To all the intrepid researchers at Nuestros Ranchos:
In searching through microfilm records, as I copy down the entries I find on
my ancestors and "might be related" persons, I strive to make these records
as accurate as possible. However, as has been discussed in this forum in
the past, spelling of names, illegible penmanship, phonetic spelling, etc.
can make accuracy sometimes a hit and miss guessing game. Which could
result in inaccurate documentation. It is so tempting to just figure, based
on other entries, that one person in one entry is the same as another person
in another entry. For example, sometimes they spell a surname "Vanda,"
sometimes "Banda." Should I record it the way they spell it in each of the
entries, or should I "correct" them by standardizing the name myself, by
documenting what I think they meant everytime?
I realize I could get myself into a sticky situation. One reason is, that
"Vanda" could be a name different from "Banda" and the persons in each
entry, therefore, different people, no matter how similar everyone else in
these entries appear. My mistake would be to assume Jose Vanda married to
Maria Sanchez and Jose Banda married to Maria Sanches are the same people.
Some people, even today, spell their surnames ending in "s" or "z", as in
Gonzalez and Chavez. In one entry a Gregorio Peres, married to a Maria
Chavez, then becomes Gregorio Perez and Maria Chaves in another entry!
Changing it in my documentation, to all end in "z" or "s", could mean
recording it incorrectly for how they might have spelled their own names!
As you can see, and I'm sure many of you have discovered, this is one of the
challenges of reading handwritten records.
Some names are so illegible, I write down the name the best I can and place
a question mark after it. For example, "Peisnlar?" In other entries, all
the names are the same as in this one, but the person's last name is very
clearly "Pinuelas." Should I change "Peisnlar" to "Pinuelas," because I
think that's probably what was written, however illegible? Or, should I not
take any chances by guessing what it probably says in the record? I look
over how the recordkeeper wrote their letters, to aid in my reading their
penmanship, but sometimes there is just one name that stumps me and I put a
question mark after it, to let myself know that I gave up.
What do you do to make your records as accurate as possible? How do you
pass this information on to others, even download databases of your records
onto forums, make your records available to family, etc., when there are
these questionable areas? I know how frustrating it is to try and find an
ancestor in a database, such as Ancestry.com, only to discover after long
searching hours and days, and weeks, and years, that the name was completely
massacred and nowhere resembles the true name of that person. When I look
for "Frias," I also look for "Freas," and "Frillas," etc. But, what if it
is entered as "Frian," or "Fias," or something like that? Will I ever find
it?
I guess we can only do what is humanly possible. No one is perfect and we
can not expect that. We can only be thankful and quite grateful that we
have information being shared in the first place and at such a huge volume,
all around the world. Which brings me to the reason for my dismay. I have
decided to download all my records onto rootsweb and find many of my
carefully kept records are dotted with question marks and notes in
parenthesis. I want to share this information, but I want to provide it as
accurately as I can.
Thank-you, all, for your help and words of wisdom!
Questions and thoughts from Santa Maria, California
>From Corrine Ardoin (I spell my first name inaccurately, because that was
how I was taught to spell it as a child, but I have since found from baptism
and birth records, my given name is "Corinne," which my father always
pointed out to me. But I never listened to him! So, to this day, I spell
even my own name incorrectly!)
Hi Corrine/Corinne
Good question with as many answers as there are people keeping records. As for myself I had to standardize a surname but always include the original resource record so others can see there was a different spelling. Like you I use Rootsweb.com because you can get a pedrigree chart there with easy access and an index so others can check for other spellings. I know there must be errors since I have many surnames like Luera/Loera, Morillo/Murillo, Viramontes/Miramontes, Zuniga/Sungia, Zepeda/Sepeda, and as for S and Z being interchangeable I went with whatever that family seemed to be using in the later 1800's since things were very different in the 1500, 1600 and 1700's since few could read and write and scribes did what they thought was best. Also, the matter of people using surnames of their grandparents or mothers making them even harder to find.
We can never satisfy everyone else so we need to do what works best for us to make the records readable
- Log in to post comments
For what it is worth: I use 20th century standard Spanish spelling in the part of the data base which generates an alpha list. I use the documents' actual spelling in the part of my records which contains the details. This second section also contains my own code, as you have, of symbols to show uncertainty, lack of verification, etc.
David in Albany, CA
-----Original Message-----
>From: Corrine Ardoin
>Sent: Feb 1, 2008 1:22 PM
>To: general@nuestrosranchos.org
>Subject: [Nuestros Ranchos] Accurate Documentation
>
>To all the intrepid researchers at Nuestros Ranchos:
>
>In searching through microfilm records, as I copy down the entries I find on
>my ancestors and "might be related" persons, I strive to make these records
>as accurate as possible... Should I record it the way they spell it in each of the
>entries, or should I "correct" them by standardizing the name myself, by
>documenting what I think they meant everytime?
>
David P. Delgado
- Log in to post comments
Corinne,
(think I got that right! :-) )
I have struggled with this myself and don't really know a good answer, so I just keep doing what I'm doing...just hoping it's the right thing.
After extracting hundreds of names from the parish records of Aguas., I can say two things. First, even when names are spelled identically and consistently, I've barked up the wrong tree..and second, I'm just hoping to make it a little easier for whoever comes after me. :-)
I will say that I have kept true to the records and copied the record exactly - including the misspellings, omissions, additions, etc. that are in the actual record. When I have enough energy I make notes in margins, etc. to show what I believe was intended. I think it's very important to copy these 'mistakes' because it leaves a sort of paper trail, if you will, of how some branches of a surname came about. If we 'fix' everything to the most commonly acceptable spelling today, we can lose sight of what branch we come from. Also
- Log in to post comments
Many of you probably know this, but it is worth repeating. Ancestry.com has
tackled this problem by allowing you to record "alternate" information for
things such as name, dates of birth, death, and locations. In searches,
alternate names appear along with the "preferred" name, so that variants and
misspellings are not lost to future genealogists. It also allows you to
spell the ancestor's name differently from that of the parent or child, if
there has truly been such a name change, without breaking the continuity of
the family tree. On both sides of my family, variants occur regularly:
Romo/Romo de Vivar/Romo de Bivar, and Wolfe/Wolf. If I think the spelling
is an error, I try to use the name as spelled most often in records of the
historical period, and I enter the variant as an "alternate."
I have not used any other genealogy software, but I imagine ancestry.com is
not the only one that has figured this out.
Karr Wolfe Romo (de Vivar)
-----Original Message-----
From: general
- Log in to post comments
Karr:
Thank-you for telling me about that. I added a category for "Notes," but I hesitated adding one for variations of spellings for names, because I don't know how the information shows up, from the database to the search engine. I don't know how all that works, but your comments certainly help in showing me that this issue can be accomodated.
Corrine
- Log in to post comments
Every single document I've ever seen of my Morillo ancestors has been
spelled Morillo, isn't that something? Marge:)
On Feb 1, 2008, at 5:12 PM, Erlinda Castanon-Long wrote:
> Hi Corrine/Corinne
> Good question with as many answers as there are people keeping
> records. As for myself I had to standardize a surname but always
> include the original resource record so others can see there was a
> different spelling. Like you I use Rootsweb.com because you can get a
> pedrigree chart there with easy access and an index so others can
> check for other spellings. I know there must be errors since I have
> many surnames like Luera/Loera, Morillo/Murillo,
> Viramontes/Miramontes, Zuniga/Sungia, Zepeda/Sepeda, and as for S and
> Z being interchangeable I went with whatever that family seemed to be
> using in the later 1800's since things were very different in the
> 1500, 1600 and 1700's since few could read and write and scribes did
> what they thought was best. Also
- Log in to post comments
Linda:
I like that, "what works best for us to make the records readable, traceable, and easy to share." That is a good standard to follow. Thank-you!
Corrine in Santa Maria, California
- Log in to post comments

Accurate Documentation