|
I think I can explain a few things about the double
surname issue.
The last names were established to distinguish a person.
They are the ultimate ID. The last name allows to determine who that person
belongs to. The use of the "de" and the "y" are essentially that. That
person belongs to this group and that group. It could be a family, or
an earlier time even a location, etc. It was the tradition. In some
regions that continue to this day (specially Spain). The use of the "de" and the
"y" alone doesn't mean "nobility". It is possible, but in some regions that was
only a tradition for every member. The only thing that it shows was that
the person had 2 groups he wanted to be related to.
The last names have been the product of an evolution. Now,
we know that the 1st last name is the father's and the second last name is the
mother's, but before, like many of us noticed that wasn't the case. You really
could pick and choose how you wanted to be recognized. Who
you were related to (belong to). Another historian told me, your name
and last names were your coat of arms. It was and it is your heritage.
You could select one group over the other one for different reasons. During my
research I noticed that in Mexico the double surname system was set more less
after 1750's (many exceptions of course). Meaning, your first last name was your
father's and your second from your mother's. On the other hand, in Spain, the
same system was more less set 100 years before (with the same exceptions).
Mexico after the conquest had to pass for the process of creation of many new
last names. (In the Americas were many people without a last name). In Mexico, specially after the independece,many families dropped
the "de" and "y". It was a way to break with old traditions.
Also, I noticed that your name wasn't set during your
whole life. You could be known in different ways. For example, in one of my
oldest lines I have Juan de Astola y Saola. He was born in Ochandiano, Vizcaya
around 1550.
EXAMPLE
NAME: Juan de Astola y Saola
Father: Juan de Astola y Saola
Mother: Marina de Aromayona y Astola
My problem is that Juan had many names. Some of them from
baptism records of his children or his own marriage certificate.
DIFFERENT NAMES
1. Juan de Astola y Saola
2. Juan de Saola
3. Juan de Aromayona y Saola
4. Juan de Astola
Same person, different names. How did I resolve my
problem?. I made a note of the different names, and respected the name of the
oldest record. I don't believe he wanted to assume different identities. I
guess, back then, everyone in town knew who was Juan...
I'm attaching to this e-mail a very interesting document
on the subject. The document is a lecture given by Don Jaime de Salazar y Acha
to the "Real Academia Matritense de Heraldica y Genealogia". The name of the
lecture is "Genesis y evolucion historica del apellido en Espana". The lecture
was given in Spanish. I hoped it helps
Saludos,
Susana Leniski
--- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:24
AM
Subject: RE: [ranchos] Re: double
surnames
Mmmmm Since this subject started I've thought
about the Novela that I'm watching "Alborada" . . . The prestigious
noble family is Manrique y Arellano. So, this might be a dumb question but
maybe the "Y" was used for noble families such as: Counts, Dukes, etc.?
Great questions,
Emilie. I've often wondered about all that. From what I read, our
Spanish ancestors came here to either get away from persecution (Sephardic
Jews) or poverty. It seems this was an opportunity to better themselves,
and perhaps take on new identities. The French would utilize "de" to
denote nobility. I wonder if our ancestors also tried to appear as noble
too.
Irma
I too have been wondering about the use of surnames in Mexico. I
still don't understand what was meant when they used the "de" in front of the
surname. Did they mean to say they were from a certain place? Back
in the early 1700's in Zacatecas, I find that my Olagues used the "de
Olague". There is a town in the Basque region of Spain with that
name. However, I have no idea when that town was founded and if my
ancestors came from there. They were Basque, that I know.
Also, I find that many of my ancestors in Zacatecas used surnames
interchangeably. My Tinajeros used the surnames Felix, Flores or Suriano
often but there was not consistency (it would change from one generation to
another and then back again), and my Matas, Valdeses and Pereses used those
names interchangeably as did my Escovedo/de la Torre and Quijas/Berumen
lines. Could it be that since only a handful of surnames were used in
each community, that the people there were confused as to what their surnames
were? Were they intimidated into using some surnames over others?
Was it more prestigious or convenient to use certain surnames? This has
all made it very difficult to find all the siblings in one family because they
used different combinations of surnames at each baptism.
This puts me in mind of what Anglos have done to preseve their more
prestigious names. The Cabot-Lodges were really Lodges who used their
mother's surname as a middle name ("the Lodges talk only to the Cabots, and
the Cabots talk only to God"), versus using that name as the second surname as
is done in Mexico. I notice that those who are related to the Kennedys
through their mothers use the Kennedy name as a middle name. They
consider themselves Kennedys. Also, Jacqueline Lee Bouvier Kennedy
always used the middle name Lee to denote she was a "Lee" from Virginia ("Lee"
being a very prestigious name-- as in Robert E. Lee--, more so than
Kennedy).
One thing I have not found (perhaps because I have not gone back far
enough) is the use of the "y". I do find (when browsing the census files
that Puerto Ricans use the "y". Is it that people from a certain
place in Spain used "de" or "y" and their descendents in the New World
continued the same practice? Why do people in Puerto Rico still do
that? I notice that in Mexico two surnames are always used, but they
eliminate the "y".
Emilie Garcia
Port Orchard, WA ----
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 4:45
AM
Subject: [ranchos] Re: double
surnames
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
>
|
by Date 
-