Maiden name/another situation
kdb...@aol.com
> Since all women are supposed be listed by maiden name* in any given
> database, why would this yield a problem?
>
> I am quite aware that genealogy books will print maiden names in
> parentheses to separate and distinguish them from married names, but
> that's not quite the same thing as they LACKED the database format
> that is used today.
>
> * - Actually, all people should be listed under their birth name as
> their main entry.? All other names are merely alternates (or
> footnotes).
>
> "D. Stussy"
HI:
I have been sort of following this discussion and decided to write a
response when I read this contribution.
Not all women had maiden names.
My ancestors were free African Americans (who had surnames) and
others were slaves. I am getting to the point where I will be
discovering slave ancestors who had no (recorded) surname. I have
read that many slaves did choose surnames but hid them from the
slave owner.
Over the years of my research I have discovered that it's especially
difficult to trace female slave ancestors, much less find their
surnames. Fortunately I've been able to find the most elusive
surname for my 2nd great grandmother, because she died in 1923 (born
in the 1830s in NC) in a state where there was a death certificate
issued (OH).
Two more comments: I use "unknown" as in "unknown Jones father" or
"unknown Smith husband" in my Family Tree Maker software. Just
easier that way, and I think abbreviations would be confusing.
Second: I don't know of any genealogy software that accommodates
slave ancestry. I've had to improvise to record slave owners and
slaves using Excel or the notes part of Family Tree Maker.
Kberry
JYoun...@aol.com
> Two more comments: I use "unknown" as in "unknown Jones father" or
> "unknown Smith husband" in my Family Tree Maker software. Just
> easier that way, and I think abbreviations would be confusing.
> Second: I don't know of any genealogy software that accommodates
> slave ancestry. I've had to improvise to record slave owners and
> slaves using Excel or the notes part of Family Tree Maker.
>
> Kberry
Kenyatta-
While I haven't used Family TreeMaker in many years unless it has
changed it can accomodate any culture where surnames were not used.
There is a difference between having a surname and not knowing what
that surname IS and not having a surname AT ALL. To designate no
surname in FTM (unless it has changed over the years the entry is
shown given name// -- the slashes mark the beginning and ending of
the blank field.
Joan
PS: And, once again, with regard to the use of "unknown" or any
variation thereof--if you are only making the notatation for
yourself -- fine; but if others are to use or view it, using [--?--]
(the bracketed m dashes with question mark in the middle) is the
best solution. This notation can be used for the surname OR given
name field and always represents an unknown (but existing) name
whichever field it is used for.