Autosomal DNA - identify great grandparent?

[melba_schmelba]

I used autosomal DNA to confirm the identity of my paternal great-grandfather, although it helped that I had a suspect in mind (that's him pictured on the left).  I initially got three (now up to five) 4th cousin matches that indicated I was on the right path , and then tracked down one of his legitimate grandchildren who agreed to test with the result being that person shared the right amount of DNA with my uncle for them to be half 1st cousins.

I also confirmed that one of my maternal great-grandfathers wasn't a foundling by comparing two of his grandchildren (my uncle and his first cousin) with descendants of two other lines that would be their paternal 3rd cousins.  That assisted one of the other lines as they had a rumour their grandfather had been the result of an NPE - which I was only told after I had paid for one of them to test!  Now we've confirmed that I hope to one day discover who his mother was.

Very interesting reply! What is an NPE if you don't mind me asking? I do have a few suspects in mind, I was sure at first that one was the culprit, but now not so sure! The mother in question was an actress or chorus girl with some connections to prominent music/theatre figures. The first two children were listed in the civil birth registers under her maiden name (no father), but the last two, I only have a baptism certificate for the last one, made almost 2 years after she was born in St. George's Hanover Square, the daughter's middle name and the middle name of the father I think point to the 19 year old son of a wealthy silk merchant. I suspect there was a different father for each one though!

[melba_schmelba]

posted by mistake

[Seaton Smithy]

The usual definition for NPE is 'non-parental event' but some people prefer 'not (the) parent expected'.

In that case, after I had tested a descendant of the only child of my great-great-grandfather's brother I was told there was a family story the child had been fathered by someone else and it had been a marriage of convenience.  The couple had separated and the story had been promulgated by the wife's family.  The number of days between the marriage and the birth suggested this was not true and the DNA supported that.

the daughter's middle name and the middle name of the father I think point to the 19 year old son of a wealthy silk merchant. I suspect there was a different father for each one though!

Yes, middle names can be very informative.  I was lucky my grandfather had one.  My great-grandmother's next two children did not, which makes it harder for their descendants.  Still, if they tested it would at least answer the question of whether the children had the same father or not.

[melba_schmelba]

The usual definition for NPE is 'non-parental event' but some people prefer 'not (the) parent expected'.

Aha, I see .

In that case, after I had tested a descendant of the only child of my great-great-grandfather's brother I was told there was a family story the child had been fathered by someone else and it had been a marriage of convenience.  The couple had separated and the story had been promulgated by the wife's family.  The number of days between the marriage and the birth suggested this was not true and the DNA supported that.

Yes, middle names can be very informative.  I was lucky my grandfather had one.  My great-grandmother's next two children did not, which makes it harder for their descendants.  Still, if they tested it would at least answer the question of whether the children had the same father or not.

There is a similar story re: a birth during a separation in my family, which I was able to verify through 1920s electoral registers. A rogue middle name might point to it having some veracity, can't find any inspiration for it within the family, although I know sometimes they were named after godparents or family friends. When did the law change that meant women could register their children under any name, even if they weren't married? As far as I know women had to use either their maiden name on birth certificates if unmarried or married name, even if separated until the 20th C.

[Rosinish]

Hi Melba,

"When did the law change that meant women could register their children under any name, even if they weren't married? As far as I know women had to use either their maiden name on birth certificates if unmarried or married name, even if separated until the 20th C."

I'm not sure which country you're in or relating to but this interests me as I have never known an unmarried woman to be able to register a child under 'any name' other than their given forenames which may include the forename/surname of the reputed father but would still include the mother's maiden surname unless of course she'd been married, it was assumed an illegitimate child was her husbands?

I'm unsure how this works with illegitimate children of unmarried couples where the father signs at the Registering of the birth elsewhere other than in Scotland.

In Scotland, if the father is present at registration the child will be known by both the father's surname & the mother's maiden surname on the birth Index.

Annie

[familydar]

Possibly getting a bit off-topic now but in England you can be known by any name you wish as long as there's no attempt to deceive.  It's known as "common usage" and although the authorities don't make it easy for you it's perfectly legal.  You don't need to change your name by deed poll.  I don't know if it's always been the case but going back to the early days of civil registration (and before) there was no real means of checking whether a person was who they said they were.

I have a couple of marriage certs which I am certain are for my dead rellies but in one case the bride used a completely fictitious surname and significantly "elevated" her father's occupation.  On the other it was the groom who went by a different surname.  I've no instances of birth certs giving unexpected surnames but (aside from the possibility of the registrar mishearing a name and the illiterate mother not knowing it had been recorded wrongly), I can well believe it happened.

Jane :-)

[melba_schmelba]

Thanks for both your replies, sorry for taking so long to respond ! In my family, in different branches, the rule I have found seems to be unmarried women register with their maiden surnames, and married women, even if I know the father was someone other than her legal husband still list the husband as the father on birth certificates. However I am not sure if that is for legal reasons or avoiding questioning or embarrassment caused by the registrar's disapproval? Embarassment was the only reason I assumed my ancestress ceased registering her births and just had the children baptised instead.

I have a couple of marriage certs which I am certain are for my dead rellies but in one case the bride used a completely fictitious surname and significantly "elevated" her father's occupation.  On the other it was the groom who went by a different surname.  I've no instances of birth certs giving unexpected surnames but (aside from the possibility of the registrar mishearing a name and the illiterate mother not knowing it had been recorded wrongly), I can well believe it happened.

Jane :-)

Yes I have the elevated occupation thing - in one case to gentleman when I know he was in fact a porter, and the other stockbroker when I know he was a musician! I also have a gt x aunt who added numerous extra first names on when she married up .