Advice for condundrum at Polstead!

[jannergray]

Hello everyone

I'm new to researching ancestors in Suffolk so am looking for some advice!

I've got a conundrum with my ancestors at Polstead.

My 4th Great Grandmother, Hannah MONTAGUE married John GARD(I)NER at Polstead in 1815. Hannah was born at Polstead and baptised there in 1791. From online transcriptions I note that her baptism record appears to suggest she is the daughter of Richard MOY and Mary MONTAGUE.

The confusion is that Mary MONTAGUE was nee GREENWOOD (born at Polstead in 1752). She married James MONTAGUE at Polstead in 1777. I'm guessing James died at some stage prior to 1791 when my Hannah was born which could explain why her father is recorded as Richard MOY??? or was she born illegitimate? or had James MONTAGUE done a runner? and if so, to where???!

Does anyone have any thoughts?

I wonder if anyone can tell me if James MONTAGUE died around the 1777-1791 period; or indeed who was Richard MOY (sometimes spelt MOYS or MOYSE)

It's all very confusing and I'd certainly appreciate any thoughts. I'd really like to try as best I can to establish Hannah's parentage.

Thanks

Graham

[Annette7]

No death in Polstead for James Montague - just one possibility for Richard:

Richard Moyse bc.1737, bur.10/3/1833 Polstead (96yrs)

A James Montague bc.1753, bur.30/12/1787 Stoke by Nayland - a James Montague bp'd there too on 7/1/1753, son of James and Margaret. 

Stoke by Nayland and Polstead just 4 miles apart.

Since Richard and Mary never married then strictly speaking Hannah was indeed illegitimate - there appears to have been 3 other children of Richard and Mary i.e. Richard 1786, Susan 1787 and Jeremiah 1794.

Annette

 

[emeltom]

Looking at the baptisms on the Suffolk Baptisims index not only did Richard and Mary have Hannah they also had a son Jeremiah in 1794.

The entry reads Mothers first name(s) Mary
Fathers first name(s) Richard Moy

This implies that his surname was Montague and his Christian names were Richard Moy. You would need to see the original Parish Register entry, or an image of it, to confirm exactly what was written.

Emeltom

[jannergray]

Dear Annette and Emeltom

I really appreciate your comments and information - many thanks.

I think the James Montague bur. 1787 at Stoke by Nayland could be "my" Mary's husband - the age fits perfectly. I suppose this would leave it slightly more acceptable to have children with another man - Richard Moy(se) I wonder why they didnt marry though, as if the James, d.1787 is the right man that would have been possible.

The three other children are most interesting - I shall have to look them up and see if they offer any clues.

I suppose as you say Emeltom that Richard Moy could indeed be Richard Moy Montague - but somehow this doesnt feel right since there is an instance of a Richard Moyse being buried at Polstead in 1833.

Is there any chance of checking for more information on Richard Moy(se)? Was he also a local man and perhaps already married?

Thanks so much for your help. It is much appreciated.

Graham (in a very snowy Plymouth!)

[rosie99]

My 4th Great Grandmother, Hannah MONTAGUE married John GARD(I)NER at Polstead in 1815. Hannah was born at Polstead and baptised there in 1791. From online transcriptions I note that her baptism record appears to suggest she is the daughter of Richard MOY and Mary MONTAGUE.

I think you sum it up there.  I agree with Emeltom, you really need to see the original record to make sure you are following the right families   

[smudwhisk]

I'm afraid you could interpret the original either way as the "Moy" has been inserted after Richard's name before the "&".  There is as you can see nothing to suggest that Hannah was illegitimate so its possible that he did just have a second name.   Those are the best quality images I can get from photographing the fiche.  I've converted both to positive, and changed one to greyscale which makes them a little more readable.  The fiche are blue.

Hopefully I've not infringed SRO copyright posting one entry from the page.

[jannergray]

Dear smudwhisk

Thank you so much for looking at this and providing the images for me. I really am most grateful. It seems the conundrum continues!

You're right it doesnt say Hannah is illegitimate as might be expected. I did notice in some online newspapers that Hannah's brother (bapt 1794) is referred to as "Jeremiah Moyse alias Montagu" in 1814. Its quite confusing this alias thing. I wonder if this suggests Richard Moy(s)(e) is not a Montague...

Once again grateful thanks for your help!

[smudwhisk]

Use of an alias with surnames doesn't necessarily imply illegitimacy.  You often see it in the registers and it doesn't imply the parents weren't married but simply that the family have been known to use two different surnames for a variety of reasons.  In fact from what I've seen they are less likely to be referred to as "alias" a surname if they were illegitimate, but that's only from my own research.  One I've seen used the paternal grandmother's maiden name as one of the surnames used in the alias, but a marriage entry existed for the grandparents.

[jannergray]

Ah thats really helpful to know, thank you smudwhisk - I shall keep endevouring to find out more on this interesting branch of the family! I appreciate your help and the information you have provided.