Ted,

 Your last question is easy:  Yes, when we are transcribing from a primary
source we must record what is written. (Period)

 The whole idea of transcribing is to "reproduce" the text,  thus it is is
wrong to record "Geo" as George.   There are pretty much standard ways to
handle unreadable text, scribbles, blurs, etc. and many transcribers use
attached notes if they want to offer suggestions or explanations, or some
who can't resist the temptation may write  "Geo[rge]" if they are concerned
the abbreviation is confusing, but  If you want an editorialized or
abstract  version, the better transcribers will  declare it so, but will
never insert a complete word for an abbreviation found in the original.

As for reliablity of the given name abbeviations,  they are probably a bit
more reliable than the spelling.

Thos. Gilmore, aka Tom



On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Ted Delaney <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I'm curious what the prevailing opinion is about the reliability and
> consistency of given name abbreviations in 18th- and 19th-century Virginia
> documents.
>
> For example, does "Jas" always mean "James"?
>
> Can "Jos" mean anything other than "Joseph"?
>
> If we are transcribing names from a primary source of that period, is it
> wrong to record "Geo" as "George"?  Are there professional or ethical
> standards about this?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Ted
>
>
> **********************************
> Ted Delaney
> Archivist & Curator
> Old City Cemetery Museums & Arboretum
> Lynchburg, Virginia
> (434) 847-1465
> [log in to unmask]
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
>

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html