RootsChat.Com
England (Counties as in 1851-1901) => England => Yorkshire (West Riding) => Topic started by: nicholastolson on Wednesday 18 April 18 04:26 BST (UK)
-
Whenever I've come across a baptism with no father named, I've assumed the mother is unmarried. Is it possible, though, that the father had died before the child was baptised, and that the mother is his widow? The period I'm thinking about is roughly from 1750-1837.
I'll give one example: Bridget, baptised on 12 October 1806 in All Saints, Dewsbury, as the daughter of Priscilla Tolson. Some trees show her as the daughter of James Tolson and Priscilla Richardson, presumably on the assumption that James had died before Bridget's baptism.
My own sense is that, in such a case, the church would still have shown the father's name, even if he was deceased. Am I correct?
-
Looking at the image for the baptism entries in 1806 it is interesting to note that there are a number of entries where only the mother is named. If they were all illegitimate then Dewsbury was :o :o
Not sure why each of these entries also has a "tick" in the margin. :-\
-
Hi
Sometimes, (depending on church) they would put widow beside the mothers name so I would look for a baptism for a female with same name 16+ years before the birth. If that fails I would look for and marriage around the time of the baptism, (before and after).
John
-
There is a marriage at Dewsbury in 1803 for James Tolson (Clothier) and Priscilla Richardson - licence says that James is 37, plus there is a burial for James Tolson, son of Richard - 17 September 1804.
-
I think it would be usual to include the name of a deceased father (with a note to say he was deceased), to indicate the child was legitimate. As long as the named father had not died so long before that he could not actually be the father.
I have one baptism where mother was shown as widow, nut the child was noted as base bor. The mother's husband had died a couple of years earlier and the widow had a relationship with another man. She subsequently married my relative, but given the childs middle name, I don't believe my relative was the natural father.
I also have a case where a woman had her two children baptised at the same time. The older one was two years old and was baptised as the son of her and Charles Livermore (deceased), the younger one (a few weeks old) was baptised as the child of her and a different man.
On the face of it the record implies that she was the widow of Charles Livermore and she was baptising their child of that marriage and also the child of her new marriage.
In fact she was never married to either man, both were married to someone else at the time of this double baptism. Charles Livermore was alive and well and living with another woman.
The vicar or clerk who fills in the records only records what he is told unless he has good reason to believe otherwise.
-
I can only speak to the one example of this I have in my own tree, which is a little later than your period (1856), but in my case the deceased father was listed on the baptism record with no indication that he was deceased (9 months after he died!). This threw me off for a while before I ordered the birth certificate, which confirmed that he was deceased. Pre-1837 that's not an option, of course.
-
I can only speak to the one example of this I have in my own tree, which is a little later than your period (1856), but in my case the deceased father was listed on the baptism record with no indication that he was deceased (9 months after he died!). This threw me off for a while before I ordered the birth certificate, which confirmed that he was deceased. Pre-1837 that's not an option, of course.
The vicar may just have asked the mother what the father's name was, and she didn't mention he had died or wasn't asked.
Like marriage records often don't record that a deceased father of one party has died. It all depends whether bride or groom are specifically asked or actually think to mention it.
-
Like marriage records often don't record that a deceased father of one party has died. It all depends whether bride or groom are specifically asked or actually think to mention it.
Indeed! Like in the case of the marriage certificates of this same deceased father's two children, one of which states that he was deceased, one of which does not.
-
Hi
Just had a look for Pricilla Tolson on Ancestry and a Pricilla Tolson shows up in the Bastardy records in 1815 (but could be 1812) Dr. William Fawcet and then 1816 Josh Scott.
A Pricilla Tolson aged 66 was buried in 1841, widow of James Tolson, (so would have been born about 1775.)
It would all depend on when James Tolson died?
John
-
Hi
If you look at Bridgett Tolson she married Thomas Hopkin and in the 1841 census it looks like a Elizabeth Tolson was living with the Hopkin family.
Elizabeth Tolson baptised 1817 at Dewsbury daughter of Priscilla Tolson.
John
-
There is a marriage at Dewsbury in 1803 for James Tolson (Clothier) and Priscilla Richardson - licence says that James is 37, plus there is a burial for James Tolson, son of Richard - 17 September 1804.
If the James Tolson who died in 1804 was recorded as son of... I would suspect he is an infant or child rather than an adult
-
Hi
Just had a look at marriage & I cannot see an age for James Tolson.
They were married by licence which usually indicates they had to marry. They had a son, David in 1804 & if the age of Priscilla Tolson in the burial records is right she would have been 28 at the time of the marriage, so if one of them was under age it would be James.
With James Tolson dying in 1804. This would mean that Biddy/Bridget & Elizabeth Tolson were born out of wedlock.
John
-
Marriage licence entry for James and Priscilla (FindMyPast transcription) give James as 37 and Priscilla as 24.
-
This thread now needs to be read in conjunction with this one-
on burial records, does "son of" imply the deceased was a child? (http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=791936.msg6479849#msg6479849)
-
This thread needs to be read in conjunction with this one-
on burial records, does "son of" imply the deceased was a child? (http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=791936.msg6479849#msg6479849)
Have now found images of actual burial registers from Dewsbury in early 1800s and there are a lot of burials where son of or daughter of .. are recorded. So either a lot of children died or the vicar was giving more detail than customary. The only Dewsbury baptism for a James Tolson that I can find which would match age at marriage is one who is son of Richard in 1766.
There is a baptism for a David Tolson in Jan 1804 s/o James and Priscilla, so it is looking likely the James buried in Sept 1804 is him.
-
Hi
...
They were married by licence which usually indicates they had to marry.
...
Hello
Whilst true that some married because they had to marry, without giving the week's notice AND then going through the Banns process whereby the intended Marriage was publicly read out in Church 3 weeks in a row, these could obtain a Licence.
If a Licence was involved and has not survived, try and see the Marriage Bond and Allegation (if both were issued - see both).
However, there were other reasons why some married by Licence:-
1) Because the Licence was usually valid for up to three months, some may have wished to think of it as a formal engagement, or pledge of marriage.
2) Because their work (such as a Mariner) took them away for periods of time, it was easier to marry by Licence.
3) Possibly some couldn't prove who they were (no formal baptism / birth record), so had to get their Bondsman to make a £200 Bond. Also that any accompanying Marriage Allegation confirmed they were Bachelor / Spinster or Widower / Widow or Single and age/s.
4) To keep the marriage a private matter.
5) Because they had nothing, or very little to do with the Parish Church, due to being Nonconformists ...
Some Nonconformists (NC) although forced to marry in Church by Hardwicke's Marriage Act, kept contact with the Church to an absolute minimum and records of NC baptisms may depend on whether records still survive.
Bear in mind some C of E and NC changed religion back & forth too.
-----------
General Comment
I have some family Quaker Burials, of unmarried children aged 18 years and over 18 years, two say Daughter of George Hood, Brewer and one does not. Their father was dead, but not all burials confirm the father was deceased.
Mark