Children born out of wedlock

[Schoch]

I am led to understand that frequently children born in Scotland (1700 - 1850's) outside of marriage were not registered.  If this is indeed the case then how can I track my ancestors who fall into this category.
(and there are a few of them)?



Richard

[louisa maud]

I would assume they would be baptised/christened

Louisa Maud

[josey]

children born in Scotland (1700 - 1850's) outside of marriage were not registered.

As I understand it, civil registration did not start till 1855 in Scotland, so no child was registered before that date 

[GR2]

Many baptisms of children born both in and out of wedlock were not recorded in the parish registers or the records have been lost. The fact that the parents weren't married doesn't really affect whether a baptism was recorded.

If a child was born to an unmarried couple who would have been free to marry at the time, subsequent marriage of the parents made the child legitimate.

If an unmarried mother were expecting or had given birth to a child, the Kirk Session of the parish would look into the matter and the Session minutes can provide lots of details including the name and sometimes the occupation and address of the father.

[Archivos]

I am led to understand that frequently children born in Scotland (1700 - 1850's) outside of marriage were not registered.  If this is indeed the case then how can I track my ancestors who fall into this category.
(and there are a few of them)?



Richard

Not strictly true, but they may not be entered into the relevant Old Parish Register (OPR) by the minister.  While civil registration didn't begin in Scotland until 1855, ministers were responsible for the recording of births and marriages where appropriate.  Some were better than others, and now not all records have survived.

The only place to access these, and Scottish civil registrations, is on the pay-per-view site www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk which also has lists of what survives for each parish.  Bear in mind that the OPRs were kept by Church of Scotland ministers, so there are separate ones for Roman Catholics.  Other denominations, such as episcopalian a bit trickier as there is no central repository for these so they're scattered about.

Kirk Session records, which are separate from the OPRs may also contain information on fornicating couples who may be asked to appear before the congregation as a result.  Many of these are held in Edinburgh at the National Records of Scotland but some local archives, such as Glasgow, Aberdeen, Inverness and Hawick provide online access to them. 

All in all, it depends on the area you are looking at, the minister who was responsible, and whether the OPRs have survived.  Even those which have are not necessarily a complete list of events.

[jennywren001]

I am led to understand that frequently children born in Scotland (1700 - 1850's) outside of marriage were not registered.  If this is indeed the case then how can I track my ancestors who fall into this category.
(and there are a few of them)?



Richard

Out of curiosity how do you know they were born out of wedlock?
Jen

[Schoch]

'cause their parents did not marry for a couple of years and were 16 & 12 yrs old when the 1st was born.   They went on the have 3 other children but the 1st two have never showed up on records.  Both parents died before any of the children were 10 so it has been very hard to find any details.

This has been on another post a while back but at that time I was only trying to identify a siblings, not the parents and their marriages.

John Gibson 1774 Yetholm - 1801
1) Margaret Sheil 1778   Sprouston to Unk ? (no marriage found to date but thought to be mother of 1st two below).
2) Sarah Robertoun 1773 Crailing - 1803 (marriage 1795, documented mother of last 3).

Children Andrew Gibson 1790 Roxburghshire - 1873
             Archibald Gibson 1794 Roxburgh - 1758 (he is my direct ancestor)
             Robert Gibson 1795 -  Crailing (?)-1796
             Isabel Gibson 1797 Crailing - ?
             Janet 1798 Crailing - 1863

There is a chance that Sarah was the mother of all children but as no record can be found of the births for the 1st two.  Margaret is speculation really.

Oh I nearly forgot Andrew and Archibald each were witnesses at the others weddings in Newcastle.



Thanks

Richard

[bevj]

Something doesn't add up here, or maybe I have misunderstood.

ScotlandsPeople has baptisms for Gibsons :

John Gibson - to John Gibson / Margaret Shiel  23 June 1788
Andrew   - John Gibson and Margaret Shiel    4 April 1790

Robert  -  John Gibson and Sarah Robertson  9 July 1795
Isabel  -  John Gibson and Sarah Robertson  13 Feb. 1797
Janet  -  John Gibson and Sarah Robertson  23 Dec 1798.

Are you saying that John Gibson father was 14 when his first son was born?
And Margaret was 10?

Sorry but I don't see it.  Also, the Margaret born in 1788 was the daughter of David and Agnes, and the normal naming pattern would give the second son the name of David, not Andrew.

Bev

[Forfarian]

Have you looked at the originals of those baptisms on Scotland's People? If not, then that is your first step.

Are the children described as 'lawful' (legitimate) or 'natural' (illegitimate)? Or are there any other clues?

If they were indeed illegitimate, the next step is to look in the Kirk Session minutes as GR2 has suggested, and see what more you can learn from them.

I take it that you are working back from one of the brothers who were married in England, and that you know from their marriage records that their father was John Gibson but not who their mother was.

Do not make the mistake of assuming that, just because there is only one potential candidate in the surviving records, it must be the right person.

Also, I am very doubtful about a 12-year-old, let alone a 10-year-old, becoming a mother. The age of menarche in girls has got younger in the last couple of centuries, and it would have been extremely rare for a girl to be capable of conceiving a child at 11 in the 18th century. Far more likely that the relevant records have not survived.

In which case, of course, the answer to your question is that you won't be able to track them further back.