John Scott

[1JC]

Hi.

Attached is the 1875 death certificate for James Scott.

I would be grateful for opinions on what the middle name is for James' father (it looks like Reid to me) and also the significance of this.

In all the other records for children born to John Scott and Isabella McNaughton there is no middle name recorded for John Scott and searches for births of John Scott with a middle name have not resulted in anything. Is it possible that John's mother's maiden name was inserted? Or is there another protocol that could explain this.

The James Scott in the death certificate was baptised on 8 January 1801 in Cargill, Perthshire and the baptism record has his parents living in Strelitz.

[Forfarian]

Yes, I think it is Reid.

It's quite common for people to acquire middle names that are not on their birth certificates, and even more common for them to acquire middle names that are not on their baptism records.

I read somewhere that this is because in the eyes of the church only the first given name mattered, so this was the only name recorded in the church records. I wish I could find that reference again, because this question crops up quite regularly.

It could be his maternal grandmother's maiden surname, but not necessarily. There is a naming tradition

First daughter after mother's mother
Second daughter after father's mother
Third daughter after mother

First son after father's father
Second son after mother's father
Third son after father

Subsequent children after great-grandparents, uncles/aunts, other relatives, friends, minister/doctor/laird/schoolmaster/prominent citizen or their wives.

but that doesn't always apply. Where did he come in the family, and is there any evidence that later generations followed the tradition?

[1JC]

Thanks Forfarian.

I have no idea where John came in the family as I am yet to find his birth. I was hoping the Reid might help. In later generations, there is definitely a tradition of having a second name that reflects a maternal surname. However, these second names only appear in baptism/birth records from the mid 1800's onward.
Good to know that it was common for middle names to be acquired. Now I just need to figure out how the Reid could fit in.

Thanks again.

[Rosinish]

What were the names of the children of John & Isabella in order as this may be of interest although illegitimate?

SCOT JOHN REID 19/06/1779
MAGRET SCOT (FR1148) (Mother - no father named)
644/1 170 4 Glasgow

Annie

[Forfarian]

I have no idea where John came in the family as I am yet to find his birth.

I meant where in John's family did James come?

[1JC]

Thanks Rosinish

The children of John and Isabella are:

James (1801)
Margaret (1803)
William (1805)
John (1809)
Betty (1811)
Mary (1814)

I have confirmed all these via their death certificates that named John Scott (a Mason) and Isabella McNaughton as their parents. It was only the death certificate of James that had John Reid Scott, the rest had just John Scott.

The birth record of SCOT JOHN REID 19/06/1779 looks very interesting. Would the Reid reflect the supposed father? Also is there an equivalent to the bastardly bond in Scotland?

Thanks again

[1JC]

Further to my last post, attached is a snip of John Reid Scot baptism record at Glasgow.

I read it as...
Margret Scot a ___ John Reid born in sporn, ____ ____ Wm ______ _____.

Any idea what the gaps are?
Does born in sporn mean illegitimate or have I read this incorrectly?

[Forfarian]

The birth record of SCOT JOHN REID 19/06/1779 looks very interesting. Would the Reid reflect the supposed father?

It's not unusual for an illegitimate child to be named after its father.

Also is there an equivalent to the bastardly bond in Scotland?

I had never heard of a bastard(l)y bond. But having searched to find out what it means, there was a similar procedure with a similar purpose, whereby the Kirk Session would have attempted to find out who the father was, and make him contribute to the maintenance of the child.

The snag in your case is that the John Reid Scot born in 1779 was baptised in Glasgow, and the Kirk Sessions in the cities were less successful than those in rural areas, partly because it was easier to hide an illicit pregnancy in a city, and partly because there were more different religious denominations over whose adherents the Church of Scotland held no sway.

I have to admit to being very doubtful that a child born in Glasgow would end up moving to a small rural parish like Cargill, though of course it's not impossible. I would want to see some additional evidence to prove that the John Reid Scot born in Glasgow in 1779 was indeed the one who married Isabella McNaughton and had their family in Cargill.

[Forfarian]

Further to my last post, attached is a snip of John Reid Scot baptism record at Glasgow.

I read it as...
Margret Scot a ___ John Reid born in sporn, ____ ____ Wm ______ _____.

Any idea what the gaps are?
Does born in sporn mean illegitimate or have I read this incorrectly?

The first gap is easy - NS for 'natural (i.e. illegitimate) son' and I think the final word could be sponsor - in other words William with an illegible surname has taken on some responsibility for the child, but that doesn't imply paternity.

I have no idea what the middle gap is. 'Born in fornication' is a common term but unnecessary in this case as it already says 'NS' which means the same thing. Also I cannot read what is in that gap as 'fornication'.