I understand that surname prefixes are recorded as part of the surname: van, le, al, ben, etc. In E

JB Cowley

I understand that surname prefixes are recorded as part of the surname: van, le, al, ben, etc. In English, they translate to prepositions in many instances: of, from, etc. So what about the word "of" in an English name, say William of Orange?

pokemonmaster1.5583035084661848E12

William ben Orange

Paul W

In Dutch - Willem van Oranje. Surely "ben" is the Hebrew translation?

 

So, put the "van", "of", "from" (or "ben"!) in the last name (surname) field, if that is really what you are questioning.

JB Cowley

I know I add those prefixes for other languages. Would I then do William /of Orange/ for an English record?

Paul W

If it were me, I would input "William" to the First Names field and "of Orange" to the Last Names field. I don't know if there are any set rules, however - I suppose its largely down to what works best with the FIND algorithm.

 

The most awkward format I have is for a "William Hucks alias Reason". Especially as another family member was recorded as "Thomas Reason alias Hucks"! Still others are known / shown simply as Hucks or Reason.

 

Whichever way you record it, it is probably best to add other formats as "Alternate Names", so there is a better chance of the individual being located by anyone searching for him by using FIND in Family Tree.

JB Cowley

I can't find "of" on any list of surname prefixes. So I don't think it's used in English. It probably means I don't have the individual's family name.

 

Example: Edward, Duke of York could have Duke in the Title, Edward in the given name, and York in the surname if that's the surname he used. "Of" just goes bye-bye or into the alternate name list.

 

Or, he could be entered as Edward // with "Duke of York" as a descriptor following the name if it's a location descriptor for the title. Wish I could find it in black and white somewhere. It definite looks un-English to use "of" in the surname field.

Paul W

I think the problem is due to this name format being so rare in English records. After all, the example here (William of Orange) relates to a person who came to England, but was not a native of the country.

 

Going way back (perhaps up to around the 15th century) the prefix "de" is commonly found for English names - as with French. Slowly, from the 14th century, names were passed down, of course. So, John de Lichfield (say) would have his name recorded as plain John Lichfield and the surname passed down through generations of his descendants.

 

Even with our present royal family members in the UK, it has become practice for naming to be "simplified". Hence, the sons of Charles, Prince of Wales, adopted the names William and Harry Wales - especially for use in their military service.

 

I wouldn't worry about the issue too much. Inputting William of Orange as I suggested will look fine in display form and should not have any adverse effect within Family Tree.