| |
I'm pondering some first names. I've got a relative, Vicente Diaz who
had 9 children but in every example and in his first wedding his father
was listed as Jose or Josse Diaz.
Now isn't listing a person as Jose Diaz over and over again
the equivilent of saying that he didn't know or remember his name?
Or that something was up with the name that he didn't want to give it?
Are there examples of people in the late 1790's and early 1800's being
named "Jose" by itself without another name, the real name? I know that
in later times there are examples of just plain "Jose" being used but
I'm unsure of the used of "Jose" only in the later time period.
okay so then at 62 years of age around 1844 Vicente Diaz remarries and
lists his father as Juan Jose Diaz then he dies around 1849 and his
father is listed as Juan Diaz.
Something is fishy here and I think that Vicente really didn't have a
good handle on what his father's name was. I have a brother of his who
also listed his father as Jose Diaz over and over again but whose
father on his marriage certificate is listed as Francisco Diaz
And I found a Jose Francisco Diaz married to Concepcion Castaneda
(correct name for the spouse of Francisco, Juan and Juan Jose in every
case) who had a Vicente Diaz in the right place (Cuculiten, Zacatecas)
at the right time.
so I'm wondering if my Juan Diaz or Juan Jose Diaz is really Jose
Francisco Diaz.
I've got other information, indirect as it maybe, that lends support to
this theory. . . .I sure would like a shut and closed case but though
there is a multitude of records I can't seem to get that door closed.
Sounds like I"m reaching. . .
joseph
|
|
| |
by Date 
-