How to PROPERLY Record Ancestor Names In Your Family Tree | Genealogy

Do you have an ancestor with more than one name? Following these recommendations on how to properly record your ancestor's names in your genealogy research.
🤔 Why Is It So Hard to Find My Ancestor's Hometown? 👉🏼 • Why Is It So Hard to F...
----------------
CONTINUE LEARNING
📺 What to Do When Your Ancestor Changed Their Name? • What to Do When Your A...
📺 7 Common Genealogy Mistakes • 7 Common Genealogy Mis...
↪️ Grab your FREE genealogy research guides and templates at www.familyhistoryfanatics.com...
⚡ Want to climb your family tree faster? Join our membership program.
/ @familyhistoryfanatics
📗 Like to read? Check out these books
www.familyhistoryfanatics.com...
----------------
CHAPTERS
00:00 Introduction
00:34 How to Manage Multiple Names for a Single Person
01:39 Which Name Should I Use in a Profile?
04:18 You Can Change the Name as You Research?
05:21 What to do with Conflicting Names
06:23 What to do with Name Changes
07:30 What to do with Alternative Names
----------------
✅ Let's connect:
✔️ Subscribe for more genealogy tips: tinyurl.com/FHFanaticsKZbin.
✔️ Website: www.familyhistoryfanatics.com
✔️ Share Video Ideas: www.familyhistoryfanatics.com...
#FamilyHistoryFanatics #genealogy #familytree

[@puncheex2]

I have a number of german ancestors, and it's important to know how names were constructed in Germany during the middle ages. This is only one example of how customs affect names; every country has its own quirks. In middle age Germany there were originally two names, a "spiritual" name and a familiar name; later on a surname was added. The spiritual name was often the name of a saint that the person could conceptuaally look to for guidance. The second name was the name he used with family, in business, in the public. For some reason, out of the myriad of saint possible, only a few of each gender accounted for the vast majority of German names: for males, John (Johannes) and Hans (Hanß) captured the lion's share of the market; for women, Mary (Maria) and Catherine (Catherina) were very common. This is why there are sometimes 4 or more boys all named Johnannes, and lots of Annas.; I have a family in which the Johns were tagged by things like "the deer hunter" or "the Indian agent". For women, there was sometimes another name which we would associate with our English married names; it was usually the husbands common or surname with the postfix -in, as in Maria Magdalena Schifferin Fuchs. They did not take their husband's surname as a rule until reaching America, unless it was an aristocratic (hochadel) name. When these people came to America, the leader of the household would usually suggest a change to the surname (Fuchs->Fox, Schifferman->Shipman, and so on). Depending on the family's conservatism, the given names could continue for several generations before the first name was dropped and the second anglicized. There is no unform "translation" involved; some were straightforward, like Johan->John (Johan was a non-spritual form of Johannes, usually), Pieter->Peter, Heinrich->Henry, but others were rather arbitrary. George has a lot of cognates in German. And don't even mention the Dutch.

[@FamilyHistoryFanatics]

Thanks for your contribution. Devon, having German ancestors, really learned a lot. So thanks.

[@puncheex2]

You're welcome.

[@suellenw561]

I found this quite informative so much so that I'm going to include it in my research. My mother's ancestors were from Germany and immigrated to US in 1830s. I have lots of cousins named John or George to the point of a situation on a trip home (750 mi away) when one George died, & we went to the viewing. We stopped to talk to another cousin who said his name was "George." I laughed & said "you will have to be more specific." He was son of the deceased. My research includes 9 with first name George & 12 John of the primary surname but over 100 in all surnames. I found only one Henry w/ surname but 25 in all. There's no Peter with surname altho one George went by Pete. Thanks for the info.

[@user-qn7ne2ur9x]

My 4th great-grandpops, George King, who was part Choctaw and French from both parents, his father William changed the surname from Roi to King. In 1820 Census in Louisiana, he was listed as George King, as well as in the 1830 NYC census. However, he abandoned his family because the mother of his son (3rd great-grandpops) was a runaway Quadroon slave who he took to NY, and got tipped off that he was a wanted man. So he joined his parents in Indian Territory, and was Choctaw By Blood, and Called George William King. Then he moved to St. Louis and he was known by George J. King. "J" probaby John after his maternal grandfather. He had a second son by the name of William. George, William, And Thomas (3rd great-grandpops) all worked on the same steamboat.

[@suellenw561]

I agree with Andy on using the name someone died with. I have found lots of relatives (mostly male) who have switched their first & middle names. One apparently even changed the spelling. His tombstone says "Laten G" but his father (my grandfather) has "Leighton" in his Will. Early records show him as "George L." It does get confusing.

[@FamilyHistoryFanatics]

Thanks for weighing in. To make Devon feel better that you sided with me, please go watch more of her videos on this channel. Thanks!

[@beepbopboop3221]

LoL. I go by birth name, too. People that I heard stories about I put their known name in quotes with the birth name. Like Great Aunt "Dolly" has 2 weird names and does use either one. Adoption, I'd go with the adopted name. I wish family search had more relationships to cover social adoption. A step parent raised wife #1 child and in the obituary make no distinction. It wasn't a legal step parent adoption, but the mother's obituary and the adopted child's final resting place is near her (step) grandparents makes it clear to me that she wasn't viewed any differently than other family members tgat were born into the family.

[@abbie8551]

3 out of my 4 grandparents where Catholic, back when they where all being baptised the Church latinised names on the baptism and marriage registers. They also latinise it differently depending if their the parent or child. Every name I come across I put it in a spreadsheet so I can quickly search for what that name could be and see if other records match up. I once found a baptism for my second great aunt (the parents names and address matched up to the family) but I couldn't find a Theresa born at that time around that area, I ended up finding out Theresa stood for Julia. I also keep a document of every family name I have discovered in my tree and any variations I found being used. My McDonough list is huge where my Smith list only has Smith on so far.

[@FamilyHistoryFanatics]

Andy loves spreadsheets! What a great way to use them for name research.

[@ledwardpettit2628]

If there was a legal name change, especially, if you have court documents proving it, I woul use the "new" name but include the "former" name as an alternate.

[@FamilyHistoryFanatics]

That's definitely a consideration. I think it depends on where that person falls on the family tree. For a more recent individual or a living person, I think that makes sense. However, the problem I foresee is that if people use personal preference rather than a consistent standard, than the family tree becomes extremely confusing. Was that the name the person really had at birth? The children have different last names from the same couple, how can that be so? These are just some of the questions that arise when we don't practice consistent standards. So, it's something for the genealogy community to keep discussing.

[@JayneSmith1960-UK]

When I began my researching over 45 years ago it was the convention that the name to use was whatever was shown on the birth certificate or baptismal entry (if the event happened before 1837). So I’ve been ingrained with that method of recording names. Another convention was that all surnames were to be capitalised but I’m seeing less of that now which is a shame.

[@FamilyHistoryFanatics]

I had the same training. In my genealogy software program, I capitalize the surnames. For online trees, I don't think it matters as much and/or the computer programs need them to be formatted differently to generate better hints. I'm only guessing. As for the which name to use... My grandmother has two birth certificates. The first was the name she was born under and the second for her adopted name. She was the second name since she was a few weeks old, so should she appear as the name at birth? Andy's great+ grandfather changed his name and all of his descendents know him under the last name Lee and not Garnett. On one hand, I would lean towards the name at birth, but then again, a good case could be made for the name change with a note. While I understand using the adult name, I still want to use the name at birth. It's hard to know what to use. I do stick with only the maiden names in the surname fields in cultures that don't give women two names at birth. For my sister-in-law, her mother's last name is Hernandez y Espinosa because their culture uses both names at birth. But her children don't have the two name designation as she married my Anglo brother..

[@kevincall4641]

Devon, I think you should put your mothers legal name. Is Penny Brown your mothers legal name? Look for birth records, marriage records, and death records. It will maybe help you tell what the person's legal name is. Just trying to help.

[@FamilyHistoryFanatics]

Thanks for trying to help. Her name is documented as it should be, maiden name.

[@mdaly724]

Good topic. I was researching a man for a friend. The man went by Steve most of his life and that's the name his descendants knew. He was born in the 1890s Austrian-Hungarian Empire so it was clear he wasn't always known as Steve. What should I look for on a passenger list? Steven? Stephen? Stefan? Were any of these on that document? Not even close. Their family story said he arrived in 1912 and they even 'knew' the ship's name. When I found him it was because they also remembered he arrived with his cousin Janos. Janos kept his name the same after he arrived so I had an anchor for my search: Janos. They did arrive in 1912 and the ship name was close. When I found Janos I found his traveling partner Istvan, which is a Hungarian equivalent to Steven. I keep his 'name' field as Steve because that's the name he used most of his life and it's the name on his gravestone. I added Istvan as an 'alternate name' since it can be an important way to find him in the old country. I also record alternate spellings - not obvious misspellings or transcription errors - as alternate names. Just as his first name changed his surname changed too. Well, they used different letters to make it easier for other people in the U.S. to pronounce the name. So I include those variations just in case one of those combinations appeared in some document. I usually use the most frequently used name for the person as their 'name'. Anything else is an 'alternate name' if it's found on documents or an 'aka' (also known as) for nicknames. I have an uncle everyone called "Bud" but he never used it on a formal document; that's an AKA. By recording these variations, I'm reminding myself that's a valid search too. My paternal surname, as an example, went through several spelling variations in documents through 3 countries before it settled down. All are valid based on the official clerks recording the information. It's how that culture decided his name was spelled.

[@FamilyHistoryFanatics]

Wow. Thanks so much for all of this information. It's really a judgment call which names we use but as long as we keep track of the less than obvious name variations, then we're helping every future researcher (and all descendants) know our ancestors better. Way to go with all of your work. I have immigration paper envy. My ancestor traveled in the 1850s and the passenger lists are not as complete or easy to decipher as the later records, like yours in 1912. I'm so happy for you. I just I had better luck with my ancestor. Especially if his name had any variations.