- Profile
- Images
Location: [unknown]
This is the Official Name Field Standards for the Scotland Project
Contents |
Lairds, Tacksmen and Clan Chiefs
Prefix: None
First Name: First Name at Birth
Preferred Name: This is the name they are known by or were known to use for themselves.
Last Name At Birth: The LNAB will be the surname at birth.
Current Last Name: The CLN will be the territorial designation with his or her number designated by a Roman numeral. This represents his/her place in the succession of Lairds, Tacksmen or Clan Chiefs.
Suffix: None
See Example 1 and 2, below.
Example 1
John Mackenzie 1st Laird of Gruinard (MacKenzie-4677) has first name “John”, LNAB “MacKenzie” and CLN “Mackenzie Ist of Gruinard”. Using the Roman Letter “I” for the number “1” which would otherwise create an error message and although the policy is to register “Mac” surnames with a capital letter, the Mackenzie family spells its name Mackenzie not MacKenzie .
Example 2
Robert Munro, 15th Baron of Foulis and 17th Chief of Clan Munro (Munro-210) has first name “Robert”, preferred name “Robert Mor” because that is how he was known, LNAB “Munro” and CLN “Munro XVIIth of Foulis” because it is place in the list of Chiefs which matters most. Later on his descendants secured a Baronetcy and for those chiefs, it is the layout for a Baronet which will apply. In recent generations the Baronetcy and Chief of the Clan have separated so once more it is the numerical place in the list of Chiefs which matters most.
Baronets
Prefix: Sir, Rev, Capt., etc.
First Name: First Name at Birth
Preferred Name: This is the name they are known by or were known to use for themselves.
Last Name At Birth: The LNAB will be the surname the individual had at birth.
Current Last Name: The CLN will be the name of the Baronetcy.
Suffix: The suffix box will be used to display the holder’s position
See Example 3, below :
Example 3
Sir John Sinclair, 6th Baronet of Canisbay and 8th Laird of Mey (Sinclair-4252) has the prefix “Sir”, first name “John”, LNAB “Sinclair”, CLN “Sinclair of Canisbay” and suffix “6th Bt”. The fact that he is also the 8th Laird of Mey is noted in his biography.
Peers and other Nobles
Prefix: Sir, Rev, Capt., etc.
First Name: First Name at Birth
Preferred Name: This is the name they are known by or were known to use for themselves.
Last Name At Birth: The LNAB will be the surname the individual had at birth. NOTE: Peers are known by and addressed using their most senior title not the family surname.
Current Last Name: The CLN will be the LNAB and his/her most senior title written entirely as words.
See Example 4, below:
Example 4
Captain James Sutherland, 5th Lord Duffus (Sutherland-1206) has the prefix “Capt.”, first name “James”, LNAB “Sutherland” and CLN “Sutherland Fifth Lord Duffus”.
Senior Clergy and Others
NOTE: As Scotland’s principal religion does not have elevated ranks within its clergy, there are few profiles this affects. However both the Roman Catholic and Scottish Episcopal churches have bishops, archbishops and cardinals.
Prefix: Rev, Cardinal, Bishop, etc
First Name: First Name at Birth
Preferred Name: This is the name they are known by or were known to use for themselves.
Last Name At Birth: The LNAB will be the surname the individual had at birth.
Current Last Name: The CLN will be the LNAB and his/her most senior title written entirely as words.
Example 5
David Bethune (Bethune-14) rose to become Archbishop of St. Andrews and a Cardinal. He was known as David Beaton. He has the prefix “Cardinal” first name “David”, LNAB “Bethune” and CLN “Beaton Archbishop of St Andrews”.
Married women, especially if from a noble family
This has long been a bone of contention and for the purposes of nobility, except where it is shown a married woman chose to be known by her husband’s family surname, she will keep her own surname because that generally was what was done. However married women in the nobility tended to be known by their husband’s title. If a Peer, she was simply the female version of his rank of peer e.g. Earl’s wife was a Countess. If her husband was a Baronet, she would generally be styled “Lady” followed by her husband’s title not family name. If she was a Baronetess in her own right, she would not be styled “Lady” but more often “Dame” or “Madam” followed by her title. If her husband was a Scot’s Baron or even a Tacksman, she would generally be known as “Lady” followed by the name of his estate.
Prefix: Lady
First Name: First Name at Birth
Preferred Name: This is the name they are known by or were known to use for themselves.
Last Name At Birth: The LNAB is the surname she was born with.
Current Last Name: The CLN includes both her LNAB and her husband's title.
Suffix: If applicable, represents her position.
Examples 6
Margaret Sutherland of Kinminitie (Sutherland-3463) was the daughter of James Sutherland, 1st Laird of Kinminitie. She went on to marry James Irvine, 3rd Laird of Artamford. After her marriage, as she also came from a noble family she was not referred to as “Margaret Irvine”. She continued to be known as Margaret Sutherland. However she was addressed as “Lady Artamford” as was typical of the time. She took her husband’s Baronial title. In a family feud with her nephew, in the Court of Session papers she is referred to as “Margaret Sutherland, Lady Artamford “ or “Margaret, Lady Artamford”. So for her profile she has first and preferred name “Margaret”, LNAB “Sutherland”, CLN “Sutherland Lady Artamford”. If you do a plain search for “Margaret Sutherland” and then click earliest date you find her quite easily.
Document History
- The finalized draft received official inclusion on the Name Field Help Page on 17 Nov 2020. Amy Gilpin
- The finalized draft has been submitted for inclusion on the Name Field Help Page. Amy Gilpin, 1 Aug 2020
- This Draft is in process for the Scotland Project. Amy Gilpin 22:33, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Original discussion: https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1064138/proposal-scotland-project-naming-policy-lairds-aristocrats?show=1064138
- Login to request to the join the Trusted List so that you can edit and add images.
- Private Messages: Contact the Profile Managers privately: Amy Gilpin and Scotland Project WikiTree. (Best when privacy is an issue.)
- Public Comments: Login to post. (Best for messages specifically directed to those editing this profile. Limit 20 per day.)
- Public Q&A: These will appear above and in the Genealogist-to-Genealogist (G2G) Forum. (Best for anything directed to the wider genealogy community.)
A couple questions for you:
But although the example of Fifth Lord Duffus” for "Peers and other Nobles" appears to follow that rule, the example for "Senior Clergy and Others" has the example “Beaton Archbishop of St Andrews” where the inclusion of the LNAB seems to violate that rule.
Is this just a matter of correcting the example or does the wording of the rule need to be changed?
If you're a member of American Ancestors, here's a link:
https://www.americanancestors.org/databases/genealogist-the/image?pageName=28&volumeId=62799&rId=10006210949
Thanks
For example: "The CLN will be the LNAB followed the territorial designation (the territory will be preceded by his number designated by a Roman numeral. This represents his place in the succession of Lairds, Tacksmen or Clan Chiefs).
You and others have done a great job and I am just trying to identify something that had me a tad confused. Ignoring the prose in the description and looking at the examples everything is crystal clear. The CLN description of Lairds, Tacksmen, and Clan Chiefs" was probably a challenge to write without introducing a tautology. From what I understand the CLN is basically [the LNAB or adopted surname] plus [an ordinal designation] plus [the territorial designation]. If so, maybe we can update the description to say that or words to that effect?
2. I have been lodging patronymics in the OLN field but also using that for Titles eg Second of Skerray. Is that incorrect?
Putting a patronymic in the OLN field is not technically wrong, if there's no title being added. Follow the guidelines above if there are titles to be added, and if it is more complicated than the guidelines above, I would suggest discussing it with Mark Sutherland-Fisher Esq. OStJ.
Thank you for reaching out and asking for best practices when it comes to Scottish Name Fields. They can be very complicated!
Edited: formatting link
edited by Amy (Crawford) Gilpin
As for your 2nd point. If you read my Scottish naming policy. Territorial and other titles go into the current last name not any other field. That way they get picked up in a name search and hopefully avoid yet further needless duplicate profiles being created. For your example you should use the Roman numerals to denote the number so the current last name would be " Mackay IInd of Skerray".
My husband's family are Lauderdale's and a family member wrote a book about them. Though the title is "History of the Lauderdales in Anerica: 1714-1850 by Clint A. Lauderdale, pub 1998 by the Heritage Books Inc. He does reference their Scottish family members connection. Is it okay to include the family members from Scotland here and if so how do I make sure these connections are sourced correctly? My youngest daughter did intern in Edinburgh parliament and visited with some of the family members while their. Is this confirmation a source? Thanks in advance
It also seems to have resulted in very poor naming outcomes for example James (Duff) Duff IInd Earl Fife (1729 - 1809)
Why Duff twice?, Who says IInd when we mean 2nd or second?
I have edited James Duff using the nickname field and it seems to look much much better https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Duff-3170
I have since noted the discussion at https://www.wikitree.com/g2g/1064138/proposal-scotland-project-naming-policy-lairds-aristocrats?show=1064138 and that "Scottish aristocratic profiles are no longer part of the Euro Aristo Project". However this project proposal gave an example of Captain James Sutherland, 5th Lord Duffus (Sutherland-1206) has the prefix “Capt.”, first name “James”, LNAB “Sutherland” and CLN “Fifth Lord Duffus”.
In fact when one goes today to Sutherland-1206 you see James (Sutherland) Sutherland Fifth Lord Duffus (1747 - 1827) or Capt. James Sutherland Fifth Lord Duffus formerly Sutherland.
This solution is neither elegant or correct.
The argument that it prevent duplicates I feel is also not valid - duplicates are created when people do not check for existing profiles - there are for example plenty of Smiths and when one tries to add another, a list comes up of possible duplicates and one needs to work through the possibilities - the same applies to any surname - we do not create artificial surnames to differentiate people. People with a Smith genealogy (or any other common surname) do cope.
edited by Anne (Champion de Crespigny) Young
In fact when one goes today to Sutherland-1206 you see James (Sutherland) Sutherland Fifth Lord Duffus (1747 - 1827) or Capt. James Sutherland Fifth Lord Duffus formerly Sutherland.
This solution is neither elegant or correct. Moreover the current implementation seems at odds with the G2G discussion.