Gateshead, Bishop Aukland, Durham

[Tickettyboo]

I'd hang on till you get the birth cert which will give your Grandad's occupation in 1932/33. That should either confirm or deny if this seaman's record belongs to him.

Boo

[seaweed]

Would agree with Boo. For your info.

https://www.southampton.gov.uk/arts-heritage/southampton-archives/index-merchant-seamen.aspx

[Eyorepet]

Good morning Boo and River Tyne Lass

I now have John William Thorpe's birth certificate and marriage certificate unfortunately I'm no further forward.
On the birth certificate it has no mention of a father but on the marriage certificate in 1932 it has Charles Henry Thorpe named as John's father. He was an Able Seaman but was deceased by then.

There is a Charles Henry in 1911 census but he lived in Kent born about 1867 and was a stoker in the Navy. Got married approx. 1910. Obviously a married man perhaps Mary didn't want him named but why then have him on the marriage certificate. No mention of Mary on there either as a witness.
John William was born in 6 Church Street, Felling but I can't find him at that address.

I would very much like to link John with Charles but for me this information is vague, do you know of any other means with your incredible knowledge that you have? 

Many thanks

[River Tyne Lass]

That is some interesting information - you never know, when I can get to the archives the workhouse entries might have clues.  I am hoping so.  I know I have found clues for my own ancestors once in a workhouse record which led to getting past a block.

When I do get there I will also look to see if there might be a baptism at Felling.  Don't get your hopes up too much as even if there is one Father might not be named.  However, I once found a baptism of a child whose Mother married one of my ancestors and she did give a birth Father's name at baptism  following on from this she gave child my ancestor's name.

[Tickettyboo]

Playing devil's advocate (again, sorry).

His mother wasn't married, hence his birth was illegitimate and its extremely rare for a father to be named (I've only ever had one case of an illegitimate birth around this time where a father was named on the registration - and they married the following week).

If this Charles Henry Thorpe you have found didn't marry till 1910 then I assume he was still single in 1908 when John William was born.

As RTL has said there is an outside chance that the father's name was on the baptism record (if he was baptised) but again that is rare especially in these cases when the father either couldn't or wouldn't marry the mother.

As for the marriage cert, people often didn't like to admit they were illegitimate and gave a made up father's name when they married. No one had to prove the information given, they were just asked for a name and occupation.
 Given that his mother's maiden name was Thorpe and John William's birth surname was Thorpe, I'd hazard a guess that a man who just happened to have the same surname being his Dad is quite possible to have been in 'made up for the occasion' category

His Dad's first names, if John William was ever aware of them, may have been Charles Henry but the likelihood of them all sharing the same surname is remote? Not impossible, but certainly remote.

Boo

[Eyorepet]

Hi Boo
yes I've just realised if he was going to make up a name then obviously it would be something Thorpe, sorry, slow on the uptake there 😁 But what I don't get is how all the different people doing family trees have come up with this exact name, although none of them have any records attached to prove it and this name was not known by anyone in the family! So advice wise, do I give up on this? Am I trying to prove something that there is no answer to?

[Eyorepet]

River Tyne Lass
Looking  forward to whatever you can find. I will be gutted if I have to give up on this without finding his father.
However, I appreciate there is only so much we can do so please don't feel that I am relying on you to get the answer

[Tickettyboo]

Other people's trees can be helpful -  as a pointer.  Then starts the work of verifying for ourselves to see if what they say has some basis in fact. Its 50:50, either its right or wrong.

Unfortunately all too often, someone takes a wrong turn and others see it. Rather than verifiying what they see, some happily just add it to their own tree and so it goes on. Enough people do that and it 'looks' like its writ in stone. Have you contacted any of the tree owners? Maybe they have taken what is on the marriage cert as being true - and though I think its a remote possibility, it IS technically possible that a 20 year old girl had a fling with a sailor twice her age who was in port for a week or so in Newcastle and he sailed off into the sunset leaving her pregnant.

But if you are asking if you should give up,. I am the wrong person to ask :-) I've been searching for my 2x G Granny Mary Ann Brown who was, apparently, born c1817, for almost 20 years now - and still nothing prior to the day she wed my 2x G Granda John Mavin on 26th June 1842. The marriage record says her Dad was called John Brown and that's still all I know. But I still dust her off now and then and trawl through the records, someday something may turn up, there are new databases popping up and I check them, but for the moment her Dad's name (as given on the marriage cert) is all I know. Doesn't stop me haring off following the most tenuous possible lead. In the meantime I have worked on other branches where I have found info.
It aint over till the fat lady sings, and I am not about to even let her on stage while I am still around
:-)

Only you can decide, one suggestion is you document back to your John William, see if there are any clues in the workhouse records when RTL is able to look for you. Ditto for the baptism record.  Work on other branches and document what you can find for them.
Read the threads about DNA testing and 'perhaps' that may be a way forward. If you are as sure as you can be about your combined tree, then a DNA match "may" turn up that doesn't fit into what you know and then you can follow that? I have read that sometimes it can break through brick walls such as yours but I have no experience of it at all.

It IS rotten when you think a record you order is going to answer the puzzle and the damn thing arrives and just sparks more questions. Its sometimes the way things go :-(

Boo

[SelDen]

If you are looking for an unknown great grandfather then there is a reasonable chance DNA will be at least able to find the right family line. However, this can take time and patience as you have to wait for the right match(es) to actually test. You also need to do the documentary research.

DNA combined with documentary research enabled my 3 x great grandfather to be finally identified. However the DNA match that provided the first solid clues did not come along until two years after I tested and only showed up on MyHeritage which has a chromosome browser and which showed the new match as also matching other known descendants. The match had tested originally on Ancestry but there they were just one of about 20,000 low value matches and I did not notice them.