Modern standards hindering research

[Jo.]

I think where/who brought up an  illegitimate child would very much depend on family more than anything.

Hubbies gx3 grandfather and his younger brother both illegitimate (same mum) lived with their mum and grandparents, and after there mum died (aged 26) they remained with their grandparents, unfortunately there grandparents died when they were in their mid teens, where or who they stayed with after this, i don't know due to gx3 grandfather is a Visitor on the census! 

Several generations later...  This was not to be, for hubbies gt Aunty, she found her self pregnant out of wedlock,  not only was the baby adopted but also she was further punished, sent to the local asylum as feeble minded and sadly died there years later.

A cousin was shocked when she was told at the time of the Gt Aunties death,  as she had never been mentioned, and neither did the remaining family arrange or attend her funeral.. 

So not sure if modern times effect our judgement when researching as well different ancestors will do their own thing concerning illegitimate children... 

[greenvalley]

Hi Guy

the phrase whom she fathers upon Thomas Elder in Glenbeich denotes that they were not married.

This is backed up by the fact that Thomas is still in Glenbeich and she is late of Glenbeich, meaning he still lives there and she doesn't.

When she marries in 1799 her name is also Walkinshaw, not Elder. If she had been Mrs Elder for the last 12 years, surely her name would have been written as Elder.

[greenvalley]

Hi Jo,

I feel really sorry for your great auntie. I always think it is really unfair how it has always been the woman who is blamed when a child is born out of wedlock: why are the boys/men never punished? But that is a totally different topic.

Anyway, I am now really curious who raised Thomas Elder, his mum, her family or his dad's family? As there are no records we'll never find out.

[Ruskie]

Illegitimacy wasn't as much of a scandal pre the Victorian era. The main concern was that the child may be a financial drain on the parish if there was no father to support it.

... hubbies gt Aunty, she found her self pregnant out of wedlock,  not only was the baby adopted but also she was further punished, sent to the local asylum as feeble minded and sadly died there years later.

Are you sure Gt Aunty was sent to the asylum as a punishment? Might she actually have been (as was then termed) "feeble minded"? You should try to obtain her records.

[arthurk]

When she marries in 1799 her name is also Walkinshaw, not Elder. If she had been Mrs Elder for the last 12 years, surely her name would have been written as Elder.

That may be another modern (or English) assumption! There's quite a tradition in Scotland of married women continuing to be known by their maiden name, though I don't know whether this happened everywhere and at all times, or if there were any conventions about which surname should be used when. Can anyone enlighten us, please?

Arthur

[Archivos]

Hi Guy

the phrase whom she fathers upon Thomas Elder in Glenbeich denotes that they were not married.

This is backed up by the fact that Thomas is still in Glenbeich and she is late of Glenbeich, meaning he still lives there and she doesn't.

When she marries in 1799 her name is also Walkinshaw, not Elder. If she had been Mrs Elder for the last 12 years, surely her name would have been written as Elder.

Have you had a look at Kirk Session records?  They might shed some light on what the relationships were.

A list of surviving records can be found on the National Records of Scotland catalogue under reference CH2, and you can view them online at various archive searchrooms across Scotland if you can't make it to Edinburgh.

Regarding irregular marriage, while it was legal, the church (obviously!) didn't like it and neither did the state - couples could be fined if they were found to be irregularly married, but numbers of people admitting to it were quite small.  There's a good article about it on the University of Glasgow's website.

Women in Scotland are still known first by their maiden name, and second by their married name, but this of course does depend on how the person writing the information did things - which can be difficult to work out.  For example, if a woman named 'Elizabeth McGregor' married a man named 'Thomas Simpson' she should be known as Elizabeth McGregor or Simpson.  Sometimes she might be Elizabeth McGregor, spouse of Thomas Simpson, Elizabeth Simpson, or Mrs Simpson.  Sometimes she might just be 'spouse of Thomas Simpson' and not given a name at all.

[greenvalley]

Unfortunately the kirk sessions for this period have been lost. I even went to Stirling archives where they were supposed to be, but there weren't any.

As to the woman keeping her maiden name: in all the records I've seen both the names of the woman are then given as you mention. So it would have been "Walkinshaw or Elder" and then after her second marriage she would have been referred to as Alexandra Walkinshaw or Elder or Thomson. But that never happened, so that is why I assumed she never married Mr Elder.

[pharmaT]

When she marries in 1799 her name is also Walkinshaw, not Elder. If she had been Mrs Elder for the last 12 years, surely her name would have been written as Elder.

That may be another modern (or English) assumption! There's quite a tradition in Scotland of married women continuing to be known by their maiden name, though I don't know whether this happened everywhere and at all times, or if there were any conventions about which surname should be used when. Can anyone enlighten us, please?

Arthur

Around here (SW Scotland) it is normal for married women to be referred to as first name maiden name by the people who know her.  Some people Suffix it with "Tae her own".  For example the garage will book my car in under my maiden name.  Documents such as my bank cards, driving licence etc are in my married name.  Other legal documents like contracts or my daughters' birth certificates I am First name married name or maiden name.

[Guy Etchells]

Hi Guy

the phrase whom she fathers upon Thomas Elder in Glenbeich denotes that they were not married.

This is backed up by the fact that Thomas is still in Glenbeich and she is late of Glenbeich, meaning he still lives there and she doesn't.

When she marries in 1799 her name is also Walkinshaw, not Elder. If she had been Mrs Elder for the last 12 years, surely her name would have been written as Elder.

To take the last point first it was not uncommon for women in 18th century Scotland to keep their surname on marriage it was not until the 19th century that the modern tradition of changing surnames on marriage was commonly accepted in Wales, Scotland and Ireland.
“Whom she fathers upon” could be taken to be proof that the couple were married under Scottish law; it was after all proof of consummation to the whole community.

As for her being “late of Glenbeich” she would not be the first woman to walk out on her husband and children because of post-natal depression or other reasons. There is of course no proof of this but it cannot be discounted either.

We cannot make judgements based on today’s practices (as the thread title suggests) but have to try to put ourselves into the mindset of those of the time period we are looking at.

I could be completely wrong and there could be evidence one way or the other but nothing in what has been shown here supports any solid decision.

Thomas Elder certainly does not seem to deny he was the father of Thomas.

Have you tried Stirling University Archives they hold various historic records and may have something useful. Glenbeich which is on the other side of Loch Earn is only about 25 miles of so from Stirling.

Cheers
Guy