Use of dynasty or gender specific names for pre-1500 profiles

+10 votes
Before I continue working on the Přemyslovci I would like to get a decision regarding the use of the dynasty or the use of gender specific names in the LNAB field. So far we have 21 profiles using Přemyslovci, 0 using Přemyslovec, and 12 Přemyslovna, and an untold number using all sorts of names. I have noticed that lately profiles for people in other languages using gender specific names have not used the dynasty but those gender specific names. I think for consistency purposes this should be clarified and added to the EuroAristo name field use.
in Policy and Style by Helmut Jungschaffer G2G6 Pilot (608k points)

Forgive my abominable ignorance... which is the dynasty name and which is the masculine form between Přemyslovci and Přemyslovec ? (sorry!). 

Přemyslovci is the dynasty, Přemyslovec the male form.

Thank you. That's what I would have guessed, but it did not seem to make any sense.

Subsidiary question: I suppose there are dynasty names even for houses in countries with no gender specific names. Have these been used / has there been a recommendation, one way or another?
As far as I know there have been occasional ad-hoc G2G discussions about what name to use. It seems that the recent trend is to use dynasty names but there has not been a concerted effort to go back and change LNABs. My experience has been that when I contacted PMs, after a discussion in G2G that seemed to reach a consensus, to ask that they change the LNAB to the agreed upon name nothing much has happened, even when the PMs were EuroAristo members and leaders.

The guidelines for selecting a Last Name At Birth (LNAB)  for EuroAristo profiles (and any pre-1600 profile) have been around for almost as long as the project.

This suggests using a house name (which I would interpret as being a dynastic name) in preference to a location or title. However since then there have been many more national and cultural naming guidelines developed.  See here and that often means there needs to be more discussion on G2G and sometimes not just once.  

In regards to leaders not updating agreed upon changes, I can only talk for myself, and I do apologise and I know I have done that.  Unfortunately I have a tendency to say 'Yes, I'll do that" and inevitably run out of hours, weeks, months and even years.  So if I've said I'll do something and haven't done it then by all means remind me.


John, it has always been my opinion that there are far too few people trying to cope with the medieval and early modern mess we have on WikiTree, thus slowing the process of cleanin up to a crawl, and in my experience you have been getting around responding most consistently whenever something came up. My comment was not supposed to be a criticism - although I have to admit on re-reading that it certainly is easy to interpret it that way and for that I apologize - just a description of the slow process of change in this field.

My question was intended to perhaps clarify the position on sex specific name forms which lately have proliferated (see Рюрикович Genealogy and Рюриковна Genealogy) and zero Рю́риковичи.

Have there ever been any profiles with Рю́риковичи as LNAB? There are 36 Kievs and 4 Ruriks as well. But it doesn't look possible to find a concensus for them, because of the Cyrillic characters.

But it seems possible to agree on something for the Premyslids, or for Arpad vs. Arpadhazi.

This is tough - the most findable is probably topological in English, e.g. Bohemia. But trying to use the guidelines the dynastic name w/o gender in Czech seems better, since they are all grouped together so Přemyslovci over Přemyslovec/Přemyslovna (vs. Přemyslid).  Wikipedia seems to use the gendered versions: Přemyslovna (cz). I don't have a strong preference - they all have advantages and disadvantages.

Every time this comes up we probably should create a category (Category: Přemyslid Dynasty see Přemyslid dynasty). The category should have an explanation about what to do and which language is being used in each field. 

Also, everyone who is not super active on WT should not manage pre-1500 profiles. I'm trying to get rid of all of mine so I'm not a stumbling block on these sorts of issues.


Yes I didn't elaborate before but I would go with the dynastic name Přemyslovci rather than using the male/female forms of the name, and I think that should be the general policy to follow where possible.

There is a list of the names of dynasties/countries and the preferred LNAB to use and that can be updated whenever there is a discussion of this sort.

I just checked the page and see lots of recommendations are territory designations. For instance we have:

*Saxe, '''Sachsen''' (DE), Saxony (alt EN), -- should we not recommend Wettin there?

Or *Russia, '''Россия''' (RU)...

Any volunteers for reviewing the page and see if some items should be clarified / modified? (I'm volunteering to update the page).
Thanks Isabelle for volunteering to update the page.

In regards to Wettin or Sachsen, we really need both, because the Wettin didn't technically rule all of Saxony until 1425 and earlier rulers than that didn't always have dynastic names.

Do we really need to make the current list a bit more complex and not just list the names but add a brief statement about when you would use one name over another, or maybe just a link to a Wikipedia page about them ?
I'd say keep the list simple and include links in it. To Wikipedia, perhaps to the category pages, to existing free-space pages for houses (I think there may be a couple of them existing).
With respect to the list I notice a lot of geographic names when I thought we would want to stay away from those and use the dynasties? If that is correct I could look at the German houses (for instance the list uses Bayern, there really never was a family named Bayern, instead the various people named Bayern right now belonged to the Agilolfinger, Wittelsbach, Luitpoldinger, Welf, Northeim etc.).

2 Answers

+6 votes

We also have 15 profiles using just "Přemysl" ...

by Isabelle Martin G2G6 Pilot (576k points)
+3 votes

Take a look at this thread which outlines the future schema:

This particular issue isn't specified but with so many more name choices we should be able to add a type and field for gender specific names.

by Kirk Hess G2G6 Mach 7 (72.5k points)

Related questions

+6 votes
0 answers
145 views asked Sep 11, 2018 in Policy and Style by Jack Day G2G6 Pilot (467k points)
+3 votes
0 answers
+8 votes
2 answers
169 views asked Aug 21, 2014 in Policy and Style by Maggie N. G2G Astronaut (1.3m points)
+20 votes
1 answer
+8 votes
3 answers
+5 votes
1 answer
+10 votes
1 answer
+13 votes
2 answers
206 views asked Jun 1, 2016 in Genealogy Help by Jayme Arrington G2G6 Pilot (185k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright