I agree with John, and I know that Peter feels the same. "Name" is indeed better than both "Christian name" and "Forename", and would be more appropriate for the FreeBMD project. But that won't stop me from carrying on transcribing! Barry Johnson Monmouthshire ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Parker" <homeowner@deardenholt.fsnet.co.uk> To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2003 4:14 PM Subject: Re: Unusual Christian name > I believe that the practice in past times was to use just "name" for what > would now be specified as "christian name", "forename", or "given name". > The Census books for the 1851 Census (which any serious family historian > will get to sooner or later) instruct the enumerator to enter the "Name and > Surname" of each individual. Looking at my own birth certificate (not quite > that old but less than 100 years after 1851!), I see that column 2 (headed > "Name, if any") has just my christian names (ie "John Stephen") and column 4 > (headed "Name and Surname of Father") has my Father's full name ("Geoffrey > Parker"). I note that the final column is headed "Baptismal Name if added > after Registration of Birth". > > The Penguin Dictionary of English Surnames, first published in 1967, has a > very readable introduction which treats "forename" as an established term. > > The Oxford English Dictionary has examples of "forename" used in its present > sense from both the 16th and the early 17th centuries. > > J S Parker >