Angus Matheson 1812 Scotland

[Forfarian]

Puzzling. The first angus christened on April 23 1813 would make sense but the thread that Shanghaipanda found on Ancestry has the birth as April 30, 1813 after the christening.
wondering how accurate the ancestry line is.

Very wise. Check the original documents at www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk and don't trust anything you find online unless it's an original document. Even then, be wary.

[Branching out]

Very good advise Forfarian.
I always back everything up with one or two documents before I share information.

Thanks
Branchingout

[DonM]

These are available from Scot's People all the recorded birth/baptisms of an Angus with a father Alexander.

MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEXR. MATHESON/ANNA MATHESON 05/09/1810 Kildonan
MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEX. MATHESON/JANET SUTHERLAND 23/04/1811 Dornoch
MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEXANDER MATHESON/JEAN MATHESON 23/04/1813   Kildonan
MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEXANDER MATHESON/HELEN MACKAY 01/05/1814 Dornoch
MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEXR. MATHESON/CATH. MC AULLAY 01/09/1819 Gairloch

To see the births without costing you a ton of credits enter Surname only followed by father/mother it will list all recorded births/baptisms of that couple.  If you compare this to Angus children using the Scottish Naming Pattern you might get a feel of who Angus actually belonged to.  However, it is not definitive proof only a guide.

Don

[sancti]

Also be aware that the correct baptism for your ancestor may not have been recorded or survived.

A father's name alone is not enough to confirm the correct lineage

[buckhyne]

These are available from Scot's People all the recorded birth/baptisms of an Angus with a father Alexander.

MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEXR. MATHESON/ANNA MATHESON 05/09/1810 Kildonan
MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEX. MATHESON/JANET SUTHERLAND 23/04/1811 Dornoch
MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEXANDER MATHESON/JEAN MATHESON 23/04/1813   Kildonan
MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEXANDER MATHESON/HELEN MACKAY 01/05/1814 Dornoch
MATHESON   ANGUS   ALEXR. MATHESON/CATH. MC AULLAY 01/09/1819 Gairloch

To see the births without costing you a ton of credits enter Surname only followed by father/mother it will list all recorded births/baptisms of that couple. If you compare this to Angus children using the Scottish Naming Pattern you might get a feel of who Angus actually belonged to.  However, it is not definitive proof only a guide.

Don

That's my thinking.
This is a list of the bairns of Alexander Matheson & Ann Matheson.
These are mostly from the contributed IGI and two from the indexed IGI.
Some of the names are the same as the Canadian ones.
All that proves is that they may have been related.
And I would guess that all Mathesons from Sutherland were related.

(1). Name: John Matheson
Birth: 18 June 1797, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(2). Name: Ann Matheson
Birth: 1 July 1799, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(3). Name: James Matheson
Birth: 16 July 1802, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(4) Name: Hugh Matheson (indexed IGI)
Birth: 12 February 1803, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(5). Name: William Matheson
Birth: 15 March 1807, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(6). Name: Katherine Matheson
Birth: 4 April 1807, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(7). Name: George Matheson
Birth: 21 August 1808, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(8]. Name: James Matheson (indexed IGI)
Birth: 29 March 1809, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(9).Name: Angus Matheson
Birth: 5 September 1810, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(10). Name: Katherine Matheson
Christening: 3 July 1812, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

(11). Name: John Matheson
Christening: 28 September 1814, Kildonan, Sutherland, Scotland

I cannot find a marriage for the parents therefore I have no idea if Ann’s maiden name is Matheson.
Best bet is to find a death post 1854 (in Scotland) which should give the name of the mother.

[Forfarian]

I cannot find a marriage for the parents therefore I have no idea if Ann’s maiden name is Matheson.

The overwhelming probability is that her maiden surname was indeed Matheson.

In Scotland a married woman does not legally lose her maiden surname on marriage. These days she is referred to as 'Ann xxx or yyy' where xxx is her own maiden name and yyy is her husband's surname. Quite a few wives are listed in the census under their maiden names, and in the older baptism records, if you get the mother's name at all, it almost invariably includes her maiden surname. I have seen several baptisms of children of 'Mr Alexander Leslie and Mrs Anne Duff his spouse', for example.

I have never seen a baptism record where the mother's surname, if recorded at all, was other than her maiden surname.

(This caused me and a cousin a lot of grief when we were just starting out, long before the easy instant access now available, because we were looking at the family of John Sang and Mary Sang, and we could not find Mary's maiden surname, or so we thought. It wasn't until we finally got her death certificate that we discovered that he father was Edward Sang!)

[buckhyne]

The overwhelming probability is that her maiden surname was indeed Matheson.

I agree, but I'm always suspicious when both have the same surname.

[Forfarian]

The overwhelming probability is that her maiden surname was indeed Matheson.

I agree, but I'm always suspicious when both have the same surname.

As I said, I have never seen a Scottish baptism where the mother's surname, if listed at all, was other than her own maiden name.

But a death certificate should indeed settle it, if one can be found.

Incidentally, Scotland's People has 11 baptisms of children to Alexander Matheson and Ann Matheson in Kildonan between 1797 and 1814, not just the two marked 'community indexed' in the IGI. (The IGI is a wonderfully useful finding aid, but I will never understand the arcane variations in what is and is not included in which section! All I know is to trust the 'indexed' section a whole lot more than the 'contributed' section.)

[buckhyne]

Incidentally, Scotland's People has 11 baptisms of children to Alexander Matheson and Ann Matheson in Kildonan between 1797 and 1814, not just the two marked 'community indexed' in the IGI. (The IGI is a wonderfully useful finding aid, but I will never understand the arcane variations in what is and is not included in which section! All I know is to trust the 'indexed' section a whole lot more than the 'contributed' section.)

Like you, I trust the indexed IGI more than the contributed IGI but on reflection as the contributed is (I believe) from individuals then it is possible that some of the info is taken from family bibles etc.
So, even if not 'official' the information could be true.
Of course only the owner of the bible would have the proof to hand and the rest of us may or may not accept the data.