Using the farm name for the LNAB

Question

In my research in WikiTree I have encounter several profiles who are using the farm name in Finland where the family lived when they were born as a LNAB.  Using the Hiski Project, a good, free secondary source for Finnish genealogy, I find that Gustaf was born on May 29, 1799 on farm Pellas No. 4, Gammelby, Pernaja, Finland to Jacob Joh: Gustafss: and Greta Alexandersdr:.http://hiski.genealogia.fi/hiski/6fk8ao?en+0387+kastetut+10035  In a patronymic system his LNAB would be Gustaf Jacobsson.  He is Pellas-9, Gustaf Jacobsson Pellas.  There are 13 PELLASs in WikiTree and I suspect they all lived on the same farm.  I do not think this is correct and would like it to be changed and discouraged.  Am I wrong?

Comments

Sounds like those families used a farm-onymic system instead of patronymic system.  Sounds logical to me.  If that was their custom, I would think it best to record how it was.

---

How it was is most likely Gustaf Jacobsson.  The Pellas name seems to be a fabrication out of Ancestry.com.  There are no sources that I could varify that lead to using the farm name.  That is why I am asking.

---

I believe that sometimes the farm name was taken as a surname. My brother in law has the surname of the farm his family owned. It still exists in Norway at least a couple of generations later.

---

I have read that until the late 19th century the farm names were used in Norway.  But, I know very little and hopefully someone with proper knowledge will answer your question.  All the girls I ever knew that were from up there seem to have the last name of Jensen.  :D

---

Yes, from recent correspondence I have received, ".. My paternal ancestry lies in northern Germany (Niedersachsen), and in that part of Germany people took the name of the farm they were born on and not their father's name."

Answer 1

Last names became compulsory in Finland only in 1921. There appears to be a divide between the Eastern and Western part of Finland with the East having a longer tradition, starting in the 16th century, of hereditary last names, whereas the West used patronymics and farm names more. A case could be made for using farm names as LNAB because that was the name people were known as. But those names changed if the person moved, often the younger siblings as only the oldest who inherited the farm stayed on. There was a gradual increase in the use of last names during the 19th century, particularly when people moved to the cities. Prior to 1921 then, this is an issue that needs to be decided on a case by case basis: If the name changed with move from one farm to another the patronymic should be used as LNAB and the farm name(s) as Other Names, If the name persists even after a move, particularly to a city, it may be appropriate to use the former farm name as LNAB.

Comments

Records for my husband's Norwegian ancestors suggest that children born on the farm during the 19th century were known by their patronymic names. Thus, their LNAB should be a patronym. However, when a child reached adulthood and moved to the city, they typically started using their farm name (even while their siblings who remained back on the farm were still using patronymics), so the farm name should be added as Current Last Name.

As Helmut notes, things could get complicated if the family moved to a different farm. And when there's a possibility that a person with a patronym might sometimes have used a farm name, it seems like a good idea to list the farm name(s) in the "Other Last Names" field.

Answer 2

Surnames came into use until about 1900. People had a name -son or -daughter.

On the farm there was always a name that remained. The owner's family might change, but the house has the same name to this day.

People talked about the name of farm, but if the place of living was changed so the name was changed. 1800 century church records began to be labeled as surname the name of the farm. The farm fee is usually the eldest son and the name remained only for him. Younger brothers find another name.

Pellas names of farms are several in Finland. And Sweden.

Comments

Pauli.  Thank you for your input. It is not easy to determine a LNAB in these situations.  In all likelihood they did not have one.  If Carl was running around the village, someone might refer to his father or to his farm if they needed to be specific.  And of course it was the local priest who needed to record family information in the church books and often made the choice.  To complicate the issue in Finland, the priest was recording in Swedish which might not have been the language of the community.  In a country like Finland with more than one official language one must often guess what is best to use for LNAB.  WikiTree wants us to use what the subject would have used.  This is often impossible.  For genealogy purposes it seem reasonable to use the recording language.

Answer 3

I added sources to the profile, and the birth record hints that the patronym should be the LNAB as the farm name is written separately together with the village name like an address.

I would have used Pellas as LNAB if the fathers name had been "Pellas Jacob Johan Gustafsson" or "Jacob Johan Gustafsson (fr) Pellas". 

The use of original sources is always preferable to secondary transcripts like Hiski.