Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Spelling of Surname changing over time - how to record

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

  • Spelling of Surname changing over time - how to record

    I was wondering what the best or recommended practice is with recording surnames changing

    One person is in the 1841 and 1851 census with one spelling of the surname, and in 1861 and subsequent with the 'new' spelling.

    I'm ok with the children's names being the 'new' spelling, but what would be the best way to record the different spellings and when they changed for an individual?

    Cheers,

    Graeme

  • #2
    Hi Graeme,

    Can't offer much help..am waiting for any answers though as I have this on my tree and I'm never sure what to do either

    Linda

    Comment


    • #3
      I tend to use the spelling of the surname that I have found at birth or baptism but make a note of any variations in the notes section of my family tree program (Family Tree Maker).
      There is generally an option to add an "also known as" name (AKA) which I would use if there has been a complete change of name at some point.
      Elaine







      Comment


      • #4
        It depends where I am recording it!

        In my own private tree I record the most recent spelling but with notes "found as xxxx" where appropriate.

        In any tree intended to catch the eye of relatives on the internet, I use the actual spelling found, just in case the contact doesn't know or realise it was really spelled differently.

        OC

        Comment


        • #5
          I also have this problem!! Hubbys grandmother was Elizabeth Skidmore, but now going backwards to the late 1700's it has changed to Scudamore! I know it to be the same person as the first names are so unusual don't know how to record the name now, so have made it a double barrelled for the time being until I can think of what to do!!
          KAREN xx

          Comment


          • #6
            It's down to you really I would say, it's whatever works best for you and how you can find the information again when you need it.

            My surname of Chiddicks is a prime example, variants include Chiddick, Chiddocks, Chiddock, Chitticks, Chiddix, Chituck, etc etc probably over twelve variations. I have personally recorded it on FTM as Chiddicks for every variation, but that's just my own choice.
            My Family History Blog Site:

            https://chiddicksfamilytree.com

            Comment


            • #7
              Is it a genuine change of name or just a census incorrect spelling though? Perhaps you could give us further detail on the name and the records you are looking at?
              Last edited by Heather Positive Thinker; 02-06-12, 16:36.

              Comment


              • #8
                I put the most recently seen version. For instance, my great-great-grandmother's maiden name is McAlarney, according to her marriage record; however I have recently been told that she has a brother Philip whose surname's variety includes M'Allarny, M'Alarley and M'Alearney.
                I shall continue recording the name as McAlarney, with some notes added.
                Joy

                Comment


                • #9
                  hmm well i just put the most common name in. on ancestry you can put in notes etc, so if the name varies i would write down the version per record, so i can find it again when i need it under that variant. but what do you do when different surnames are given? i have an ancestor at first marriage 1859, who said her name was mack. on second marriage 1874, her father's surname was mcaulliffe. she had married after all the kids were born, and their births record mack. after 1874, on her death and her kids deaths, the surname is mcaulliffe. mothers name and maiden name was the same at both marriages. and fathers occupation and christian name were the same too. so which is her surname? im stumped!! good luck with what you decide!!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thank you for the suggestions - I'll try sticking with the parents conventional spelling of Crosswaite and note the alternate spelling at each event.

                    To give a rough outline:

                    Christening: https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/J93J-3X1 as William Crosthwait

                    1841 census transcribed - as William Croswaite

                    1844 marriage BMD record - as William Crosthwaite http://www.yorkshirebmd.info/cgi/pma...=Sarah&area=LS

                    1851 census transcribed - as William Crosswaite (ag lab) also https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/SP9C-BCL

                    1861 census transcribed - as William Crosthwaite (coal engine worker) also https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.1/M7X3-L6Q

                    1864 death BMD record - as William Crosthwaite http://www.ukbmdcertificateordering.co.uk/certapp.php?type=deaths&data=CROSTHWAITE|William|W hitkirk|Leeds|1864|1864||LS%3aWHIT%2f5%2f94|C|4250 1|yorkshire|LS|-&lang=

                    Some other family researchers have viewed the microfiche and microfilm copies of the 1841, 1851, 1861 census and have transcribed them.

                    About this time the family forks into Crosswaite and Crosthwaite branches (with other relations of William's as well)

                    Kind Regards,

                    Graeme
                    Last edited by GraemeWi; 03-06-12, 10:29.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Graeme

                      In your case I would use the spelling as found for each individual - it's the same surname but with recording errors.

                      OC

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I have 4 more usual variants for one of my mainline surnames. I record them all the same, as I find searching easier, but I always add notes of how they were actually recorded.
                        I was talking to someone earlier this week, who told me that his father was one of 9 children. The first 4 were recorded by one registrar, the next 5 by the replacement registrar. One set are COOMBS, the other set are COOMBES.
                        They have subsequently used the spelling on their certificates, so cousins have different spellings too.

                        Gwyn

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I would recommend that you use whatever system suits you, personally. Each of us has a different feeling for waht works for us, and no particular system can reasonably be said to be definitive.
                          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


                          • #14
                            As its not actually a change of name, just a transcription or enumerator variation, stick with the usual spelling.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I usually record the name as given, but make a note that the name has morphed over the years. I have Chadbournes in my tree, they have been recorded as Chatburn-Chadburn-Chadborn-Chadbourn. I know that from 1916 the name used was Chadbourne, but in earlier instances have all variants in my tree.

                              It is up to you personally how you want to record it, but, depending on others that are researching that same name, it might not occur to them that there was another spelling of it!

                              I know of someone researching the family Holtam, and they are Adamant that it is ONLY spelled that way. (so if they come across a Holton-Holtan whatever, they would discount it as not being theirs!)
                              Julie
                              They're coming to take me away haha hee hee..........

                              .......I find dead people

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                fair enough if it's a separate name in it's own right julie, but sometimes people are idiots. i'm hesitant looking for morton's as martin. they are separate surnames, rebut sometimes they are mistranscribed as the other.

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  As I have a very unusual and old English surname (ADLAM is not it but I do have an Adlam branch) I took it upon

                                  myself many years ago to do a spreadsheet for births which has as column headings;
                                  NAME GIVEN YR Qtr REF DIST CTY PARENTS M/M NAME # Source FILM
                                  ADLAM George 1565 3 PR Frome SOM Fromeresearch
                                  ADLAM Tobias 1577 2 PR Frome SOM Fromeresearch
                                  ADLAM Thomas 1580 2 PR Frome SOM Fromeresearch

                                  and as the gaps became available to fill this is what the sheet continuation (after 1580) looks like;

                                  ADLAM Benjamin 1818 N/C Westbury SOM Samuel + Hannah HAYWARD RG4_2741
                                  ADLAM John 1818 N/C Westbury SOM Samuel + Hannah HAYWARD RG4_2741
                                  ADLAM Jane 1820 1 IGI Holborn LDN James + Jane P010519
                                  ADLAM William 1820 3 IGI Warminster WLT Richard + Jane ANNETT 2034563
                                  ADLAM Ann 1820 N/C Westbury SOM Samuel + Hannah HAYWARD RG4_2741


                                  Whilst there are only 7 entries here there is a total of 157 on the spreadsheet.
                                  I do this for every name and variation in my tree that I find and from whatever source.
                                  I do similar spreadsheets for marriages and burials
                                  It has paid of handsomely.
                                  Under REF (Reference) PR is parish Record N/C is non-conformist etc.
                                  I record them exactly as found ie ADLEM;ADALEM;ADLUM etc and place a comment where and how any mispelling arises.
                                  joboy

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Originally posted by kylejustin View Post
                                    hmm well i just put the most common name in. on ancestry you can put in notes etc, so if the name varies i would write down the version per record, so i can find it again when i need it under that variant. but what do you do when different surnames are given? i have an ancestor at first marriage 1859, who said her name was mack. on second marriage 1874, her father's surname was mcaulliffe. she had married after all the kids were born, and their births record mack. after 1874, on her death and her kids deaths, the surname is mcaulliffe. mothers name and maiden name was the same at both marriages. and fathers occupation and christian name were the same too. so which is her surname? im stumped!! good luck with what you decide!!
                                    In this instance Kyle my guess would be that the surname is Mcauliffe but she didn't learn to spell it until older so opted to just say Mack!;)
                                    Vivienne passed away July 2013

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      I would think carefully before changing any spelling found in historical documents as by doing so one may in effect be changing family history.



                                      Spelling in England has developed over time depending on various influences, for example the monks adapted their “Roman” spelling of words to accommodate the Anglo-Saxon vowels and sounds.
                                      This Latin spelling was changed after the Norman Conquest when the French scribes used their spellings as the norm.
                                      The late 14th and 15th centuries brought further changes (silent vowels etc.) with the development of printing and so until the publication of Samuel Johnson's Dictionary of the English Language in 1755.


                                      The spelling of a name could be a reflection of the individual's or the family's politics and historic roots. They could be clinging to their Anglo-Saxon, or Norman history. They could be making a statement in the face of sweeping changes that confront them, or they could simply accept a spelling imposed on the by the cleric or enumerator who records the name.
                                      Very often we, hundreds of years later do not know the reason for the change of spelling therefore we should think very carefully before changing it and adopting a standard spelling for our records.


                                      Perhaps it is such standardisations and similar that change a family history to a genealogical study.
                                      Cheers
                                      Guy
                                      Guy passed away October 2022

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        In the case of census enumerators I guess it fair to say that the name we see in the census was never seen by the family. Therefore we can't say (in the case of the census) that they 'accepted' it. They just never saw it and were not able to say whether they considered it a mistake; a good idea; or didn't care!

                                        Anne

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X