Brickwalls

[Silent Whale]

Hi to all in Roots Chat world!

I thought I'd just start the ball rolling as a newbie with this first post before bombarding the forum with all those brickwalls we all inevitably hit.

I actually started many years ago after a family rumour told tales of us not being part of the gene pool we assumed by fact of our surname. After the first hurdle I gave up after finding evidence that tipped its hat towards that rumour but also seemed to disprove it at the same time.

Some time passed and then I accidentally sent an email to myself - who turned out not to be me but my evil twin living just around the corner. He invited me to see his online tree to see if we were related (which we weren't) - hence I caught the bug again.

I came to this forum after stumbling across Neil from Fraser and Fraser's post about the increase in GRO BMD cert charges. As I feel I know Neil personally (lol - from the tele) - I thought this must be the forum for me!! Was there any suggestion in those 20 pages of why the GRO can't offer a service like The National Archives - where we can just get a pdf of records for £3.50 - and instantly?

I'd like to point out at this stage - that the price increase has no sinister connotations: it is just my luck (please feel to blame me and send me rude messages) that I start a new hobby and then - wham! - becomes something that has to be seriously considered against the need to feed the children!

I have now proved that we are in no way connected to the gene pool for the surname we carry. And, of course, in doing so have uncovered all those dark secrets that the old guard of the family do not find funny - except one old aunt who, like myself, finds it all highly amusing!

So - first question - although I have no intention of charging my surname to the proper one - what do people think about this situation; where only three generations back we assumed a name nothing to do with that gene pool?

I'm not sure what help I can offer other forum members but thank you all in advance for your thoughts on the brickwalls I will be posting.

[Rah1980]

Welcome to rootschat 

Just wondered how you assumed a name that had nothing to do with you? Was an ancestor named after a step father or something along those lines?

Personally I don't care how many illegitimate ancestors I have in my past, but my grandmother who is 90 (on Tuesday!) has a big problem with it as she was an illegitimate child, it took me ages to find her 'other' family and haven't gone into much detail because she would rather pretend her father never existed and although she didn't get on so well with her mother or stepfather she would rather be thought of as their child.

Sarah

Ps look forward to seeing your brickwalls 

[Silent Whale]

Hi Sarah

It's been a long process but basically my great- grandfather appears as various different names - variations on a theme - until I finally tracked his real birth cert down which showed no father.

His mother married the man whose name we carry some 5 years after the birth of my great-grandfather. As further proof my great-grandfather carried his original surname on as middle name for his children.

Further investigation showed some of his children with the double-barrelled name of his birth name and the 'inherited' step-fathers name. With both parents named on the children's birth certs with double-barrelled names - but not all of the children!

Neil

[Maggie1895]

Silent Whale,
welcome to Rootschat - that's quite a first question!

Difficult.  If you and your family all relate to your parents and grandparents then in many ways the name they used, for whatever reason, surely is your name? I can also see why you would want to link back to the gene pool though.

Steps and remarriages often change things - I lost my own gr.grandfather for 2 censi and eventually found his mother, who I thought had died, had remarried and the whole family were recorded under the stepfather's name.  Once my gr.grandfather left home and married he was always recorded in his own birth surname and we, his descendants, all followed suit.  So was there a time when a grandparent or gr.grandparent of yours made a conscious decision to stick with a different name, know it would affect all of you to come?  If so, they must have had some reason.

Could you take your original surname as an extra middle name, and use it as a second given name for newborn members of the family?  

I think a lot depends on the ties you feel, and the history established by, the past 3 generations who chose to be called something else.

p.s. My 'post' click collided with your new post.   How much influence and affection was that stepfather held in?  Sounds like it was a lot, perhaps he was someone they wanted to belong to?

[Silent Whale]

Hi Maggie

With regards to influence and the affection side of things - this is all in the past and before my time - and certainly before any 'openness' in the family.

Also we have to bear in mind that most would have been poorly educated. If your mother got married when you you 5 years old and you suddenly changed your surname I don't think you would question it - nor wonder why you suddenly had a 'dad'.

There doesn't seem to have been a conscious decision to stick with one name - only to continue with his original surname as either a double barrelled or middle name for his children - my paternal grandfather.

However, just to add more intrigue - his naval records show signing on for 12 years but the last entry is 'run' after only 5 years. I'm led to believe that 'run' meant AWOL and there seems to be no form of legal discharge remark after this event. So perhaps a name change may have been order?!!! LOL

He does appear again later in WW1 in the army (albeit very old) - did the British Army have penal regiments - perhaps they did catch him in the end?!

Neil

[jim1]

During wartime going AWOL was a capital offence but in peacetime it was quite commom particularly if the runner was being sent overseas for any length of time.Although these events were reported in the Police Gazette they weren't hounded down with dogs so to speak.Had he been caught he would have been charged under Naval Regs. & jailed.
As has already been said it was common practice to give young children the name of the new husband,in some instances older children retained the birth father's name & appear under a different name to their younger siblings.Illegitimate children always retained the mother's name as the father had to give his permission which for obvious reasons didn't usually happen,so out of defiance or recognition the mother would often give the father's name as a middle name.
We all have them.
Names don't really belong with the gene pool they are part of our family history,the gene pool is part of our genetic inheritance & although this might dictate the colour of our eyes or our height it's family that dictates our attitudes,character etc. therefore those are the names that are important to us.
If we follow the gene pool we'd all be called something else.

jim

[Silent Whale]

Arr, yes Jim; the old nature or nurture discusion. What I'm alluding to in family history terms is that there is no longer any point in me tracing back ancestors based on my surname as that side would only have a very small nurture input and absolutely no nature (gene) input whatsoever.

The naval service was from 1895 until 1901 - I've not looked into what ships (if any) where sent to the Boer War but he was probably in cells or on the run anyway! Just surprising that it ends with 'run' and no word of even a dishonorable discharge. I've got some other naval records and they all have a definite 'end'.

Neil

[ainsley]

Hi Neil,
      Welcome to rootschat. My imediate family too have assumed a name that is nothing to do with the gene pool.

        My husband changed his surname as a teenager to the 1 we now have, which was his step fathers name. He never knew his biological father or what his name was, so my children if they ever decide they actually want to know where they came from, will never know that side of thier family. So they will never hit that brick wall. Unlike the 1 i'v hit with my research

Thanx Ainsley 
     

[jim1]

My GGrandfather had no known father (except to the mother of course) so everyone from that point had the name we have now,that of his mother,so that's the only line to trace.Going back generation after generation down each line is a bit of a fairy tale in most families.

jim