Starting Sept. 5, 2014, Genealogy.com will be making a big change. GenForum message boards, Family Tree Maker homepages, and the most popular articles will be preserved in a read-only format, while several other features will no longer be available, including member subscriptions and the Shop.
 
Learn more


Chat | Daily Search | My GenForum | Community Standards | Terms of Service
Jump to Forum
Home: General Topics: Melungeon Forum

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

Re: naming - scholarly work on naming Huguenot practices
Posted by: J Friedman (ID *****8598) Date: July 15, 2010 at 05:03:00
In Reply to: Re: naming - scholarly work on naming Huguenot practices by djarrett of 28064

The post you posted from ancestry, this person seems to be going by some DPY research on trying to figure out naming patters and where they came from. DPY stared this Jewish surname issue which is not accurate research on the Jewish people. The slave masters gave their slaves their names. Im sure many of the Slave owners could read and write and even if they couldn't most back then were raised on the christian bible especially in the south. It's anyone's guess how a Slave owner whould name their slaves.

Owen, Henry and William are known English "Royal" Tudor names. My 6th great grandfather is a Tudor. Henry the 8th left no living male heirs to know if my Tudor's were at one point royal way back there. Some people got my family traced back to England even though there is no proof of my ancestors parents, wife or siblings.I cant get my ancestor out of NC on paper. people make up things in my family too. My Tudor family drops the "Royal" first names and started using American names like Benjamin Franklin, George Washington

That post on ancestry mentions that one of your slave owners may have fathered a child to one of his slaves. if this is true,your family might have been treated slightly differently. Your slave family would have been kept together and not sold off seperately or passed off to other family members of the slave master. I have heard about 35% of African American's come up with European DNA on their male ancestors because of a Slave owner fathering children to his slaves. That post also mentioned that the slave owner freed one of his slaves. Sounds like some of the slaves may have been "Family" if the resarch posted is accurate

Some slaves were permitted to marry but it all depened on how the slave owner treated their slaves. Your slave owner seems to have taken the time to record all the information. I have met people researching slavery that don't have the documents you do because their slave owner did not keep as detailed a record.


Notify Administrator about this message?
Followups:

Post FollowupReturn to Message ListingsPrint Message

http://genforum.genealogy.com/melungeon/messages/27068.html
Search this forum:

Search all of GenForum:

Proximity matching
Add this forum to My GenForum Link to GenForum
Add Forum
Home |  Help |  About Us |  Site Index |  Jobs |  PRIVACY |  Affiliate
© 2007 The Generations Network