Illegitimacy

[Maggyanne1950]

When tracing someone in parish records at the Notts archive, I discovered that the family had 3 legitimate children, followed by 3 recorded as illegitimate, in 1806, 1808, and 1815. There were many baptisms recorded as illegitimate; possibly up to 35% of records. This seem excessive when the national average is around 7%. I was wondering if the father may have been caught up in the Napoleonic wars and therefore away from home. Has anyone else encountered this situation? Was it normal for the father to be present at the baptism and a no show just taken as no proof of paternity?
I have tried all sorts of angles on the internet to discover a reason for this, but I cannot believe that the population of Newark had that many more illegitimate children than anywhere else. If they are genuinely illegitimate, it certainly adds an interesting new dimension to my family tree

[pinefamily]

That certainly is unusual to have illegitimate children AFTER legitimate ones. Are you saying the father is named on the first three, but not the other three?

[venelow]

Maggyann states:

"I cannot believe that the population of Newark had that many more illegitimate children than anywhere else."

Nor can I.

From Nottinghamshire Family History Society Transcriptions.

Newark
1806  212 Baptisms  7 without fathers' names
1808  236 Baptisms  17 without fathers' names
1809  238 Baptisms   9 without fathers' names
1815  285 Baptisms  7 without fathers' names

1808 is higher than the other years but nowhere near 35%.

Venelow
Canada

[Guy Etchells]

When tracing someone in parish records at the Notts archive, I discovered that the family had 3 legitimate children, followed by 3 recorded as illegitimate, in 1806, 1808, and 1815. There were many baptisms recorded as illegitimate; possibly up to 35% of records. This seem excessive when the national average is around 7%. I was wondering if the father may have been caught up in the Napoleonic wars and therefore away from home. Has anyone else encountered this situation? Was it normal for the father to be present at the baptism and a no show just taken as no proof of paternity?
I have tried all sorts of angles on the internet to discover a reason for this, but I cannot believe that the population of Newark had that many more illegitimate children than anywhere else. If they are genuinely illegitimate, it certainly adds an interesting new dimension to my family tree

Were you looking at the original records or transcripts of the records?
If transcripts perhaps the transcriber assummed if no father was shown the child was illegitimate, clerics normally made it clear whther the child was illegitimate or not.

I would add if the fathers were away at war it is very doubtful that any children their wives had would be legitimate as there would be little if any chance of home leave at that time.

Cheers
Guy

[clairec666]

Like Guy says, seeing the actual registers will tell you a lot more than the transcription. (Sometimes blatantly using the word bastard, sometimes a little more polite!)

Often in the 1700s only the father's name was mentioned, or the wife wasn't explicitly named (e.g. John the son of Thomas Smith and his wife). I've not yet seen a case of only the mother being named, except when the child is illegitimate. And by the early 1800s both parents (if known) were usually mentioned by name. However,  there was no standard form for recording baptisms like post-1813, so the cleric was free to record it in any way they liked. It's worth looking at how other baptisms were recorded around that time to compare.

[Guy Etchells]

Like Guy says, seeing the actual registers will tell you a lot more than the transcription. (Sometimes blatantly using the word bastard, sometimes a little more polite!)

Please don't think using the word bastard was not being polite.

That was the correct legal description of a person born out of wedlock and far more polite than calling someone illegitimate which in reality means they are not allowed according to rule or law; which questions their right to exist at all.

[clairec666]

Like Guy says, seeing the actual registers will tell you a lot more than the transcription. (Sometimes blatantly using the word bastard, sometimes a little more polite!)

Please don't think using the word bastard was not being polite.

That was the correct legal description of a person born out of wedlock and far more polite than calling someone illegitimate which in reality means they are not allowed according to rule or law; which questions their right to exist at all.

I meant polite by today's standards... if a vicar used that word in a baptism today there would be uproar!

[Maggyanne1950]

Thank you all for your replies. I found my ancester Ann Addis.on line(freereg), with only the mother, Elizabeth) named. I wanted to find more of the family, so went to view the microfiche at Nottingham. I found the 3 children mentioned with the word illegitimate written in the book. The mother has the same name as a mother with 3 legitimate earlier children and a father named as William. The other 3 were born in 1778, 1800 and 1802. As the father seemed to be absent after the 1802 baptism, I guessed that maybe he was called to the militia to defend the country. Information is sketchy. Apparently it was thought that england may be invaded, so I surmised that he may be based in the UK rather than abroad, hence potentially home leave. I have read that an allowance was paid to wives. However, I guess that if she had little or no income, maybe she opted to live with another man. I looked in many registers, but the word illegitimate occured very frequently in this parish at this time. There were records available of cases of fathers being persued for payment within the record office, but I did not have time to search them. Perhaps that should be my next course of action, when I am able to get there again. At the moment, I am just guessing at scenarios. If anyone has any better ideas, please let me know.

[Maggyanne1950]

PS I have an acquaintance whose grandfather had the description "Bastard son of ......" on his grave stone.
I also mentioned the Lincolnshire Bastardy courts in a family history group meeting about illegitimacy, last year, which was recieved with a mixture of stunned silence and suppressed sniggers.
It is strange how words go in and out of common usage.