If you found out your surname was an alias adopted 3 generations ago, would you want to reclaim your real name

Question

My son and I are really into genealogy, and have done a LOT of research. For years, there was a story in the family that our last name was actually an alias. The way the story goes, our great-grandfather went on the lam and moved to another state after a shooting for which he was wrongly accused. He took on the much more common name of Johnson. We have since discovered that the story is true, and now know what the family's original surname is. And it is much better sounding and less boring than Johnson. Since we are so into tracing our roots, and prefer that surname, would it make any sense of be worth it to change our name back, in order to more easily make contact with distant relatives who may be looking for us?

Answer 1

By all means, change it back. If your great-grandfather was on the lam and took a new name, it's quite possible he never changed it legally, so you might simply be able to revert to the name that should have been yours all along.

Answer 2

You seem like you want to do it. And that should be what really matters.

Answer 3

I'd certain go for it!

Answer 4

When I read your question, I immediately thought of the well-known authors Irving Wallace and his son, David.

Normally, I wouldn't cite Wikipedia as a source, but a portion of the entry for David Wallace explains what happened to him.

"...He is the son of author and screenwriter Irving Wallace. When David was conducting genealogical research on his family, he discovered that the family's original last name was Wallechinsky. It had been anglicized to "Wallace" by an immigration clerk. He was so angered at this that he legally changed his name to "David Wallechinsky." "

Disclaimer:  The part about the surname being anglicized by an immigration clerk would not be accurate.  This is one of those old urban myths that just doesn't die.  But, suffice it to say when the son learned of the original surname, he chose to re-claim it.

In your case, your son and you are considering this due to the fact that your present surname is both common and boring. Of course, you can choose to do this for no reason at all, but to do this because it is common and boring seems not to be a very compelling reason.  If it were to re-claim the honor of your famly name, this would make more sense to me.  I think I am one that would make the choice to change my surname to its original version even if it required some $$$$ to go through the process.

Here's something to think about - you could end up w/ one confusing family tree for future generations to try to figure out. :)

Answer 5

It seems to me your "real" name is the one you have on your birth certificate, high school diploma, driver's license and that packet of letters tied with a faded pink ribbon up in the attic that your father (grandfather, uncle . . . ) wrote home from Korea (Viet Nam, Europe . . .) when he was in the war (courting your mother, in college . . .)  It is the one all your friends and neighbors know you by.

Three generations of your family has used it, even if it is plain and ordinary.

I just about missed the trip of a lifetime this year because I changed my middle name informally years ago. The passport office thought I was an international terrorist. If you want to change your name formally, be aware of the costs. (I investigated them.)

In my county in California you have to go to the court and pay $320 (each), then publish a legal notice in a newspaper (cost of that varies, but it is over and above the $320) for four weeks. If no one objects, the court grants your request.

After that, you should get about a dozen notarized copies of the change and, if you ever apply for a passport, government job, security clearance . . ., be prepared to spend an extra hour (day, week) or two.

You will need to put a note on your resume when you apply for a job, since you graduated from high school and college and worked at employers 1, 2 and 3 as "John Johnson" but now you are "John Periwinkle".

>  make contact with distant relatives . . .

If you publish your genealogy data on Roots Web World Connect and GenCircles,  and post a "Descendants of" report on the appropriate surname / county pages in GenForum and Ancestry, people looking for you will find you no matter what your surname is. Note also that you have 16 great great grandparents (unless someone married a cousin) and only one of them has the surname in question; so, roughly, 15/16ths of your distant relatives don't have that surname.

Answer 6

my thinking... from genealogy, it sure seems to be a cool thing to do.  Or? maybe not.  One aspect of research (to me) is that we are SEARCHING for historical facts, and keeping record of them.. but not judging or changing them. I have heard people ask about going back to a record from 100 yrs ago, wanting to "correct" it.. when actually, nothing guarantees that the correction is correct.   Also, consider this... your ancestry consists of many different persons, almost all of them always had a different name.  Your connection is no less real to them, if the name is not what you now have.  And I fully agree with Ted.. none of this will make it any easier to find distant relatives.

Practically speaking, what you have now,  is entirely legal and correct. Same as if grandpa's name became different after an immigration.  The real cost and challenges of changing the name outweigh the rest.  

Good job on finding the documentation, by the way.  I LOVE people knowing that they can prove (or disprove!) family legends, and go from there.

Answer 7

what is teh original surname, may i ask? please do- it would make a good film/book.