Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Surname variants in early PR

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Montmorency

Montmorency Report 27 May 2005 10:30

genealogists look at things back to front. But our ancestors often didn't really know what their name was, how could they, and if there was a choice of spellings, there was no way of saying which was 'correct'. There were no better-quality earlier records to refer back to, and people had no idea what their descendants would eventually settle on. So you can't assume that the modern form is the correct or original form. You just have to expect more variation as you go further back In fact different descendants could settle on different variants. Somewhere out there you might have Nth cousins who're spelling 'your' name differently from the way you spell it, and they think their way is right too On Sheila's point, interchanging th and d was a very common feature of the southern West Riding accent for centuries -- odd, because there's no trace of it now. But Bradforth/Bradford didn't make its mind up how to spell itself until the 1800s and many other placenames and surnames were affected the same way. Changes went both ways -- Medley->Methley, Leathley->Leadley, and there's no way of saying which form was original, they were just interchangeable. Hard to imagine our West Riding ancestors talking like Jamaicans, but it seems they did

Margaret

Margaret Report 27 May 2005 08:45

Same problem with sussex Ruff today but parish records down as Ruffe Rolf and Rofe

Unknown

Unknown Report 27 May 2005 07:37

It can be a nightmare cant it. Some of my Irish lot had the names put down as it sounded - so I ended up trying to say it in a strong accent and BINGO - it worked. When you see what they are listed at the penny drops and I find myself thinking - ah - got it now. My fave HAS to be Agnes MADDER - it was actually Maither but had several variants including Matter .Mutter, Mather and the like.

Ellen

Ellen Report 27 May 2005 07:25

I quite agree having found Callear as culeer, cleer, colyeer etc.

Graeme

Graeme Report 27 May 2005 03:58

Just thought I'd share this with you: In Sussex, in the 1700s, my Osborne family seemed not to exist, not even as Osburne or Osbourne, with or without the 'e'. More by luck than good management I found them referred to as Orsband, Husban, Husband. These variations all arose, it appears, from the Sussex/Kent accent as interpreted by church officials. It really pays to think laterally at times.