father (according to one profile) is "Severt Smit" - should son be Smith or Seversmith?

Question

Two profiles with the same information - one Smith and one Seversmith - have been in an unmerged match for several months. One of the profiles is attached as son of Severt Smith. Would he have been baptized with the surname Seversmith? Both profiles have the other's LNAB as an Other Last Name but it does not appear that any progress has been made since the merge was postponed.

Birth is shown for both profiles as the Netherlands, about 1635, and death in both is in New York (1699/about 1699).

Would appreciate input from Nederland Project and/or New Netherland Settlers Project and/or Smith researchers. (Since I had proposed the merge, its on my list of unmerged matches, which I'm trying to clear).

Thanks!

Answer 1

Difficult, because looking at both profiles, I only really see hearsay/secondary sources (publications, ancestry.com) but no links to original sources (baptism, marriage, death, tax, land ownership, court records, etc.).

Being Dutch, I'd say that Severt is a first name and Smit (without the h) a surname. According to the Dutch Databank of first names by the Meertens Institute, Severt comes from Siegfried which is a Germanic first name coming from the words "Sieg" and "Friede", meaning Victory and Peace. The surname Smit is old Dutch for the profession of a (black)smith.

Having said that, it could be that Nicholas Smit would state that he was the son of Severt Smit which would then turn into a patronymic.

It was common for people to be named by their first name and their occupation:

Severt (the) Smit

His son would then be referred to as:

Nicolaas/Claes Severtz(n) Smit

The "z" or "zn" standing for "zoon" meaning "son of" (Severt)

This would sometimes turn into a new surname e.g. "Seversmit"

If Nicholas was born in the Netherlands, I would choose the patronymic Severtsz as his surname or Smit and add the patronymic to his first names. Apart from this, I would try and find the original sources to find out the earliest documented names for each individual.

Comments

Thanks! I'll suggest Severtsz to the PMs (I came across these when I was looking for profiles of two colonial Virginia Nicholas Smiths).

---

Also: Reusel is a bogus location!

---

Great link, thanks Jan! And a great reminder that once written, errors on the internet can be repeated endlessly--or until someone actually does real research

---

Funny how this happens

---

Yes, this bogus location is long known on WikiTree, as can be seen here and here.

---

just a note to save folks from checking... Reusel is mentioned in this answer to the G2G question. It is not mentioned in either of the profiles being asked about.

Answer 2

Hello Liz,

From a Dutch perspective the surname Seversmith seems to be a mistake. It was common in the past, especially in the north of the Netherlands, to use a patronymic. Nicholas could have been baptized as Nicholas Severts Smith (Severts = son of Severt). I guess the person who wrote the name in the old American records didn't know it had to be two names. Or the genealogists who found the record misread the names Sever(t)s Smith and combined patronymic and surname into a nonexistent surname.

Comments

Agree with Tineke (see my earlier post) about Seversmith probably being a mistake. However, since here at WT we agree to go by LNAB, it would be interesting to find the original sources and to find out whether Nicholas was born in the Netherlands or not. There seems to be a lot of info around but everyones keeps pointing to a page in a publication. Have not seen any original records yet.