RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: kath davis on Sunday 15 November 20 15:22 GMT (UK)
-
I have established that William and Thomas Franklin - earlier post Lincolnshire section - are most likely the same person. But why should someone change his name in mid-life? The change happened between 1813 and 1815. He was born in Worlaby about 1782 (from 1851 census for Thomas). There is a baptism for William Franklin 26 Dec 1782 parents John and Ann Franklin. He was married 1803 as William, to Mary Cooper. The first 9 of his children were baptised at Middle Street Independent, Wrawby, their father was William. The change came before/when the 10th child, Ann was baptised at Independent Chapel, Brigg, and no 11 at Wrawby Street Independent Brigg (could be the same place); their father was recorded as Thomas. Thomas was also recorded when the next 2 baptisms returned to Independent Wrawby, the minister was different to the one performing the first 8 baptisms. At his 2nd marriage he is again Thomas, registered in 1841 1nd 51 censuses and died as Thomas.
As I am satisfied that they are the same man, this is just a discussion issue, unless someone can show differently! Hope this is the best place for it.
-
One possibility I will throw in. Perhaps he changed from William to Thomas because of a condition in a relative's will?
Not completely unknown. There have been cases where in order to inherit from the will the person was required to change their name.
-
Thanks for your reply, and good thinking, although probably unlikely - ag lab in Lincolnshire, if it is correct it didn't exactly change his life! I did check, his father died the year before - but why call him William if he wanted him to be Thomas.
-
This is an awful thing to say Kath and I'm sorry -- but is it possible 'William' committed a crime I wonder and he was hoping to disguise his identity.
-
No need to apologise - it did cross my mind - but why and who from? Better idea to change your surname or move away. He certainly didn't spend long 'away' he had 12 children at regulation 1/2 year intervals!!!
Thanks for your interest
-
Some people have an official name and a name they are known to family as
And they just decide to use the one they are commonly.known by
Also varies as to who is filling in the forms or answering questions of the person who is recording the detais
Maybe there was another Thomas in the family so he started using that as a preferred name once they passed away
-
One of my ancestors is on some documents as William and some as John - however on his second marriage he actually listed it as John William Surname - I have no idea why he switches between the two names
Also rather more recently one of my husband's friends actual name is Brian - my husband (and 99% of people) thought his name was actually David as he's known as Dai No apparently his grandfather started calling him Dai when he was a baby because he was born on St David's day
-
Thank you - 2 more interesting responses. Another Thomas is possibly - anything seems to be possible, but I don't have any earlier ones to blame.... yet!
Iolaus - yes it can happen, my father was baptised John, but called Jack from day one; until he started work and then became (young) Joe, as he worked alongside his father. I did check the baptism for 2 names, but that wasn't it.
-
Similar to other respondents, I teach a student whose official name is X but has always been known as Z throughout his life (not an official name, so doesn't appear on his birth cert etc).
As the change in name coincides with a change in vicar, perhaps your man was always known as Thomas but was officially a William. The old vicar might have known this and have filled in official forms as William. The new minister might not know any different, and refer to him as Thomas. If he referred to himself as Thomas then when the census enumerator comes around and asks what's the name of the head of the household - if Thomas is how he is known then that might have been the response.
-
Good, thank you for that. This is my preferred option. Now his father is John - but can I find him anywhere!!!! Perhaps I should look for William!
-
Names in my close family over the last 100 years:
Pamela -- known throughout her entire life as Paddy, NEVER uses Pamela.
Maud - k/a Billie
Augusta - k/a Frances.
Norman Frederick - k/a Tim.
Thomas Edgar -k/a Ted.
Brenda Elizabeth - k/a Betty.
Muriel -k/a Jonnie.
John Michael - always been k/a Mike since birth.
John Arthur - known at different times as John, Arthur or Jack.
I have never used my "real" name - it's on various documents but my parents always intended me to use a diminutive version of it (it's not actually Ann/Annie btw!)
It's immediately obvious how some of the above came about. Most of the others are obvious once you know the background. A couple are total mysteries.
There are lots of reasons why people change their names, or use different ones!
-
Thank you, yes you are right of course. I did air this as a discussion point, and it has produced some interesting suggestions. Once I had convinced myself it was the same person - thank goodness he lived to the 1851 census (just) so I could get a birth date - with a different name to add to my other evidence.
You have an impressive list there, doesn't make life easy does it?
-
I have several brothers. Each one has their 'own' first name, and then two further given names. Those given names include names based on Grandfathers' names, Uncles, and Dad.
However, NONE of my brothers are known to use ANY of their given names.
So, let's say their birth certificates at least match their baptism records (.... ummm.... more later)... anyway lets say there's
John Michael Frederick Roger SURNAME
Peter George Edward SURNAME
David William James SURNAME
Roger Paul Dennis SURNAME
Well ....
John answers to Charles and Charlie
Peter answers to Christopher and Chris
David answers to Ian
and
Roger answers to Ken (although I have not ever heard him called Kenneth)
All because back in the 1940s and 1950s they were allowed to decide 'what name do you want to be known by AT SCHOOL' .... phew, they all kept their surname intact. I have a male cousin who changed his SURNAME when at school. .... Yes, opened phone book, shut eyes, selected a surname ....
JM
-
My brother was baptised as Robert Andrew.
Robert was grandfathers name, but where Andrew came from we don't know.
He has ALWAYS been known as Andrew, or Andy.
AC
-
A quick scan of answers seems to be examples of birth names never being used, not why someone changes after many years.
I know of a change by a teenager.
I cannot remember why, but some time in early teens she stopped being called by birth name and used, possibly, her second name. This was announced by her parents, so that, for example, if we sent Christmas cards and named all the children on the card, we should use this new name.
By her mid-twenties she was back to her original name, cannot remember that being announced, she was just referred to by her parents under her old name.
A colleague at work changed his first name because too many people thought he was a she because in many countries his name was only used by females. If one is dealing with clients in Asian countries it does make a difference. So in all official work-related documents his name changed, however he kept his original name for his private life. This would mean that, with a surname such as Smith or Jones, it would look like 2 separate people had worked for the company.
Neither of those examples explain William/Thomas. Sorry.
-
AC and PM. Interesting, obviously changing names is and probably always has been fairly common. I suppose I was surprised that people didn’t use their ‘official’ name on official documents. The school example is a case, I taught, more recently than the 50s, and yes you checked on their chosen name, but they still used their given name on external exam papers etc.
Chempat just in before I signed off. I remember in my early teens a group of friends (girls) adopted boys names, one of these stuck throughout her school years, I suspect some peers never knew her real name!
Thank you all for your offerings
Kath - not quite my given name!
-
I bitterly regret calling my kids by their middle names, in this computer age it has caused them a huge pain in the neck. I had known many people who were called by their middle names and didn’t think it was particularly unusual, you were called what you were called and people didn’t bother.
As a new mum and of an ‘artistic ‘ nature ::) I thought the combination of names flowed better !
If only I had known what hassle I was setting up for them.
My late Dad last one of 9 was called Sam, not his baptismal name, as when he started school the teacher said “oh ANOTHER one of Sam ******s kids” :D
-
My grandfather and his siblings used their given (first) names throughout their lives.
EXCEPT for the 1911 census, when all of them used their middle names?! ;D
-
There may be a simple reason for this - or maybe not! In 1911 the householder filled in the form - this would probably have been the father. Previously the enumerator called and filled in the form - when possibly only the mother was at home. Mother would remember the child's Baptismal name - even if it wasn't used regularly, but father probably just did the job without too much thought.
On the subject of Baptismal names and form filling - the entry in the Parish register was, in many cases "slightly" abridged, I suspect that at the Baptism the priest used the full name given to him at the time by the Godparents - form filling was not a priority, it just had to be done, so "Thos of Thos Smith" was the entry.... and sometimes he would even get the first Thos wrong - it was probably John!
I have enjoyed reading these comments, and given some food for thuoght, brought back memories and even educated. Thankyou all
-
Google says the old feast of St. Thomas was celebrated on Dec 21, perhaps your William/Thomas became more religious in later life, and if that was his actual birthday, decided to take the name.
Someone I know - her family’s surname was changed when she was young because it would have been awkward in her father’s profession...and she took her middle name in her teens, so two changes!
-
There may be a simple reason for this - or maybe not! In 1911 the householder filled in the form - this would probably have been the father. Previously the enumerator called and filled in the form - when possibly only the mother was at home. Mother would remember the child's Baptismal name - even if it wasn't used regularly, but father probably just did the job without too much thought.
No! This is wrong.
The system was always the same. The enumerator left a form at each dwelling a week or so before the census. He then returned to collect the completed forms. There may have been occasions when the form hadn't been filled in by the time he called back for it, and then he might have had to help with completing it.
Before 1911 the original household forms were destroyed after the information had been extracted from them. The 1911 census is the first where they were preserved.
-
I stand corrected, thank you. But the same result can stand, many people could not read and write - evidence of his/her marks on marriage records. A lot of the information would be taken verbally.
-
I have established that William and Thomas Franklin - earlier post Lincolnshire section - are most likely the same person. But why should someone change his name in mid-life? The change happened between 1813 and 1815. He was born in Worlaby about 1782 (from 1851 census for Thomas). There is a baptism for William Franklin 26 Dec 1782 parents John and Ann Franklin. He was married 1803 as William, to Mary Cooper. The first 9 of his children were baptised at Middle Street Independent, Wrawby, their father was William. The change came before/when the 10th child, Ann was baptised at Independent Chapel, Brigg, and no 11 at Wrawby Street Independent Brigg (could be the same place); their father was recorded as Thomas. Thomas was also recorded when the next 2 baptisms returned to Independent Wrawby, the minister was different to the one performing the first 8 baptisms. At his 2nd marriage he is again Thomas, registered in 1841 1nd 51 censuses and died as Thomas.
As I am satisfied that they are the same man, this is just a discussion issue, unless someone can show differently! Hope this is the best place for it.
I've encountered the exact same mystery. Unfortunately I have no good answer other than the most likely scenario that they were nicknames that eventually usurped their real ones on formal documentation. Really would love to know for sure though! And new names probably explains the certain individuals I just cannot find trace of...
-
I do believe my one boils down to the minister, he would know his flocks given names and write those in the register. The change of Minister coincided with the change of name. But why William became Thomas in the first place remains a mystery. Good luck with your search, the answer is probably out there somewhere, as mine was, you just have to find it.
-
I stand corrected, thank you. But the same result can stand, many people could not read and write - evidence of his/her marks on marriage records. A lot of the information would be taken verbally.
Very likely, but making a mark instead of signing a document doesn't always indicate illiteracy. There are various other reasons why people might sign with a mark. This has been discussed in other threads.
But it's true that not everyone filled in their own census forms. Some would have been completed by the enumerator, but a neighbour or literate child may have done it at dictation, and assistance was sometimes organised by the local clergy or schoolteacher.
-
Hello there, interesting posting. I would have thought for religious reasons; that he had changed his church. He did not have a friend or family member who died so he changed in his name in their memory, did he?
-
Sloe Gin - I will try and find the thread, it may make interesting reading. Never too late to learn!
Misha77 - I do think it is probably something to do with the Church - when there was a change of minister William/Thomas had his next child baptised at the next Independent chapel, but he returned to the first with the new minister, so doesn't look like falling out, more like no minister to do the baptism. But as you say, interesting thread.
Thanks both for your comments
-
My brother was given two first names and has always been called by a diminutive of the second. For the last few years he has chosen to be called by his first name, which was our late father's. Dad died in 1970. Dad had two first names and was always known by the first as a child but as an adult he became known by the second. People are interesting.
-
This is all a good reason to persevere with searches, if you have good birth information, ditch the first - or even surname, and try again - it can work.
-
Sloe Gin - I will try and find the thread, it may make interesting reading. Never too late to learn!
Here's one
https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=816907.0
A search for something like "illliteracy" will find lots more. It's something that often crops up.
-
Thank you, it is interesting. I suspect the language has changed - we would be instructed to "sign here" now, but previously they probably said "mark here" - and as someone said in days gone by we did as we were told.
Again thanks for your help and interest
-
I have a lady in my husbands tree. She disliked her given name when growing up, so was always known as Diana. however, when she discovered that Eugenia was a family name and that she was named along with several other Eugenias through four generations she happily changed back . Strange but true.