BORDEVICK (Norway>Belgium, Canada)

Meaning/Pronunciation: Pronunciation: Bord-wick., also Bord-veek Meaning: Have been unable at this time to find a specific meaning, though we believe it is a place name surname.

Origin: According to the family lore, it comes from a town in Germany, Bardowiek, though I am uncertain how far back we have to go to find the ancestor who originated from the town.

Variations: Bordewick and Bordewich, but also Bordevig, Bordevick, Bordeviksen, and I’ve seen Johan Petter Bordewich’s daughters listed as Johansdatter, Johansen, and Johan Petersen.

Relation to me: My mother’s father’s father’s mother.

i: Bordevick, Leonharde, 1861 – 1944, Nordland, Norway; Henrick Bordewick, 3 sons

ii: Bordevick, Johan; 1802-1879; Norway?; Leonharde Linkhausen, 7 sons, 4 daughters; Henrikke Roness, 1 son, 3 daughters

iii: Bordevick, Hans; 1769-1813; Norway?, Anna Tiller, 3 sons

Looking for:
Any further information on Hans Heinrich Bordewick and his wife Anna Magdalena Johnsdatter Tiller and their family, particularly his parents.
Also interested in any further information about Johan Bordewich’s two wives.

I was actually going to post this as Bordewich, but after some consultation with one of my Danish friends, and the records I’ve found when I do go back this far, I’m going to go with the more Scandinavian spelling over the Germanic version.
I’m also wondering (if there’s anyone out there actually reading this) when people tend to change the names in their family tree program? The moment they see an alternate spelling? Or do they just keep all alternate versions, and not change what’s in their original record?

ETA: I should add the reason I had her listed in my tree as Bordewich.

The Bordewick tree came to me whole through Leonharde's grandparents when I first received it. And when I did, all the Bordewicks had that spelling for their last name. Then, a few years back, we had contact with family who spelled their name with a ch instead of ck. After some discussion with my mother and her siblings (my grandfather has been dead since shortly before I started my genealogy search), I determined that it must have changed shortly after the beginning of the century, with my great-great grandfather and great-great grandmother. So I changed all the surnames in the Bordwick clan (his brothers and sisters and father and further-back ancestors and corollary family) to Bordewich.

But in my recent explorations and finds in my family tree has found a number of name-variants. None of which seem to be the -ch variant. The Bordevick variant seems the most likely variant when they didn't use the -sen patrynomic root surname.

So what do you think? Bordewick? Bordevick? Bordewich?


Miss Foodie2shoes July 3, 2010 at 3:36 PM  

Personally I wouldn't change a spelling from an original record, but just keep a note of an alternate spelling, but that's just me.

Elf Flame July 3, 2010 at 3:38 PM  

Well, in this case, I'd always spelled it Bordewick because that's how the family spelled it. Then a few years back, we found another branch of the family that spelled it with a ch, so I assumed that before WWI or so, that's how it was spelled, but seeing in documentation that it's spelled -vick... I'm inclined to believe that over the other two reasonings. If that makes sense?

Miss Foodie2shoes July 3, 2010 at 4:27 PM  

I guess in this case I'd say go with whatever you have on any actual documentation. That's the most likely version.

Elf Flame July 3, 2010 at 4:28 PM  

The problem with that is it's different on a number of documents, unfortunately. But Bordevick does repeat, so that seems the most likely.

Miss Foodie2shoes July 3, 2010 at 4:40 PM  

It ultimately doesn't matter, really, as long as you have a list somewhere of all the alternate spellings.

Ciara Eirikswif July 9, 2010 at 9:46 AM  

For what it is worth, my uncle will make a parenthetical note in the tree with alternate spellings if he finds them.

Elf Flame July 9, 2010 at 9:49 AM  

That's what I've been trying to do, at least. But I do wonder when I should choose one name over another as the one to list them by in my records... Perhaps preponderance of the evidence, I suppose. Use whichever name I find them listed as most.

Ciara Eirikswif July 9, 2010 at 5:40 PM  

Perhaps preponderance of the evidence, I suppose. Use whichever name I find them listed as most.

that would be the best method in my opinion.

Post a Comment

About this blog

This blog is maintained by two sisters who have had a life long interest in geneology.
Mika writes here mostly about our family (Hansen, Hillinger, Bordewick, Park, etc), and her search for more information.
Shannon mostly uses this space as a place to make the many stories written about and by her husband's family (Holly, Walker, Walpole, etc) available to the rest of the family, present and future.

Our blog is named Oh Spusch! mostly because Shannon is bad at naming things. The first post I put up includes a story about the time Walker's great grandfather took his whole family out to see a play and the littlest kept saying "Oh! Spusch!" No one ever figured out what she meant by that.