Good names versus lousy name searches

[v.wells]

I ran across this most wonderful name on another thread "Cecil A UMPLEBY", and I thought what a horrible but lovely name to have and to search for! I get head aches searching for my lot of Wells, Stuart and Walsh's! And to top it off they all seem to have the same first names, Robert, Thomas, William, Albert, Elizabeth and Eliza's. I know I am not alone out there, as I read almost all of the posts and do try to help where I can - often to no avail! Common names a the bane for genealogists such as we.

[Davran]

There is a down side to unusual names in that people often didn't know how to spell it and don't recognise the combination of letters when transcribing. At the moment I am looking for ARNISON, which can be spelt umpteen different ways. Also if you have a name beginning with S or L they are often transposed in transcription. But it is fun to have something less boring to work with and when you do find the entry you are usually absolutely sure it's the person you are looking for.

[janiegirl]

Couldn't agree more. I have a SMITH in my family tree and have not gone near that name yet.

Isn't it strange though that some names that you don't think of as common, once you try to search for them you find that they are. In my case his has been true of MORRISSON and MOFFAT in the areas I am looking at.

It is 's like those that make life interesting!

Janiegirl

[SBSFamilyhistory]

I have Smith's in my family, back several generations, and oddly enough I found them easier to find than some of the more unusual names, as there have been fewer spelling mistakes over the years, unlike some of the other less common names.

[Patrisia]

Agree!
Smith doesn't get messed around and when you are Gabriel Smith, as I have just transcribed in Smalley bapt on 12 April 1635, you can't go far wrong

[Barnzzz]

Sometimes the common names aren't so bad. We had Foords and they were easy, but then I found I'd made a terrible mistake and followed the wrong branch, I should have been looking for Fords all along. After a slow start they were quite easy !

Sue

[Jan1954]

Agree!
Smith doesn't get messed around and when you are Gabriel Smith, as I have just transcribed in Smalley bapt on 12 April 1635, you can't go far wrong

Or, as amongst my John Smiths, a delightful chap called Pharaoh!

[Peter_uk_can]

On my wife's maternal side, who come from Norway, we have the surname "FROM". This confuses the *&*(& ! out of the search engines.

We also have "Harsvog" who sometimes go by the name "Carlson - Carlesonn - Carlesson" etc... now and again they also used the name "From".

I have been confiused since the first day I saw this and am pleased to remain blissfully ignorant in all matters of the research.


Other members of the aforesaid family have tried to unravel it, but I am not sure if they have it right... I have so many balls in the air already I am leaving this one to others...

[Sandra Parker]

I have Please in my family, great fun when you try searching forums. You don't realise how polite people are on forums such as this!
Sandra
A very Happy and Successful Search New Year to all!

[Davran]

I know the feeling, Sandra. My mother-in-law's ancestors were SAW. You think you've made a hit and then realise it's only the verb in a sentence!