Thanks ! Very helpful and interesting.
In the case I'm currently researching, the "child" was married using his
father's surname, then most, if not all, instances where he is found after
that, he used his mother's surname. His children were surnamed using the
mother's surname.
Carole
In a message dated 5/16/2011 8:39:07 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:
How high is the sky?
Not trying to be facetious, but there never was a set "policy or practice"
about naming an illegitimate child. It was left up to the mother (or her
family) as to what surname to give a child. In my experience from having
done genealogical research for over 30 years, "most of the time" the child
took his mother's surname (probably 95+% of the time). Actually, I can
count very few entries in my almost 100,000 name database where such a
child was given a surname other than his mother's. Maybe I'm dense, but
I've never come across any "policy or practice" before. In fact, most of
the time, the children of an unwed mother took her birth surname. One
could only try to determine the father's surname by looking at many,
many records, such as Census Reports, Wills, etc.
Sarge
At 5/14/2011 01:20 PM Saturday, you wrote:
*********START OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT*********
>In the early 1800s, what seems to have been the policy or practice of
>naming an illegitimate child? Would he or she take his natural father's
>surname or that of his mother? If this policy or practice reversed at
some
>point
>in time, approximately when did the change occur?
>
>Thanks for the help !
> Carole
>
>To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at
>http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
**********END OF ORIGINAL MESSAGE TEXT***********
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html
|
