Spouse's surname
I'm currently reviewing US—City Directories, 1901–1935 [Part E] [MQ2D-54Q]. I have read the PI in it's entirety many times.
If the spouse's surname is not specifically listed, are we to assume the primary's surname is also the spouse's surname? My interpretation of the PI is that we are NOT to assume that the spouse's name is the same as the primary's surname. I have reviewed several batches in this same project and most indexer's are marking the spouse's surname as blank. But in this particular batch, the indexer has listed the spouse's surname as the same as the primary's so I am confused.
Best Answer
-
From Project Instructions/What To Remember About This Project:
A spouse's name, if listed, may have been recorded in parentheses after the name of the principal individual. The surname should be indexed for both individuals. If a spouse is listed as deceased by the words "wid" or "widow of" do not index the spouse.1
Answers
-
Thank you! I appreciate your assistance!
0 -
Yikes. While indexing city directories I have been leaving the spouse surname field blank unless it was specifically given in the directory (which it never is). So, just to be sure, I should use the primary person's surname in the spouse surname field if the spouse surname is not specifically given. Is this correct?
0 -
Yes. If you have a spouse that is not deceased, and the surname is not listed, like John Smith, barber, 1234 Main Street (Ethel), it will be indexed as:
Given Name: John
Surname: Smith
Spouse's GN: Ethel
Spouse's SN: Smith0 -
What a refreshing change to see common sense being applied in providing the PIs for this batch!
The usual instruction of indexing "only what you see" is so unhelpful to researchers hoping to find their relatives following the indexing instructions attached to most batches.
For example: "John son of William Smith" usually leads to indexers being instructed to index "John" for the child (being baptised) and "William Smith" only for the father of the child. Why should finding a plain "John" in the database (when using FamilySearch's search engine) be made more difficult than finding "Ethel (Smith)" in batches having PIs like this?
Please, project managers, let's have greater consistency in PIs from batch to batch - especially where this will later help me find my relatives (at FamilySearch) without having to jump through hoops!
0