Today is the Thanksgiving holiday, so first of all Happy Thanksgiving to all U.S. Condrans, Condrens, Condrins and Condrons! I don't know exactly how many people that is, but at the time of the 1930 census (the most recent U.S. census to be publicly viewable), the index on ancestry.com shows there were 1488 people in the U.S.A. with the name CONDR?N (where ? stands for any one letter), namely 226 CONDRANs, 336 CONDRENs, 31 CONDRINs and 906 CONDRONs. (The reason these numbers don't add up to exactly 1488 is presumably that a few entries have been indexed under more than one spelling.)
As this one-name study has developed, I have realized that surnames can often be misspelled, and that names people go by can evolve according to local pronunciations etc. particularly in the nineteenth century and earlier, before widespread literacy. I do still regard CONDON as a distinct name different from the ones under study here (even though CONDRON can sometimes be misspelled in the records as CONDON). But the following name variants can I think all be considered to be related, and therefore relevant to this one-name study. I have grouped them according to their being most common, uncommon, rare, and then those instances that possibly only occur as misspellings.
CONDREN, CONDRON, CONRAN
CONARON, CONDERAN, CONDRIN, CON(N)ERAN, CON(N)ORAN, CONRYN
Possibly only occur as misspellings
CONARAN, CONDERON, CONDORAN, CONDORON, CONDRUN, CONERIN, CON(N)ERON, CONORON, CONREN, CONRIN
I stand ready to be corrected!
It is interesting to speculate whether CONDRON and CONRAN, for instance, are more ancient in usage than CONDRAN, say, and if so whether CONDRAN is a corruption deriving originally from CONDRON or from CONRAN.
So to summarize, the names whose instances need to be collected in pre-twentieth century records in order to try to understand present-day distributions and origins of CONDRANs, CONDRENs, CONDRINs and CONDRONs are of the form CON*R?N, where ? is a single letter and * is any number of letters (including none); but excluding names of the form CONC*R?N which I consider to be distinct from those under study here. In searching indices etc. for possibly occurrences of the study names, I use these searches with the wildcards * and ? when the search engines permit:
Happy Thanksgiving, everyone!