Re: [ranchos] Juan v. Juan Jose v. Jose Francisco

["David P. Delgado" <dpdelgado@...>]

Joseph,

I have never come across a man with only the name Jose at baptism.  I asked my wife, Gloria, and she says that she has seen a number of men given only the name Jose at baptism.  Gloria researches mainly Aguascalientes, Jalisco and Puerto Rico.  She has done hundreds of extractions in her own research.  

My own experience, in Senecú, taught me to be flexible in naming people.  In the case of my ggggrandfather he showed up as: Carpio, Juan, Trinidad, Policarpio and combinations of all.  Finally I figured out that he was named Juan Trinidad Policarpio.  I was able to do this by extraction from the microfilms.  I find it incredible that anyone could do it using the IGI online.  I guess you have noticed that the names used in recording marriages is usually different from the baptism records.  Someday I'll read the notes on the Council of Trent to see if the RCChurch mandated that children in the western hemisphere be named José or María.  

I wouldn't be too quick to assume that the son didn't know his father's name.  It was not at all possible for a layman to be able to tell a priest what to do.  No one could stop a priest from writing whatever he felt like writing.  Good luck hunting your answer.

David Delgado in Albany,CA

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Puentes <makas@...>
Sent: Jul 8, 2005 3:51 PM
To: LosRanchos <ranchos@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [ranchos] Juan v. Juan Jose v. Jose Francisco


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


David P. Delgado