I have been reading birth records scanned in the ANTENATI Archives as well as using transcriptions on Ancestry and Family Search. I'm wondering about the recording of names in the primary documents; understanding them might help with the transcriptions.
For example: John Smith might be recorded (1850s) as John of Smith, and I'm not referring to the record of John's father (where reference would be di or fu depending on the father's still living or deceased).
My questions: Is John's name John Smith?
Is John's name John of(di)Smith?
Was the "di" used to certify belonging and lineage?
Or was it a very real part of the person's name?
There are so many pages, if not nearly all, in the records where the father of the birth-child presents himself and after his first name is recorded, it is followed with "di" before the surname is written.
It seems strange to me that most males in Napoli were named John-of-Smith, as example.
But, I don't know!
The Ancestry and FS search records will transcribe names using "di" as John DiSmith. Therefore, it can be difficult to "match" records from more than one source.
Your help in interpretation is appreciated!
Thanks so much.