Arts & Humanities: Genealogy: “Question: If a Puerto Rican has Spanish ancestors, that means they are not Puerto Rican and are just Spanish? Making them European?” plus 5 more |
- Question: If a Puerto Rican has Spanish ancestors, that means they are not Puerto Rican and are just Spanish? Making them European?
- Question: My Puerto Rican grandfather is list on census as blanco in 1940, with his wife and kids. Does that mean he is white?
- Question: I am trying to find my father's record at Southern Pacific. William Joseph Wright. I believed he retired in 1985?
- Question: Why do last names change spelling over time and pronunciation of the last name Bossij/bussij/busee?
- Question: Surname help plz?
- Question: What would he be?
| Posted: 16 Nov 2015 06:17 PM PST Realize what you are saying. Puerto Rican = Puerto Rico = a location, not an ancestor. Do you see now? People have migrated all over this planet. We were given classifications through our current civilization, but those classifications do not represent people in any way. The names of places have changed as people have moved and language has evolved. The only thing you need to know is that we are all of the same species. Our appearance changes because of mating selection and environmental factors, but that does not change what we are.  |
| Posted: 16 Nov 2015 02:34 PM PST It means that he self identified as White. Does he really look white or mixed? Back in 1940 and before, most Latinos were considered White unless they had very obvious Black or Indigenous ancestry. The word "Hispanic" wasn't even used back then. In fact, it's only been in the last 30 or 40 years that people have become so confused about the race of Spanish speakers, thanks to the U.S. Census Bureau. |
| Posted: 15 Nov 2015 06:58 PM PST Report AbuseAdditional DetailsIf you believe your intellectual property has been infringed and would like to file a complaint, please see our Copyright/IP Policy Report Abuse Cancel Report AbuseAdditional DetailsIf you believe your intellectual property has been infringed and would like to file a complaint, please see our Copyright/IP Policy Report Abuse Cancel Report AbuseAdditional DetailsIf you believe your intellectual property has been infringed and would like to file a complaint, please see our Copyright/IP Policy Report Abuse Cancel  |
| Posted: 15 Nov 2015 04:51 PM PST A lot of it had to do with how some clerk or official heard a name and put it down on a record. Also, I understand they did not have standardized spelling until sometime in the 19th century. If you could read it, it was right. You will actually see where people signed their name using different spellings. Surnames in themselves do not indicate you share ancestors with another person with the same surname as when they were first taken the first part of the last millennium it wasn't to identify a man as a member of a family but just to better identify him, frequently for taxation. Too many men with the same given name in the same town or village and they just had to have a better way of sorting them out on records. When they got through it wasn't impossible for legitimate sons of the same man to wind up with a different surname and still each could have shared his with others with no known relationship. The funny thing about it, you might not be related at all to someone with the absolute same spelling of your name and related to another with a different spelling. You might not be related at all to a person with the same surname as yours but you might be related to him in another family line with an entirely different surname. Your ancestry doubles each generation you go back and so do the names. One of the big mistakes people make when first starting their genealogy is to try and trace their surname. They should be viewed as just convenient identifiers on records. |
| Posted: 15 Nov 2015 11:50 AM PST Report AbuseAdditional DetailsIf you believe your intellectual property has been infringed and would like to file a complaint, please see our Copyright/IP Policy Report Abuse Cancel Report AbuseAdditional DetailsIf you believe your intellectual property has been infringed and would like to file a complaint, please see our Copyright/IP Policy Report Abuse Cancel Report AbuseAdditional DetailsIf you believe your intellectual property has been infringed and would like to file a complaint, please see our Copyright/IP Policy Report Abuse Cancel |
| Posted: 15 Nov 2015 07:20 AM PST You can call your cousin's wife your "Cousin-in-law", which is fun to say but not a real relation. None of her relatives are related to you, unless you have a common ancestor, which you probably don't have. (In the 1800's, people married their first, second and third cousins ALL the time, so cousins' spouses, aunts, nephews and so on would have common ancestors.) When (if) your cousin and his wife have a child, Ralph, he will be your first cousin once removed. When (if) you meet that special someone, marry and have a daughter, Matilda, Ralph and Matilda will be second cousins. They would be second cousins no matter what their names were, and even if their parents did not marry. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Arts & Humanities: Genealogy. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
0 comments:
Post a Comment