I leave Jardim as the last name mainly because at the time I started researching the program I used did not allow for long or double surnames. But another thing I do is I always add significant variations of the name to my program personal notes. The way I find the name spelled out on the marriage record is the way it stays on my program, and any other records if it is switched I add it to my notes like I said, or you can add it to the "also known as" area. Luis Beal Paulo Gomes Jardim <darwin@spamcop.net> wrote: Cece, These are the rules I'm using, which I got from my own experience: 1. The "De" particle, as in "de Freitas" or "dos Santos" shall never be included in the surname; 2. Patronimics, as in "Maria Rodrigues daugther of Rui Fernandes, son of Fern�o Dias" shall not be used as a surname, unless you're certain that it really has become a surname; 3. Always update the name to it's current version: No "Affon�os" or "Hyeronimos" shall remain. And specific to the point of this thread, 4. Include every (useful) version of the name as an alias, if your software allows that. For example, Maria, daugther of Jo�o Correia de Aguiar and Ana de Freitas can be known as Maria Correia, Maria de Aguiar, Maria Correia de Aguiar or Maria de Freitas. 5. Try to make the distintion between nicknames and surnames. In the case of the "Gomes Jardim" Gomes is a true surname, while Jardim seems to be a nickname. When it is passed to the descendancy it was always "Gomes Jardim" or "Gomes", but never or very rarely "Jardim". The same with the "Gomes Perneta". On these cases I use "Gomes Jardim" as a surname. On the other cases, of double surnames, I do as in point 4 and *never* use them combined. With a database of more than 60.000 names, I can tell you that it is working quite well. :) Paulo On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 07:21:46 -0600, Cece Camara wrote: > I was just wondering about how most of you deal with these in your family > tree program. > I am talking of course about the Fernades de Aguiars, or the Affonso da > Silvas or the Martins de Nobregas > etc etc... > > Do you use just the final surname as the last name or the conjoined > names as > the last name? > I can't decide which is the easier way to find these people. The most > frustrating thing > is that you will find them with just one surname on one record and a > conjoined surname on the next! > Then, how do you decide which one to use? > > I seem to be going back and forth depending on the name...but it's > getting > really diffucult > as my database is nearing 3000 names...and they are getting harder to > find! > > I guess I'd really like to know if there is a geneaological standard for > how > to record these names. > > Cece > > > > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx > -- " Pallida mors aequo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas regumque turres." -- Horacio ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page

I once used to include the archaic versions (Affonços, Hyeronimos, Yoams) of the names on the AKA field too, but with the time that proved to be quite contraproducive and useless, as it would increase greately the pool of names everytime I do a "brute force" search on the name list. Now I don't care much about the spelling of the given names, and always update them to their current versions. I still keep on the notes field the way the surname was spelled, as it helps to trace it's evolution throught the time. Another thing I do is discard any "AKAs" which are obvious mistakes made by the priests when writing the records, and only leave a note about that on the notes field. As for the name that stays on the program as "main name", I always choose the most complete version. If anyone was known at some point as "D. Ana Isabel do Carvalhal Atouguia da Costa Bettencourt de Esmeraldo e Castelo Branco", that's the way she stays, even if the marriage record names her simply as "Ana Bettencourt". That way I can easily spot her among the many other "Anas de Bettencourt". The only exception is for the modern (and disgusting, IMO) habit of assigning the husband name to the wife after the marriage. I'm very sorry, but these "modernities" don't enter my database. ;) Paulo Paulo On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 11:25:12 -0800 (PST), Luis Beal <luisbeal@yahoo.com> wrote: > I leave Jardim as the last name mainly because at the time I started > researching the program I used did not allow for > long or double surnames. But another thing I do is I always add > significant variations of the name to my program > personal notes. The way I find the name spelled out on the marriage > record is the way it stays on my program, and any > other records if it is switched I add it to my notes like I said, or you > can add it to the "also known as" area. > Luis Beal -- " Pallida mors aequo pulsat pede pauperum tabernas regumque turres." -- Horacio