt in a variety of ways. 4 brothers went off to Glamorgan and turned into variants that stuck, so I have some Melins and Mailins too!

    Similarly, a branch of the Chowns dropped the s and are just Chown.

    I try to work out if its a decided change or just an error on the part of whoever recorded it.
    ~ with love from Little Nell~
    Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Jo.

      I have the name Flavell in my tree, that has changed over the years,(Flavel, Flavill, Flavelle) but l have plumped for Flavell. It wouldnt be so bad if there werent so many of them lol
      Pam

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks for the reply. I am sure it is just the various recorders different interpretations of the name rather than a meaningful change in name. It just seems odd to label the father (and who knows what else I will find further back!) with a name spelt in a way never mentioned in relation to them in the records. I guess I will just have to get over that!

        I have never thought about it before. I have done quite a bit of family research now and obviously never really come across this before to an extent it concerned me!

        Thanks again

        Jo
        :D Charney Jo

        Comment


        • #5
          Well, Jo, its only really in the last part of the 19th century that most people were able to read and write (and possibly correct others reading/writing) their names.

          If you never had to write your name, how would you know the correct spelling? Remember an ag lab in 1850 wouldn't be filling in bank details, income tax forms, mortgage applications, passport applications, credit agreements, driver's licences etc. He'd probably put an X on his marriage cert and any birth/death certs he had to register and that would be it.

          You can see the vagaries of spellings by looking at parish registers - the same family will be recorded umpteen ways even by the same vicar/curate. My gt x 2 grandmother is recorded as Susan/Susanne/Susannah/Suzanne and surname as Chouns/Chowns/Chownes in the baptisms of her children. Who is to say which version - if any - is the "right" one!

          Likewise with Mary Ann/e Marian/ne Marion!
          ~ with love from Little Nell~
          Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

          Comment


          • #6
            Jo

            I've told this tale before, but I will tell it again just for YOU, lol.

            One of my ancestors, Hugh Holden, was church clerk for eight years. Every year he did the Bishop's Transcripts, and carefully signed his name to say that the BTs were a faithful copy of the register.

            In 8 years, he spelled his own surname in five different ways, lol.

            (Holden, Holdin, Holding, Holeden and Holdeng!)

            OC

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks OC.

              I know the reason, am happy about it (and not too unduly bothered actually!) but it just felt odd standardising the name. I was wondering whether anyone had a family all with different spelling (but sounding the same) surnames ... like I started with when I started this line!

              I will continue to standardise and list what spelling was recorded for each individual source.

              Many thanks!
              :D Charney Jo

              Comment


              • #8
                my FREED family changes to FRIDD in teh parish records. I looked at them a while ago on a microfische and it had been crossed out and respelt on several entries. I have been told that it is because they were immigrants possible danish or german and the accents would make the registrar write it down how he thought bearing in mind a lot of them couldnt read or write so how could they correct it.?

                There are a few FREED's still around and one of them told me that he often gets mail address to Fried/ Freed /Freid etc etc.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I also tend to stick to the latest spellings, and put what I consider the correct spelling in brackets against the weird and wonderful mis-transcriptions I have on various censuses. I also do the same on a sticky label on the outside of the punch pockets I use for all BMD's. The name I have in my family with the most peculiar spellings is - Chenery/Chinery/Chinry/Chinnery. Take your pick LOL!

                  Chris

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I had a laugh with my unc over this last year before he died, my grandad always said , "he was a Stroyd without the e...lol
                    now sonce doing the family tree have discovered that they were originaly Strides going back to 1600's with variations as Stride / Stoud/ Strdye/ Stoyde/ Stroyd...
                    borobabs passed away March 2018

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Then again, I found two of my gt grandfather's brothers had married sisters called Elsbury. Couldn't find them on census before marriage and no sign of baptism on IGI. Eventually I got to the London LDS centre and looked at the parish baptisms at the place nearest to where they said they were born on censuses. I found them as Aylesbury and Ailsbury!

                      Only the Broads and Wells in my direct line have unchanged spellings. All the others I have variants.
                      ~ with love from Little Nell~
                      Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Pamdidle View Post
                        Hi Jo.

                        I have the name Flavell in my tree, that has changed over the years,(Flavel, Flavill, Flavelle) but l have plumped for Flavell. It wouldnt be so bad if there werent so many of them lol
                        Pam trying to sort that lot out is a nightmare lol, I gave up..till I'm really really bored. I too stuck with Flavell and one day I'll start on them again and maybe get a match up with yours lol..




                        ]

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I've entered all my HAKIN proven direct line using the spelling we have now, but noted the variations on censuses & BMDs etc. Some of the census entries were so obscure they took a bit of imagination to find. The biggest problem I have with this name, is that it has been recorded as HAWKIN in most of the 18th century parish registers. One of my 19th C married-in lines is also HAWKIN (as far as I can tell not related) so this way I can easily keep them separate in the FTM lists.

                          Unfortunately for my OH, who is a Smith, he also has a married-in line of Smiths on his mother's side (again, not related). I usually manage to pick the wrong one when I'm looking at the list!

                          afterthought: you'd think you couldn't spell SMITH any differently phonetically, yet even in the mid 19th century you get the odd SMYTH
                          Last edited by Vicky the Viking; 17-03-08, 11:08.
                          Vicky

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I can't remember the surname but I have a line of say Smiths where one son suddenly calls himself anf his family Smyth. I called Dad Smith and the son Smyth.
                            Kit

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              If your tree is on GR, it's useful to have as many of the variants as you can reasonably include, so as to catch any relevant matches.

                              Christine
                              Researching: BENNETT (Leics/Birmingham-ish) - incl. Leonard BENNETT in Detroit & Florida ; WARR/WOR, STRATFORD & GARDNER/GARNAR (Oxon); CHRISTMAS, RUSSELL, PAFOOT/PAFFORD (Hants); BIGWOOD, HAYLER/HAILOR (Sussex); LANCASTER (Beds, Berks, Wilts) - plus - COCKS (Spitalfields, Liverpool, Plymouth); RUSE/ROWSE, TREMEER, WADLIN(G)/WADLETON (Devonport, E Cornwall); GOULD (S Devon); CHAPMAN, HALL/HOLE, HORN (N Devon); BARRON, SCANTLEBURY (Mevagissey)...

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                I use the name they were baptised with. Names do change over time, often in pronunciation as well as meaning. In my one name study, the different spellings help me differentiate branches and periods. They also, as Christine says, cast the net a little wider when it comes to GR.

                                If you use a modern, standardised name, you may miss a link a couple of centuries back with a female because her surname was fossilised with another spelling.
                                Phoenix - with charred feathers
                                Researching Skillings from Norfolk, Sworn from Salisbury and Adams in Malborough, Devon.

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Originally posted by Northern Light View Post
                                  I too stuck with Flavell and one day I'll start on them again and maybe get a match up with yours lol..
                                  Yes Denise.

                                  I should think they are related somewhere asyours originate from Gornal dont they? Its just so hard to connect them:(
                                  Pam

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Pam, yes its Gornal lol..maybe one day who knows..




                                    ]

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      I had terrible trouble trying to find my ggrandfather's birth certificate.
                                      He was Samuel Blades and he had moved to Portsmouth from Chester. Eventually it dawned upon me that the surname might have been spelt differently and I found him as Samuel Bleades - then I discovered that other variations existed - Blaides, Blade, Blead, Bleads. I wondered if the local (Cheshire) pronunciation of the name could sound like Bleads.
                                      If there is a birth certificate I tend to use the spelling on that and note any variations. This can lead to some odd looking family trees though!
                                      Samuel and his wife Margaret produced a son before their marriage and Margaret registered him as Samuel Blain Prescott!! I presume she was not certain of the name, or else she mumbled it!

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        I have the same problem with my Sidgwick ancestors. My direct ancestor and her immediate family were all recorded as Sidgwick but if you go far enough back they were Sedg(e)wick and then there's the branch that emigrated to Utah in America as Sidgwick but are now Sedgwick.

                                        I tend to record their name as recorded on the birth cert if one exists otherwise I keep the spelling the same as the parents name. I think its nice to see the changes in the tree.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X