BLACKADAR-L Archives

Archiver > BLACKADAR > 1999-11 > 0941729957


From: "David C. Blackadar" <>
Subject: Falkirk Blackadders #7
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 08:39:17 -0700


-----Original Message-----
From: Alfred K. Blackadar <>
To: Douglas Merry <>
Cc: <>;
<>; <>
Date: November 2, 1999 1:42 PM
Subject: Re: Falkirk Blackadders


Hi Doug and all:

As I indicated before, I did not expect I would get any support for my
suggestion that spelling of names could be useful. I think we have all
become aware of the variations of spellings especially among early
families. I once made a tally of more than 125 different spellings of the
name, often with several variants in the same household. So, I agree with
you we should be cautions, and I would never support trying to identify
individuals because of the spelling of the name. (Pardon me if I have been
guilty of this in the past.)

Nevertheless, I find the spelling interesting, and I have observed what
appear to me to be definite patterns within our family in the way they have
spelled their names. Just as an example, germane to the present discussion,
I made a tally of the 267 "Blackadders" in my data bank (out of the total
965 of all different spellings, plus uncounted unlinked people that I keep
in a different db). I sorted these according to their location of origin as
follows: 1. 116 were in East Lothian (Berwickshire, Edrom, etc.) or known
to be derived from them; 2. 81 were from Stirlingshire (mostly Falkirk, a
few others in Lanark, incl. a couple from Glasgow and all the ones that
went to New South Wales); 3. 17 from the North shore of the Firth
(Tulliallan, Dysart, Dunfermline), and 4. 53 others (Ireland, England, and
Edinburgh if not identifiable otherwise, other Australians, and origins
unknown.)

The pattern of two concentrations of similarly spelled Bs, which is not
found with the other groups, seems to tell me something.

Al

|At 09:23 PM 11/1/99 -0500, you wrote:
|>Hi Al,
|>
|>I would just like to offer an argument for not using the spelling
|>variation as a means to determining which branch of the family a person
|>belongs to. I recently had a good example with my own surname as to how
|>interchangeable these variations can become. From marriage info gleaned
|>from my gggrandfather's death cert I was able to locate his parents
|>marriage first on IGI under 'Murray' (correct wife's name) the result of
|>an eager Mormon's search for Sealants for the Dead which lead me to the
|>entry in the parish records under 'Mirrie' (1800), the death cert civil
|>reg. 1859 he was recorded as 'Merry' as are all descendants.
|>Interestingly the first record in that parish (1705) is 'Merry'. On
|>these same parish records I have seen the same set of parents have their
|>surname varied with successive entries of birth often in different
|>handwriting. While there is no doubt that many Reverends were erudite
|>their parishioners were not and probably would not know if their name
|>was spelt correctly.
|>Blackadder obviously has even greater potential for variation than
|>Merry.
|>Regards
|>Doug
|>
|
|

This thread: