In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Dennis P. Havlena) wrote: > > Here's the puzzling text: > > Zpusob zapisu prijmeni Havlena neni z genealogickeho hlediska > podstatny, do poloviny minuleho stoleti nebyl tvar prijmeni zavazny > a proto zcela bezne dochazelo k zapisum ruzynych forem jednoho > prijmeni, na priklad v zavislosti n jazyce, kterym byl zapis > proveden. Puvodni tvary zapisu prijmeni jsou v genealogickych > resersich zachovavany pouze jako doplnujici informace. > Hi Dennis, nice to see you on the web again. Not sure if anybody responded to this, but here you go: The spelling of the Havlena surname is not important from a genealogical point of view. Up until mid 1800's the form of a surname was not binding, so a particular surname was routinely spelled in various ways. This depended, for instance, on the language of the record. Original forms of surname spelling are retained only as complementary information in genealogical searches. Radek -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==----- http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum