Navigate Messages: by Date - in Thread
Main Index - Date Index - Thread Index
 

Re: [ranchos] Repeating name patterns.

 


Pacorro73@... wrote:

Notice that #6, Gerónima de Liébana was the namesake of her mother, Gerónima de Liébana.

By the way the surname, Liébana, is a toponymic one.  Toponymic surnames refer to some place, geographic entity or feature, city, town, or region.  In this case, La Liébana a region in the Province of Cantabria, directly north of Palencia and which surrounds the present day town of Potes, in Cantabria, where this family came from originally.

Other toponymic surnames include, León, Avila, Palencia, Madrid, Sevilla, Badajoz, Oñate, Ayala, Orozco, Trujillo, Zamora, Burgos, Códoba, Garnica, Soria, etc, which are towns and cities in Spain.  Others include Peña (a massive boulder), Río/Ríos (river/rivers), Barranca/Barranco (cliff), Vega (flat lowland), Sierra (mountain range), Huerta (field), etc, etc.  But I digress.
yes you did, but a wonderful digress-ion it was!!


Here's yet another example, of my own direct male line, the source of my last name, which was once Hernández Gamiño:

Domingo HERNÁNDEZ GAMIÑO b: 1595 in Trujillo, Cáceres, Extremadura, España
Juana GÓMEZ DE ESPEJO              b: ca 1601 in Celaya, Guanajuato

1.  Domingo HERNÁNDEZ GAMIÑO b: ca 1621 in León, Guanajuato
2.  Isabel GÓMEZ DE ESPEJO b: ca 1624 in León, Guanajuato
3.  Nicolás GAMIÑO b: ca 1626 in León, Guanajuato
4.  Cristóbal HERNÁNDEZ GAMIÑO b: ca 1628 in León, Guanajuato
5.  Blas HERNÁNDEZ GAMIÑO b: ca 1630 in León, Guanajuato
6.  Margarita de ESPEJO b: ca 1632 in León, Guanajuato
7.  Juana GÓMEZ DE ESPEJO b: ca 1634 in León, Guanajuato
8.  Anna GÓMEZ DE ESPEJO b: ca 1636 in León, Guanajuato
9.  Juan HERNÁNDEZ DE ESPEJO b: ca 1639 in León, Guanajuato
10. Diego GÓMEZ GAMIÑO (aka Diego Gómez de Espejo) b: ca 1641 in León, Guanajuato
11. María GÓMEZ DE ESPEJO b: ca 1643 in León, Guanajuato
12. Tomás HERNÁNDEZ GAMIÑO b: ca 1646 in León, Guanajuato

Joseph, you even asked me this about this once upon a time; asking me why they all used different names, some of them Hernández Gamiño, Gamiño, Gómez de Espejo, Espejo, Gómez Gamiño, or Hernández de Espejo.  The answer: Because each individual felt like it.  It's that simple.  Back in those days you were free to choose which of your ancestral names you would call yourself.
okay I get this but have you ever found an individual going back and forth from one name to the other? I have a GG grandmother in Tepetongo that either used or was given the name by the Padre of her father at times and in 1/2 of the records of her mother in t he other 1.2 of the records. To see this do a parent search for: Lucio Santa Maria and then for the mom: Cecilia

I have the records for these and the parents of Cecilia Lugo and the parents of Cecilia Espinosa remain the same: Januario Espinosa and Antonia Lugo.
  In this family most of the men chose Hernández, except #10, Diego who used Gómez de Espejo or Gómez Gamiño.  His descendants became Gómez, and not Hernández.  All the women used either de Espejo or Gómez de Espejo, which in itself is a combination of their maternal grandfather's surname, Domínguez de Espejo, and their grandmother's surname, Gómez Maldonado.  The Gómez de Espejo continued to be used among the women for several generations to come.  #3 Nicolás Gamiño, had some sons called just Gamiño and others Hernández.

Even more recently, is the case of the three María de Velasco's.  # 4 above, my direct ancestor, Cristóbal Hernández Gamiño married in 1653, María de Velasco.  Cristóbal and María de Velasco had a daughter who called herself María de Velasco, namesake of her mother.  She in turn married Joseph Tello de Orozco (md. ca. 1679), descendant of the above mentioned Francisco Tello de Orozco.  Joseph and María's daughter also called herself María de Velasco, thus namesake of her mother and grandmother, as well as María Tello de Orozco.  This third María de Velasco married Francisco Martín del Campo in Ayo el Chico, Jalisco, in 1718.

One of my ancestors, Juana Enríquez, was the daughter of Pedro Enríquez and Isabel de Calderón (Isabel de Islas y Calderón).  I located their marriage, 3 July 1667, in Nochistlán, Zacatecas, and noticed that it said the following:  "Ysabel Calderón, hija de Diego Delgadillo y Petrona de Yslas..."  What??  If Isabel was the daughter of a Delgadillo and an Islas, then where did Calderón come from?  I continued to research this family and learned that the parents of Diego Delgadillo were Juan Delgadillo and María de la Concepción de Islas, while the parents of Petrona de Yslas were Bernardino González de Islas and Mariana Catarina Moscoso de Sandoval (aka Mariana de Sandoval).  Well...still no Calderón, and no closer to figuring out where that surname came from.  It seemed to have just come from right out of the blue.  Until I found out that Juan Delgadillos parents were Diego Delgadillo and Isabel de Calderón (aka Isabel de Calderón Orozco).  The second Isabel de Calderón (the more recent one) had been the great-granddaughter and namesake of the first and older, Isabel de Calderón.  The surname had jumped across four generations. 
Gracias Steven. . .esto es la informacion mas importante para mi. So when you run across a total puzzle and a surname inserted where one doesn't think it should be inserted. . .we should be very thankful because it might (probably is) be revealing of what a past generation was named.

As I mentioned to a couple of people I've recently been spending a lot of time in Ciudad Juarez chasing my ever elusive, until just recently, maternal side of the family. Anyway, I found my great grandparents on my grandfathers death certificate. Then I found the marriage certificate that matched wonderfully: Romulo Perez y Antonia Maldonado. But since this record didn't record the parents I thought I'd have a look at the Civil records. Well here I thought I was really in a puzzle because this record showed that Romulo Perez married an Antonia Benavides. Unfortuneately both records didn't include parents (surprise---not).

Well I previously found a baptism record for a child of Romulo Perez and Antonia Baldonado naming the parents of Antonia as Roman Baldonado and Tranquilina Rios.

As I was driving home from work last night puzzling over my misfortune of not having records that nicely fit the standard that I wanted them to fit I remembered that I had seen the use of the Grandmothers surname before. So I decided to try a surname search with exact spelling on with all the combination spellings of Maldonado Benavides; Maldonado Venavides, Baldonado Benavides; Baldonado Venavides; Rios Benavides; Rios Venavides and see which if any turned up results for Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe, Juarez, Chihuahua.

Well  amazingly I found that the Rios Benavides combo gave me a Tranquilina. Thus I think this will eventually solve the puzzle that this side of the family seems to so frequently introduce "early" in my search for more info.


This is evidence that people, mostly females mind you, would often use their mother's, grandmother's, or even one of their great-grandmother's surnames and claim it as their own.  This would happen more often if they also had the same first name.  They would also do this if the surname in question was significant or prominent in some way.  This happened a lot with my Mendoza and Hurtado de Mendoza families, who are one in the same, as well as Hermosillo.

And I could go on and on and on and on....  But I think you get my point.
This brings up a question I've had that is related. Was it the use of individuals or was it ever the influence of the padres that were conducting the ceremony? I've seen names so often spelled differently and give that credit to the Padre recording the info. I've seen my name mostly as Puente but in later times as Puentes and have somewhat come to the conclusion that it was Puente and Puentes came about because at certain times there was a bunch of us. It really appears that the difference between the two was not sooooo important as to bring it to the attention of the scribe to make sure it was recorded correctly. So since the scribe had this kind of freedom I'm wondering if they might not  have taken any liberties with the assignment of surnames. I know this is a leap but I can just see an old Padre that might have baptised both individuals that were now coming before him to be married and knew both their parents and grandparents possibly "suggesting" the use of past generation. This is all speculation on my part, just stuff I've wondered about. I guess that wondering came about because of some truely puzzling records I have that can only in my limited experience be called "mistakes."

I have a relative that is possibly a "Hijo Natural." I'm not sure I'm interpreting the records correctly but in many baptism records for some of this relatives children he is listed as the child of "Juan Smith y Beatriz Jones" but in two of his childrens baptismal records his parents are listed as "Juan Smith and Mary N." So I'm not sure how to interpret this. Do I think in terms of that the person was a "hijo natural" because he was the product of his father with an Unknown or Unrecorded
"Mary N."? Or do I think in terms that the mother of this person was a "Hija Natural"????

In either case this persons records go on to become very confusing in one particlar record. In all those baptism records for the children of him and his wife his wifes parents names stays consistent. but in one particular record I have this person "coupled" together with his mom as the parents and the father "coupled" together with his wife as the grandparents. This has to be a mistake because the wifes parents are in the record and are the same as before so I am confident that we are talking about the same people since all the names are in the record just all mixed around. IT has to be a mistake.
Well I hope this helps all of you out there.  Good bye and God bless.
Well it certainly helped me and I can't imagine it not helping others that have come across this same type of naming pattern.
thanks Steven,

joseph


Respectfully,
Steven Francisco Hernández López