Seeking confirmation before changing Last Name at Birth

Question

A great many of my recently adopted profiles were based on information from Nos Origines. Much as I appreciate how helpful that site has been to me, it has a fundamental difference from our site. They usually standardize family names (regardless of what documents say), and they favour family name at death over family name at birth. I have had to recreate many profiles that were based on Nos Origines because the LNAB in the profile does not agree with the baptismal record.

Before I change yet another, I would like someone else to confirm that the name in the record is "dyon" rather than Guyon or Dion or the other usual spellings. Merci!

Baptismal record from FamilySearch: https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3QS7-8999-37D4?i=578&wc=HCS3-W38%3A24018201%2C24018202%2C24018203&cc=1321742

Edit: Sorry, it's pretty clear that the name in the record is Dyon (with a lowercase d). But I've had to change LNAB so often lately that I think I just had to rant about using only Nos Origines to create a profile.

Comments

that's why I stay away from Nos origines for older profiles, they sometimes have good data on recent profiles, but even then, quality of sourcing is haphazard.

Answer 1

I understand your frustrations Véronique but many people could not spell their own names. Is it actually correct to use the spelling from the baptismal record when it was likely spelled somewhat arbitrarily by a missionary or priest? This could lead to siblings having different last names.

Comments

I didn't make the WikiTree rules. I just try to follow them. Yes, sometimes siblings have different spellings for their family names, and sometimes different names entirely (one the family name, another the "dit" name).

As well, although some spellings are definitely odd, there was no standarization yet, so the names aren't actually spelled wrong. And sometimes, one name ended up with more than one standarized spelling.

---

Fair enough

---

Liza, the problem with most ''standardised'' names is that names actually evolve over time.  Guyon / Dion is one case in point, phonetically they aren't that far apart, and depending on pronunciation of the people and the comprehension of the persons hearing them and writing things down, gets quite zany sometimes.  

I often cite the case of one member whose last name is Simpier.  Evolved from St-Pair or St-Pierre.  

My own family name started as Guyard when my ancestor arrived here, parish priests changed it to Liard in 18th/19th centuries, god only knows why.

---

The Guyon/Dion thing does puzzle me though. The pronunciations aren't really that close. No one would confuse "goûte" with "doute." And yet we have this back and forth between Guyon and Dion (with variant spellings, of course).

Guyard to Liard surprises me too. Maybe some people had a thing against the letter "G". :)

---

It all appears to depend on where the priests came from, if they are not familiar with the name Guyon but are familiar with the name Dion (both existed in France), then they basically misheard and dubbed in what they thought it was.  Might also be caused by regional accents.  This is not the only person to whom it happens.

The name Guyard was sometimes spelled Guilliard.  Same pronunciation.  Maybe the priests thought it stood for Guy Liard?  Although the first Guy in the family is actually my uncle, so long after the fact.

Answer 2

Knowing that the majority of ancestors in Quebec (Nouvelle-France) were illiterate and that the priests did not know how to write names, then why give more importance to the baptism record rather than all the other records (Marriage , Baptisms of children, Burial)?

Most of the time (but not always) the burial record is closer to reality than that of baptism and as Danielle Liard pointed out, names evolve from one generation to the next. To this end, Nos Origines is closer to reality than Wikitree on this point.

About the first name, the baptism record in Quebec is not so important before 1900s because of the too large number of miscarriages, stillborn children or in the first days of life, there was an emergency (according to their faith) to have the child baptized on same day and was often given whatever name was changed later when the child survived.

Comments

Also, I have seen French-Canadian families, including in the U.S. north-east, where EVERY son's name started with Joseph in the baptismal records and every daughter started with Mary or Marie.  Those children were always called by their second name by the family and within subsequent records, and the baptismal first name became their second name or sometimes disappeared.

---

Having Joseph and Marie before the first name is a usual and normal thing in the French Catholic community. You will sometimes also find Jean Baptiste there like my godfather has. As you say, if this first name no longer appears in subsequent acts, it should not be used in the ancestor's first name because it is just a first name of association with the Holy Family.

---

Regarding the first name at birth, you will sometimes find in Quebec (Nouvelle-France) the addition of the first name of the godfather for guys or the godmother for girls but which will never appear again afterwards, this is This is the case in my father's family and I think it is also the case for me.

In addition to this there is the first name that the godparents give to the child which can be added after or before the child's first name. Usually this second name no longer appears afterwards but not always. This is also the case in my family.

---

As I wrote in another comment, Daniel, I don't make the WikiTree rules, but as an Honor Code Signatory, I agree to follow them. So if someone's name is Claude Dyon on his baptismal record, then Dyon is his Last Name at Birth. All names and variant spellings get included in the profile somewhere, and the name at the time of death is in Current Last Name.

Priests might have been only somewhat literate, but most non-clergy were not literate at all, so they didn't spell their names, they just pronounced them. And often at a baptism, it was the godparents who supplied the names of the parents, who usually weren't present.

---

You make a good point Véronique; that is often the godfather who transmits the names to the priest. Yet another reason to have name variations.

About the Wikitree's honor code signature, fortunately the Quebecois project (https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Project:Quebecois)  has provided some exceptions for Quebec (NouvelleFrance) with several rules 'applying to first and last names.

However, I think that one more exception should be made, namely that when the baptismal name is no longer used subsequently and it does not appear either among one's brothers and sisters or among one's children, it It is obvious that this is a spelling error in the baptism record and should not be used for LNAB.

---

Sorry Daniel, but creating ''exceptions'' due to mis-spellings leads down a very long path to inaccuracy.  The name written is what the name is, period.  Whether it gets used thereafter or not is irrelevant.  That's what the record says.  We have a current last name box and other last name box to deal with such.

Nos Origines is not at all ''closer to reality'' as it isn't even all the same.  And using ''standardized'' names, such as is done by PRDH or Tanguay etc, leads to errors.  Whose standards should be applied?  Tanguay and PRDH don't use the same spelling on everything.  So whose ''Standard'' is more accurate?  And working back in time, you can be led down the wrong trail by such.  PRDH converts the name Marest to Desmarais for example.  While statistically in this province the name has become Desmarais in large majority, tracing back to France records will not find Desmarais.  People are not statistics.

As to the giving of the name Joseph to all boys, that is actually not found in New France days, that practice starts around late 19th - early 20th centuries.  And Jean Baptiste isn't used this way at all (your family seems to be prone to it, from what you say).  Ditto for Marie, although it is extremely popular always.  Around the same time, the godparent's name gets added also (same sex godparent).  So you get a result like Marie Denise Danielle, with Danielle being the intended name for the child.  But again, this is fairly recent practice.

And before you compare to Acadian project, the cases are totally not the same.  Acadians project went with ''standardized'' names due to an enormous lack of records.  They were all destroyed, or almost all.  So there's simply no way to tell what the names were at birth.

Answer 3

I work on the assumption that hand-written cursive name spellings may not be what the family used AT ALL.  These records, whether church or state, were written by priests, clerks and registrars based on what they heard.  Phonetic spellings were rampant, and often didn't match a gravestone or family document.  When someone is in search of their family members, they are looking for the family's spelling of their surname, not some miss-written document. In addition, Catholic Church documents may have Latinized versions of the first name(s), which also were not what the family called the child. Therefore, I use the family spelling of the name, not the baptismal record if it does not agree.

I also look for the family surname spellings as close to death or the 20th century as I can find.  My ancestors were mostly Irish and, although the family knew perfectly well how to spell the surnames, I have seen Killoran, Prendergast and McDonnell spelled at least 4 or 5 different ways each, particularly by non-family members in the 19th century.

I would not change LNAB to match baptismal records just for spelling.  Use what is in their death record or on the gravestone.  That is what their family knows.

Comments

There's a WikiTree help page on name fields. That's what I try to follow. When I signed up, I agreed to follow WikiTree rules, regardless of my personal preferences.

---

Joanna,

 Should we all do as you say, WikiTree would become a «secondary source» as there would be no way to clearly follow a profile through generations as the family name chain would be broken. Danielle explains it clearly and following the WT rules allows following that chain as the FNAB will leed to a baptismal record, often not so easy to find among others. The CLN: at burial. Other spellings if different: OLN.

The evolution of a family name is also a very interesting caracteristic for historical value, easily followed if one follows the WT rules. It even reveals how a name was pronounced, often leeding to specific regions of their living.I suspect that in this case, the FNAB was pronounced like «geeon»

A profile is somewhat a picture of the individual.

Answer 4

Véronique is right, there is a help page. https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Name_Fields#Last_Name_at_Birth and it says :

It is usually the formal name as it appears in official documents at the time of birth. However, it may not be exactly what appears in a birth record if:

• There was a spelling mistake or error in the document, or if the family name was more commonly spelled in a different way at the time of the birth (see the spelling conventions section above).

And in the spelling conventions sections :

• ... the spelling that appears in a birth record should be used for the Last Name at Birth unless there are other documents from at or near the time of birth that inform us about a more common or correct spelling.

Clearly all the others baptism records for a particular family are from that same period and could be a good indication that a spelling is an error.

I like the WT rule because it allows to see the evolution of the familly name and allows some discretion about the LNAB. It is relatively easy to find the birth record in Quebec but it does not mean we should always rely on one priest. I have seen baptism records in primary sources where the name in the margin, the name in the text and the signature were all different... and with indexing error. What is the LNAB then ? (I took the signature but reproduced the text verbatim in the Bio)

I still try to follow the rule from the Québecois Project (in particular the rule about the "Dit" names) because any rule is better than no rule.  (Certainly not because it is a better rule than standardized spelling). All rules have their limitations and exceptions. All can lead to error, especially when the users dont understand them and apply them blindly. (A good reading about that is the "Traité de généalogie" by René Jetté who himself admit standard spelling is not a universaly best rule but definitely the one to use in the particular Quebec situation).

So, all that being said : For me, most of the time the standard spelling is good enough and I would not change the LNAB of a profile only because it does not match the spelling in one baptism record. I would search a better reason because maybe the person who put it that way knew better.

Comments

So whose ''standards'' should be applied?  The name Beaudry for example is found as a ''standard'' given by PRDH, but in early days of the colony, it mostly gets written Baudry.  Tanguay used Baudry mainly.  We have more than one box to include name variations in, so people can find them.  My ancestor François Cottu signed his name that way, the records for his family vary a fait bit, the name becomes Coutu 2 generations after him.  Sometimes written Coetu.  Trying to find his parentage under the name Coutu in France leads nowhere, since it was not that but Cottu.  Which is an old French word.

---

Whose standard ? The current WT rules. What else !!

But WT has many rules. We also have a rule saying to avoid changing LNAB unless we know what we are doing.

I am saying that I would not change the LNAB of a profile based solely on the spelling by one priest on one record, be it the baptism record. Especially if that spelling seems odd or exotic. (I could be the one misreading it, or relying on some bad Ancestry indexing). I would rather put it in OLN, put it verbatim (with reference) in the bio, even add a Needs_LNAB category, and leave it until we know more about that specific family (siblings baptisms, name at marriage of the father ... ). I like to see to evolution of names but I rarely consider a spelling error in one record as an interesting historic fact worth noting. And when I do, I put it in the Research Notes.

I am also saying that the "use the baptism record spelling at all cost" rule, as it is suggested/understood by some of us in Project Québecois, is sometime in contradiction with the WT rule that suggest : "unless there are other documents from at or near the time of birth that inform us about a more common or correct spelling." It is difficult to obey two masters. This could even lead to a LNAB feud on some profile : one person following the Project rule the other the WT rule.

And there is the problem of duplicates. The more exotic the spelling, ths less likely it will be found. WT was design for US, English speaking people, so it's Search is not particularly good with French or other languages. 

Now, I understand your point about finding the parentage over frontier. But for me it is only a common beginner's mistake to rely on one spelling be it LNAB or standardized. Your example seems to make my point : Imagine if his baptism record has been Coetu. It would not have help you finding Cottu in France. The fact is : you cannot rely on only one spelling and the rules about LNAB have nothing to do with that. (CLN and OLN can help here too)

My conclusion about changing the LNAB: The spelling from one baptism record might be OK for a new profile but by itself it should not be enough to change a LNAB. 

---

the problem with the WT wording on spelling of LNAB you outline above is that it calls for value judgements, repeatedly.  So then people start going by what was used by another priest earlier or later, with no actual certainty that that was any more correct.  It can become a never ending tail-chasing exercise.

---

Yes, it could happen. But it would be rare if the rule is "dont change the LNAB for a simple spelling error". That way, if you ever get enough proof, and you think it is important, you can change it without being too afraid someone will change it back blindly. Specially if you explain it in the notes.

A rule more compatible with WT's, would limit mistakes by project outsiders but still allow to correct obvious errors (like "dit" names). This becomes more important if we extend the scope of the project to cover later periods.

---

the very concept of ''spelling error'' didn't exist back then, there was no such thing as a spell-checker.    So saying somebody didn't spell the name right is a hindsight judgement.  I've read enough documents from this era, both from religious acts and notarial acts, to know that things get written phonetically for the most part, unless it's a name that is quite frequent.  And even then, I have seen instances where the name is similar to another name that is already present in the colony, and the priest writes the name the way the other guy has his, not the way the guy in front of him has it.  Came across that problem recently, forget what the name was off the top of my head.  

---

Let me rephrase :

... "dont change the LNAB for a simple spelling difference" ...

---

but then, you are again thinking that one form is more ''right'' than another.

Take for example the modern name Beaudoin.  Records I have seen for it have the following variations:  Bodoin, Bodouin, Baudoin, Baudouin, Beaudouin.  They all sound exactly the same.  If you don't use the form that is on the baptism record, then somebody who comes along later who is not conversant with French may think it's a different person / name.  

As a note, the name I mentioned above that got written according to the other man's name was wrong, it was not the same name at all.  

There's one big beef I have with PRDH, they ''standardize'' to their own ideas, which are purely statistical.  So the name Macré, which has as variant Maqueray, they turn into McCrae.  Not at all the same name, the lady in question came from Picardie, not Scotland or Ireland.

---

Dont you also think that some are more "right" ? (Your own McCrae example.)

And because of that, I see no reason to have rules too different from the WT rules. Somebody who comes later should never change the LNAB without a very good justification. And I dont consider the spelling on one baptism record to be a good enough reason. Sometime they are real mistakes and make the profile hard to find.

PRDH is a scientific project (I think they let Drouin collect the money for them in exchange for some exclusivity). To understand PRDH (in WT terms) think of their standard names as WT categories (persons with names that sound like "McCrae", with lists of variants). The category never represent a particular name. This approach has been devised by the best experts in Genealogy and Information Technologies (informatique). Scientific research needs stricter rules : Computers dont like exceptions.

---

actually, PRDH database is now managed by Drouin Institute, and one or more of the Desjardins brothers formerly with UdeM is now working with IGD.  The actual university program that produced the books, I am unsure whether it didn't end some years ago.  Currently, UdM has its demographics programs listed under the numbers 1-070-... in its offers.  The computer version came after the book version (bigger than the original Drouin collection books, at 47 tomes, published between 1980 and 1991)

But it was not a genealogical study per se, it was a study of demographics.  Obviously, the two domains are linked, but they are not the same thing.

Answer 5

Veronique, I give you kudos for knowing the standard for LNAB (what was actually written) and sticking to it, despite all the other creative approaches described here.  Danielle told me a long time ago is that using the name the way it was first used (often a baptism) allows you to see the name progression over time.  Even if a priest grossly "mis-spells" it, that can have an influence on the eventual name.  I've seen the name Hébert eventually become  current day Abair because of this.  But without the rule, how would you know when or how it changed??  As has been mentioned, all the other spellings go in Other Last Name so they can be found in searches.  I only put the Current Last Name as the last documented name, hopefully from a burial record, but that is not always available.  Thank you for your commitment to the Honor Code.

Comments

Thank you, Cindy. As a member of the Québécois Project as well, I think it's even more important to follow what has been established here. I think for myself, but I also want to work *with* others. I want WikiTree to be the best it can be.

You and I are seventh cousins, sharing 6th great-grandparents, Charles Letartre and Marie Maheu. So far, I find that I'm related in some way to most people who work on Canada, Acadia, and Quebec profiles. :)