Suggested approach to entering English alias names

+19 votes
403 views

Alias names were used by some families in England (and sometimes other countries) in the period from about 1400 to about 1650. They often passed down through families for several generations. More information about them can be found in this article on FamilySearch. Over the years, there have been a number of queries about how these names should be entered in the various Wikitree name fields, without any firm conclusions. After reviewing existing Wikitree guidance, including the guidance provided by the Quebecois project for dit names (which are very similar to alias names in England), an approach has been suggested below. Feedback and suggestions for improvement are welcome. If agreed, it is suggested that this becomes guidance that is added to the English Profile Standards.

In this guidance, the full form of an alias name refers to the two individual surnames, separated by the word "alias". For example, if a person is recorded as "John Chapman alias Barker", then the first surname is "Chapman", the second surname is "Barker" and the full form is "Chapman alias Barker".

The Last Name at Birth (LNAB) for a child whose father uses the full form of an alias name should be the first surname of the father on the baptism (or other record closest in time to the child's birth). Thus if the father is recorded as "John Chapman alias Barker", then only "Chapman" should be entered in the LNAB field of the child. The Current Last Name (CLN) field should record the full form of the alias (ie Chapman alias Barker), if the child actually used this full form at the time of their death. Otherwise, this should be entered into the Other Last Name (OLN) field. The second surname (ie Barker) should also be entered as a separate name in the OLN field, for search purposes, and because some records may only show the second surname by itself.

If only a single surname appears on the baptism (ie "Barker" or "Chapman"), then that single surname is what is recorded in the LNAB field. The other surname and/or the full form of the alias name (ie Chapman alias Barker) should be added to the CLN or OLN fields as appropriate, if sources show that the person used these.

When entering the full form of the alias name, the word "alias" should always be written in full, even if abbreviated in the source (eg "Chapman alias Barker", NOT "Chapman als Barker").

Example 1: Person uses Chapman alias Barker throughout their life

Last Name at Birth: Chapman

Current Last Name: Chapman alias Barker

Other Last Name(s): Barker

Example 2: Person's father used Chapman alias Barker at their child's birth, but person is otherwise recorded as Barker

Last Name at Birth: Chapman

Current Last Name: Barker

Other Last Name(s): Chapman alias Barker

Example 3: Person's father used Chapman alias Barker at their child's birth, but person is recorded as Chapman at their death

Last Name at Birth: Chapman

Current Last Name: Chapman

Other Last Name(s): Chapman alias Barker, Barker

in Policy and Style by Nic Donnelly G2G6 Mach 8 (81.1k points)

5 Answers

+8 votes

The profile of one of my ancestors, Thomas Cooke alias Butcher would benefit from this. Cooke-720 I'm sure this would help the clarity of many profiles. As you can see Butcher isn't in the fields on the profile, even though it's quite thoroughly covered in the first pages of his published genealogy. 

I mention this because without the addition aliases might be missed and important details (and traditions) would not be utilized. 

by Dina Grozev G2G6 Pilot (200k points)
Thanks Dina, I agree, it is important that the use of these aliases is appropriately recorded.
+9 votes

Thank you.

I've asked a couple of times on G2G as did others  with no answers.

I think this profile will need aka Aden alias Barbet moved to CLN but that's easy to do.  https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Aden-105  

I'll have a go tomorow in entering my own Fitzhugh alias Caporne line and report back.

by Helen Ford G2G6 Pilot (475k points)
Thanks Helen, I saw some of those questions and the lack of a clear response and thought it would be good to try and come to a consensus on this!
+7 votes
Thank you, Nic!

As always you've done your homework. That was really helpful!
by Marcia Benjamin G2G6 Mach 4 (45.8k points)

Thanks Marcia smiley

+7 votes
Thankyou Nic I am in complete agreement but have a question.  How do we deal with then derivations of a name that are not necessarily alias ie:  isnt it going to be a minefiled of inaccuracy as people enter grammatical error as alias., ie typical in my family Blomfield instead of Bloomfield sometimes grammatical sometimes alias, We need more definitive comment about grammatical error in translation or otherwise also.
by Shirley Blomfield G2G6 Mach 2 (22.2k points)
Good point Shirley. As I've discovered, there are many versions of this name: Blomefield, Blomefyld, Bloomfield, Blomfield just to name a few, and they seem to be relatively consistent down a particular family line.
Hi Shirley, if the person is referred to in contemporary records as "Bloomfield alias Blomfield" (for example), then this proposed guidance could apply. Otherwise, the variants used by/for the person may be recorded in the "Other Last Name(s)" field.
+2 votes
Do you have any suggestions on how to handle the situation where the alias appears to change with the generations?

I have a profile for Charles Berriman who was also alias Brandon, https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Berriman-383.  In the research notes (because I do not have sufficient data for profiles yet) I comment on his father and the burial of a possible son where in both cases the name is shown as 'Brandon alias Berriman'.
by Peter Mason G2G6 (6.0k points)
Hi Peter, I've come across this situation as well. I think a degree of judgement is required. If research indicates that a particular order of the two surnames in the full alias is far more common, then there might be a case for treating the less common ordering as a clerical error (perhaps recording it in the Other Last Name(s) field). But if the order of the surnames is closer to 50/50 in the relevant records, then I think the best thing to do is use what is in the record closest in time to the person's birth. Even though this may mean that siblings have a different Last Name at Birth. Whatever is decided, the reasoning can be documented in the Research Notes.

Related questions

+4 votes
1 answer
+13 votes
2 answers
+8 votes
1 answer
+27 votes
7 answers
+1 vote
1 answer
99 views asked Jan 31, 2021 in Policy and Style by Judith Chidlow G2G6 Mach 5 (57.2k points)
+2 votes
2 answers
164 views asked Jul 14, 2020 in Policy and Style by Joop van Belzen G2G6 Pilot (148k points)
+9 votes
1 answer
+11 votes
3 answers
230 views asked Nov 1, 2017 in Policy and Style by Vic Watt G2G6 Pilot (359k points)
+6 votes
1 answer
188 views asked Oct 18, 2014 in Genealogy Help by Michael Hruska G2G6 Mach 5 (57.6k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...