APG-L Archives

Archiver > APG > 2002-09 > 1032141698

From: "e-shown" <>
Subject: [APG] Indexing Females
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2002 21:01:38 -0500

Helen Ullmann wrote:
> The entry by married name should include the maiden name. E.g.
> Smith, Mary
> Jones, Mary (Smith)
> If she's married more than once there should be entries for all.
> Smith, Mary
> Jones, Mary (Smith)
> Brown, Mary (Smith) (Jones)
> White, Mary (Smith) (Jones) (Brown)

Helen's response also raises another interesting point here. There are
clearly two schools of thought over what names in parentheses represent --
and as NGSQ editor I've had authors from both schools argue their case quite

On the one hand are those who, as Helen as done, put in parentheses every
surname except the last one that a woman held. On the other hand are those
who put only maiden names in parentheses --i.e.,

White, Mary (Smith) Jones . . . or
Mary (Smith) Jones White

The latter school argues that the mixed usage of parens for both maiden
names and formerly married names actually muddies the issue of a woman's
identity. As NGSQ's editor for the past 16 years, I've tended to agree.

I'd be interested in hearing the views of others on this list.


Elizabeth Shown Mills, CG, CGL, FASG
Editor, *National Genealogical Society Quarterly*

This thread: