I have come across a bit of a puzzle re: the parentage of a person I am researching. Forgive me, but I am going to anonymise as much as I can.
The problem starts with the birth of a child, John, into a poor family in an urban area shortly before 1900. He was born on 5th August and was registered under his mother's surname with no father listed on the birth certificate. On the certificate, his mother's name is Amelia and she was unmarried at the time. She married about six months later and John lived with this family during his formative years, even stating Amelia's husband as his father when he got married. During some early censuses, he has two surnames - his mother's and his "father's". Eventually he only used his "father's" name.
That was all quite logical - I assumed that Amelia had had John with the man she married but as they weren't legally married at the time of his birth, his father's name couldn't be entered onto the birth certificate.
The problem came when I tracked down John's baptism record in the Catholic church. The baptism entry is the correct one - his date of birth is consistent with his birth certificate (5th August) - and the godmother is Mary Jane who is Amelia's twin sister. John was baptised on 22nd August. No father is listed here - as to be expected - but the strange thing is that his mother is "Helenae", Latin for Helen - not Amelia, as I was expecting.
The curious thing is - Amelia had a younger sister called Ellen! The problem is that if Ellen was indeed John's mother - she would only have been about 12 years old when he was born!
So the question is - do you think it would have been possible for a 12 year old to have carried a child? And that in between baptism and the registration of his birth (much later on 16th September), Amelia decided to raise John as her own? And that when she married, John took his name instead? I should point out here that on the first census John appears on, he is listed under his maternal grandfather (with both surnames!) as "grandson" - despite the fact that Amelia, her husband and two legitimate children were also living in the same house, but they were listed separately as another family unit. John is not listed as being in their "household". The other anecdotal evidence for this would be that I have been told that John never got on well with his "family" and nothing much has ever been spoken about with regards to his relatives.
Or - could I be blowing this all out of proportion and it's simply a case of some priest writing the wrong name in the baptism register?
I would be very grateful if I could benefit from your collective wisdom on this one! Which scenario do you think is possible/probable? Will I ever get a definitive answer?
Many thanks.
