VA-ROOTS Archives

October 2002

VA-ROOTS@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Holly Cochran <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Holly Cochran <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 17 Oct 2002 22:18:42 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
At 12:00 AM 10/18/02 -0400, you wrote:
>Could a child around 1800 be referred still be referred to as an "orphan" of
>a named individual, if that individual was a court appointed guardian,
>because both of the child's natural parents were deceased?

I don't know, but I will offer that I have a case around then that
describes a child as an "orphan" because "his father has run away". So I
wonder if orphan meant something slightly different then - like "child in
need of protection or guardianship". So in your case "orphan of X" might
have meant "the orphan for whom X was responsible for". All speculation, of
course.

--Holly

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2