TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2000-01 > 0946807468


From: Tony Hall <>
Subject: Re: TMG-L: Source Entry - married or maiden surname?
Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2000 10:04:28 +0000


On Sat, 1 Jan 2000 06:40:26, Jeff Miller <>
wrote

[snip]
>In the long run, is it "better" to enter her in the master source list as:
>Moe, Merry
>Moe, Merry (Miller)
>Moe, Merry (nee Miller)
>Miller, Merry (Moe)
>etc.?

Jeff, I have had to tackle the very same question. Before I thought
much about it, I used to enter only the birth names of married women
into sources. This is in much the same way that birth names are usually
primary in tags and come out that way in reports (e.g. Fred Thurwachter
married Merry Miller) - Lee has described more complicated cases.

However, a citation then mentions Merry Miller, not Merry Thurwachter
and not her present name of Merry Moe. That began to seem wrong on
three counts: a) I think of her as Mrs Merry Moe; b) so do other
relatives to whom I send reports; and c) the citation isn't so easily
traceable to the actual source, which is (say) the letter I received
from Mrs Merry Moe.

So now I use "Mrs Merry Moe (née Miller)" in source citations. That
solves the three problems a) b) c) above, but retains the identification
with the Merry Miller birth name in the dataset. If I had also received
data from her when she was previously married to Fred Thurwachter, I
would have used "Mrs Merry Thurwachter (née Miller)" for that source.

The abbreviation has to be the best the limited length can achieve (e.g.
Letter: Merry Moe) - it doesn't appear in my printed reports, so it's
only for my own convenience in identifying a source (as Cliff has
explained).

I did check Lackey for this question, but I don't believe there's an
adequate explanation there. He does have a possible example under
acknowledgements - on p.21, there is "Etoile Loper Hopkins (Mrs. Oliver)
...", and there's a partial discussion on p.34 about author entry for
books - "Normally a married woman's name is given ...". The examples
about letters have only male correspondents, and oral interviews don't
seem to address the issue of a married woman being interviewed. None of
this moved me from believing that my suggestion above still satisfies
the joint requirements of others being able to locate and evaluate my
sources.

Elizabeth? (sorry, haven't bought your book yet!)

I'm open to reasoned improvements!

--
Tony Hall
Gloucestershire, England
<>
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TMG-L The Internet Mailing List for The Master Genealogist
To unsubscribe: Send an e-mail to with 'UNSUBSCRIBE TMG-L'
or... if you get the digest version: 'UNSUBSCRIBE TMG-L-DIGEST'
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

This thread: