AIUI - in most every case where a patronymic is used - it cannot be changed because you are the child of your father - if he acknowledges you and you are sprinkled with water and he formally accepts you
I believe this is the case today
To use a Matronymic might suggest that your fathers name be not known or that he has not acknowledged you - with all the concomittant difficulty that entails
Or - perhaps your mother was of a noble line and Daddy was not
At all events I am almost sure that .........'s wyf is not recorded
You are whom you are - complete with Patronymic
Kveðja
Patricia
 
-------Original Message-------
 
Date: 25/11/2006 15:41:43
Subject: [norse_course] Female names
 

Our group was discussing the practice of female surnames and the various sources of surnames including nicknames, location names, etc. A sticking point on married names or family names came forward. We need a tie breaker. Could someone venture an answer?
 
Opinion 1
>If you’re married, you would be described as the wife of your husband.   It would be a little insulting if you continued with your father’s surname, as it suggests you’re embarrassed to take your husbands name, so Ragnaborg Haroldsdottir becomes Ragnaborg Vlladswif, if her husband was generally known as Vllad.<
 
Opinion 2
>I was of the understanding that the tradition was for women to take the mothers name...example. ..Helga Oglasdottir. .meaning Helga the daughter of Olga.. I thought the whole point of surnames in that time period was to determine what lineage you were from..and had nothing to do with who you married.<
 
Thanks,
 
Lodin