What's in a name? Genealogy fun.

[archipirata]

I find it interesting how different the importance of correct name spelling used to be. These days, our names (exact, correctly spelled names) are so important now, ID must match birth certificate which must match passport which must match boarding pass which must match tax returns, etc. etc. But it certainly didn't used to be the case. I guess a good bit of it comes from low or non-existent literacy but even so the variety is amazing.

In some genealogy research on my family I have found an astonishing number of different spellings for last names and that's only going back 6 generations. It certainly makes the search more challenging.

Here are a few examples, and these are all from official government documents including census, birth and death records, immigration records, etc.

My grandmother's maiden name was Radosy as well as I can determine but I find it also spelled Radoczy, Radosh, Radish, Rados, Radasy and Radoz.

Another great grandmother's maiden name was Putinger but I have found it as Petinger, Pritinger, Puttinger, Bettinger and Buttinger.

My last name, Marx, is also found spelled Mark, Marks and Mars.

But some names seem to stay the same over time. My mother's maiden name was Bastide and on every single document going back 6 generations, it is spelled exactly the same.

[Paul F.]

Goldsborough. Goldesburgh, Goldsburch, Goldsburg, Godesburgh, Goldsburgh, Goldeburg... it goes on, and on... For 1000 years in Yorkshire, England, suns'a'bitches couldn't figure out how ta spell it!

[Ombligo]

Quite often the person was illiterate and could not even write their own name. So someone was told what the names was and wrote it down phonetically. So Marx became Marks, or whatever the listener heard. If the original person had a accent or couldn't be understood, it just became worse.

[Filliam H. Muffman]

archipirata wrote:
I find it interesting how different the importance of correct name spelling used to be. These days, our names (exact, correctly spelled names) are so important now, ID must match birth certificate which must match passport which must match boarding pass which must match tax returns, etc. etc. But it certainly didn't used to be the case. I guess a good bit of it comes from low or non-existent literacy but even so the variety is amazing.

In some genealogy research on my family I have found an astonishing number of different spellings for last names and that's only going back 6 generations. It certainly makes the search more challenging.

Here are a few examples, and these are all from official government documents including census, birth and death records, immigration records, etc.

My grandmother's maiden name was Radosy as well as I can determine but I find it also spelled Radoczy, Radosh, Radish, Rados, Radasy and Radoz.

Another great grandmother's maiden name was Putinger but I have found it as Petinger, Pritinger, Puttinger, Bettinger and Buttinger.

My last name, Marx, is also found spelled Mark, Marks and Mars.

But some names seem to stay the same over time. My mother's maiden name was Bastide and on every single document going back 6 generations, it is spelled exactly the same.

My dad started researching the family tree around 1987 (and recorded it on an IBM XT clone). Back then it was cheaper to travel to Salt Lake City to view the Mormon's archive than paying for long distance phone charges for a MODEM. It seems help if at least one generation was well off and fully literate at least 200 years ago. My current family name is spelled the same back to England from the time it was supposedly approximated from a French immigrant/invader. Same with various roots of the family tree, they were always easier to trace when the ancestor's name came from a family/city where people could read and write.

One GF supposedly knew her entire lineage back 12 generations, but it was on an island without a lot of immigration.

[pdq]

^ what Ombligo said.

To get meta for a moment, we tend to think of this -> CAR <- representing an actual automobile. But what (most) written language is, is only a representation of what the spoken word (which usually came first) should sound like. In that light, it's not too surprising that different spellings of family names were used, as long as the sound the reader produced was close to what the person (who may well have been illiterate) knew as their name.

At some point, we all started to go to school and the "right" spelling of words was frozen. Which is kind of a pity though (through, tough, plough...)

[davester]

Another bit of genealogy fun comes about when illegitimate children are concealed. DNA analysis has shown that there is quite a bit more illegitimacy in general than previously thought. This probably extends back to the days before DNA testing.

[archipirata]

davester wrote:
Another bit of genealogy fun comes about when illegitimate children are concealed. DNA analysis has shown that there is quite a bit more illegitimacy in general than previously thought. This probably extends back to the days before DNA testing.

There are lots of reasons families hide info. I found out about a great uncle only through a death certificate. He had committed suicide when he was 18 and apparently was never spoken of again as no other family members ever heard of him and he wasn't in any other family documents.

[archipirata]

Here is a fun observation from someone who was studying the expedition journals of Lewis and Clark: "Clark in particular raised spelling to the level of performance art, and never was he more creative than when writing of one of the Expedition’s greatest pests, known to us as the “mosquito.” Clark came up with no fewer than 19 variations, including mesquestors, misquestors, misquitor, misquitoes, misquitors, misqutors, misqutr, missquetors, mosquiters, mosquitors, mosquitos, muskeetor, musqueters, musquetors, musquiters, musquitoes, musquitors, musqueters, and musqutors."

[Fred_Also]

davester wrote:
Another bit of genealogy fun comes about when illegitimate children are concealed. DNA analysis has shown that there is quite a bit more illegitimacy in general than previously thought. This probably extends back to the days before DNA testing.

Condoms weren't invented until 1855. Birth control pills a long time after that. Not much way to be safe back in the olden days.

Fred

[jdc]

Fred_Also wrote:
Condoms weren't invented until 1855. Birth control pills a long time after that. Not much way to be safe back in the olden days.

Fred

Pull out. Its not hard.

Something many religious nuts who dont believe in birth control cant seem to figure out either, and end up with 19 kids.