Genealogy Chat

take offence when you tell them that one of their ancestors an illegitimate child? I had one contact awhile a go that seemed to be excited about the connection till i told her i was decended from the illegitimate son her ancestor had before she married...it was serveral generations ago, nothing recent (child born 1853). Mhairi

Probably. Certainly in Scotland in Victorian times the child was penalised as much or more than the mother and England was pretty harsh if you were catholic. Some thinking lingers on. Clive

Hey Clive I have so many ancestors now that had children before marriage that i dont bother about it any more...quite interesting seeing my grans reaction sometimes though, even though her cousin was illegitimate. In this particular case the child was born, christened (both mother and father where named/signed) then the child was dropped at his marternal grandparents and by the looks of it, never had much contact with either though he knew their names. I could understand if it was a more recent event but...maybe i just have a different way of thinking. Mhairi

I have a similar case in my tree, my great grandmother had an illegitimate child before she married my great grandfather. In fact I never even knew this child existed before I started researching my tree. However, through this site a descendant of this relative contacted me, and yes we have shared alot of bits and pieces but I am more so interested in my great grandfathers line, which of course they arent because there not descended through it. It certainly doesnt bother me that they are related through an illegitimate line, were still related at the end of the day...and I have a new cousin!

Hi Crougar, I think it is possibly a case of 'Late miss-placed conscience', but why they should feel that I do not know. We all know that children have been born out of wedlock since weddings were invented, and how does a bit of paper make it 'OK'. Kathlyn PS.....My nan and granddad had a very healthy, good weight, 7 months first child!!!!!!!!!

Why it should effect who we speak to today I have no idea. If you can find the documents there are often heartbreaking stories behind these children left with grandparents. Mother had no option, the child was effectively taken away from her as she was clearly irresponsible, etc etc! It saddens me how cruel people can be to each other. Clive

when i found my first 'illegitimate', I thought it was funny - not quite as funny though when I found out so was I !! vicky

I think it's silly to frown on something our ancestors did, especially when they didn't have the birth control options we have now. Do these people expect the poor people to have been celibate until married, it just isn't realistic. We always knew that my maternal grandmother was pregnant when she married her first husband. And I recently discovered that my dad's mum had her first child by the friend of the man she later married. It's believed the babies father died before she was born or something, but there are so many little fibs in that family I don't pay much attention unless I can back these things up. I haven't got her birth cert but I'm thinking that as she's registered with her mmn as a surname, it's unlikely it will list her father in order to back up the story. I'm interested in what that and her marriage cert might say though. We're led to believe that illegitamate children were rare, but if you go through births image by image in the late 1910s and 20s you see there are loads with the same surname as their mmn and that to me usually means illegit. It can be hard when you find an illegit child as it can kill the research for the line but I find it reminds me that these were real people just like us and despite the way history would like to portray virtuousnes, they had a sex drive too. And yes, some stories can be sad but even that can connect you to the people who lived so long ago. I think it's their loss if they don't wish to maintain contact. Liz

One thing my dad always says about this is that it's just human nature - illegitimate babies were born then just like they are now, and I now believe that if you think they weren't, that Victorian image of 'no sex before marriage' must have lasted very well. So many of my ancestors were pregnant at marriage that I don't bat an eyelid any more. My grandma was seven and a half months pregnant when she married for the second time, her sister was four months. My paternal great-grandparents married seven months before my gran was born, his parents married when the mother was three months pregnant. It's nothing really new - it's just that then they seemed to like to cover it up more than we do now. And like Liz says, how could we expect them not to slip up occasionally when abortions were so dangerous and birth control didn't exist? I have heard that in farming communities they would wait for the girl to become pregnant and give birth before marriage because it proved she was fertile and could further the family name.

I had an instance of this very recently......a woman had a child before her marriage.......several with her husband, then at least one more after he died. The GR member connected to this family was most put out at being told that the child born after the husband died could not have been fathered by him.......he died 5 years before the birth!! This was in the 1860's.............. Reg

Since records began, in 1536, the illegitimacy rate has remained constant at 10% of births. (Illegitimacy being defined as bride pregnant at time of marriage, or not married at all). The rate rises in wartime and of course has risen dramatically in the last 20 years. OC

I suspect the ''Unofficial'' Illegitimacy rate is far more than 10%. This is why some researchers put more emphasis on their maternal lines, much harder to cover up who the mother was than who the father was.

Glad i'm not you only one then... Do people also find that if you correct someone about something in their tree that you get the silent treatment as well? I have a Dickson who married a Dickson and both the mothers maiden names are very similar (McMurdoch and McMurdo/McMurdy) and when i'd checked into the information i was given i discovered that it was slightly wrong and mentioned it...never to hear from the contact again. I suppose we also have to take account for Real life and other things taking over from this hobby and that may be the reason we havent heard from people. Mhairi

Also forgot to mention...my grt gran. She married her first husband 10/06/1927. He died 25/07/1927 Their son was born 05/09/1927 :) Her second marriage (to my grt granda) 04/11/1930 Their first son was born 10/12/1930 :)

Mhairi Yes - people do not like to be corrected, I have discovered! At least nine people on here have gone seriously wrong on their tree. I have provided them with photocopy evidence (where requested, most didnt even reply). Only one person has changed her information. The rest prefer their own (wrong) version, which they have copied from each other! OC

Just had to copy this across from General Message board (whoops forgotten the name) Susie Lee fell in love She planned to marry Joe She was so happy 'bout it all She told her Pappy so Pappy told her Susie Gal you'll have to find another I'd just as soon yo' maw don't know but Joe is yo' half-brother So Susie forgot about her Joe and planned to marry Will. But after telling Pappy this he said 'There's trouble still. You can't marry Will, my gal and please don't tell yo' mother cause Will and Joe and several mo' I know is yo' half-brother. But Mama knew and said 'Honey child, Do what makes yo' happy. Marry Will or marry Joe you ain't no kin to Pappy. Kow you know why we have problems Clive

Oh Clive, that's hilarious, loved it and so very very fitting. Liz

Well , mums got the hang of it since I,ve been researching the family tree . First one was Oh Dear ....... By the upteenth she now expects it and even asks me if the parents were married ? She,s 84 XX Kim

Can't think why I did not mention it before. O H nearly fell of her perch with surprise when we obtained wedding and birth certificates for her grandparents & father. The marriage was 5 days before the birth. That was cutting it rather fine! lol Clive

too right it happened a lot. My grandparents married on 8 December 1929 and their son was born on 9 December 1929. To make it worse the wedding took place 11 months after the death of his first wife. Caz