| |
Chris Pineda wrote:
I too have come across instances in the 1500s and
1600s where some siblings took on the surname of their
father and others, their mother's. I have heard some
of the following explanations to account for this:
1)Perhaps their mother's line was more distinguished,
particularly if she was the daughter or grandaughter
of someone famous;
2)Perhaps their father had committed some crime and
some of his children did not want to be associated
with his name;
3)Perhaps the father's line/surname was associated as
being Sephardic and some children wished to disguise
this fact, particularly when the Inquisition came to
Mexico.
I'm wondering about this possibility. It is my understanding that to be
full Spanish was better than Mestizo. so maybe if the mother was
thought to be more full blooded spanish they chose to use that name
because the genealogy would show this to be true, whereas maybe with
the father the lines were more complicated or maybe he was even a "Hijo
Natural."
I really don't know about this since I haven't any examples in my own
genealogy of the name being the surname of the mother instead of the
father.
joseph
Or perhaps it really was not that big a deal back then
to take on one parent's name over the other. I imagine
for most of the Spanish conquistadores and immigrants,
coming to the New World must have been a fluid time in
terms of identity--it was a rare chance to remake
themselves.
Chris Pineda
--- Arturo Ramos <arturo.ramos2@...> wrote:
Linda:
I got some persepective on this issue from Mssrs. de
la Torre Berumen
and Valdes Salazar while I was down in Mexico.
Apparently, soon after the Mexican independence,
President Vicente
Guerrero (who was mulatto) decreed that all
Spaniards be expelled from
Mexico. In reality, many were exempted but
certainly all of those who
had been loyalists during the war of independence
and those that had
royal ties (since Mexico was now a republic) were
expelled.
Those Spanish families that remained became weary of
being labeled
Spanish and particularly loyalists or royalists and
thus those
with "composed names" such as "Carlos y Godoy" or
"Fernandez de Jara
Quemada" quickly dropped parts of their names to
mexicanize them. I
think it was somewhat arbitrary which parts they
dropped.
On a similar note, I would appreciate hearing any
perspectives people
may have about how children chose whether to take on
the mother's
family name vs. the father's family name. I have
run across many
instances, particularly in the 17th century where
children of the same
family took on different names, i.e. some siblings
took on the father's
name "Covarrubias" and other siblings in the same
family took on the
mother's name "De La O" so you have siblings with
different last names.
--- In ranchos@yahoogroups.com, "Erlinda
Castanon-Long"
<longsjourney@y...> wrote:
I'm hoping you can help me with double surnames.
Is there a
difference when they use De or Y? Such as Alvares
del Castillo or
Ochoa y Garibay? How long did they usually keep
the double surname?
I haven't found a reason why some families ended
up using the surname
they chose.. Villasenor y Jaso, some went
Villasenor and others went
Jaso.. same family!
I have gone from records in Tamazula Jalisco to
Chilchota Michoacan.
So many families from that part of Jalisco came
from this area of
Michoacan in the later 1700's. In doing marriage
records from there
I'm finding it not unusual to have the actual
marriage in the home of
a family member, was that normal for the mid
1750's?
Linda in Everett
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL – Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ranchos/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ranchos-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--
 |
|
| |
by Date 
-