married in Québec in 1843, would the woman take her husband's name - to include the "dit name"? [closed]

Question

A profile I watch over (in one of my husbands' trees) is for a woman in Québec who married in 1843. A while back, a merge brought in a Current Last Name (CLN) that was her husband's. In researching whether or not that was appropriate, and whether or not his dit name should be changed to dite when she assumed it, all I found was a record of their marriage that showed "Payet" as the spelling, so that's all I changed & posted a [comment] to cover my thinking on retaining the rest, as CLN. The spelling was recently changed back to Payette, and looking to see why, I had 2nd thoughts about it being her CLN & re-researched whether it was appropriate for her to take her husband's name (regardless of spelling).

Reading up on the naming conventions posted by the Acadians Project and the Quebecois Project, and [this G2G discussion], I'm thinking the answer is no, but it could be in the Other Last Name(s) field - as his name.

Anyway. My main question - lacking anything that shows she took her husband's name, a woman in Québec in 1843 should not have her husband's name as her Current Last Name, right?

Details:

• her husband's name can go in the Other Last Name(s) field.
• if including her husband's dit name in OLN, it should remain "dit" and not be changed to "dite" (since it's his name... or should it change to dite since it's being said about her?)
• should OLN bother with spelling variations? since WikiTree prefaces displayed OLN entries with "aka", what the records show can be explained in text.

Thanks in advance for furthering my education in this area!

Cheers, Liz

Comments

I see a lot of names that will need correction in this family, Alexis' mother for one, who is actually called Juneau dite Latulippe, not Janault

Answer 1

hi Liz,

Her funeral record clearly names her Rosalie Lefebvre, have transcribed the record on her profile with source and corrected place names as well, somebody got confused, there is a place named Notre-Dame-de-la-Salette, which is not near Montréal at all (map included on profile), and there is also a parish named Notre-Dame-de-la-Salette in Montréal.  She did not die in Montréal.  

Sometimes I think Ancestry sources are geographically challenged.  

Marital names would preferably get entered in other last names, this is the era where women were called ''Mrs (husband's name)'', but religious records keep the woman's name and so do we.  Anyways, the law changed in the 1980s or so, women keep their own names no matter what, although some use the husband's name socially. 

Comments

As far as her husband's correct spelling on his name, during his life the name gets written :

Payet

Peguet

Payette

'''Alexis Payet''' is the exact form of his name on his baptism, born 20 apr 1820 bapt. 22nd in St-Esprit.  https://www.genealogiequebec.com/Membership/LAFRANCE/acte/2944435 Bapt. IGD Drouin collection (membership)

---

Thank you SO much! Not only am I geographically challenged (historically and in real life) but this branch of the tree is relatively new to me.

Your help is greatly appreciated!

Cheers, Liz

---

you're quite welcome.  

To add to the confusion on place names, whoever had entered the location with ''Papineau'' included.  Only problem is, Papineau is an electoral riding in Provincial parliament which is appropriate for Notre-Dame-de-la-Salette, but it is also a Federal electoral riding name, this time in Montréal (not englobing the parish cited earlier).

Which is one reason I keep pounding away that these location names shouldn't be included in place names, they are not ''counties'' as understood by our US friends, they are electoral ridings subject to alteration regularly.

---

Danielle; I'm so glad you added the information about electoral districts.

I have been removing from or not including those names in the first place for locations on profiles I manage on Wikitree and editing them out when adding records on my Ancestry trees.

I add a standard comment on the biography that says ' This name is not a place but an electoral district please do not use it as this person's place of residence which is called .....'

---

thanks, appreciate it, will take all the help to get the point across.