Scottish naming traditions in the 19th century

[goldrich]

...or rather, a tale of the unexpected.  Help wanted!

Hi, I’m new on here but this is an issue that’s been bugging me for years.  A bit of context: my great-grandfather John Smith (yes, I know) was the youngest of nine siblings, and the second son to be named John, the first one having died before my great-grandfather was born.  That’s not the unusual bit – he wasn’t even the first son in the family to be given the same name as a deceased elder brother.

What’s odd is the first-born son being named John at all.  His father was William, son of William, but it was the second-born son who was named after his father and grandfather.  There were no Johns in the ancestry on other side of the family.

But… the first John was conceived out of wedlock, although born after the marriage of the parents.  The birth records give his parents as William Smith and his wife Janet, née Leitch (my great-great-grandparents), so why wasn’t the boy named William?

Could it be (a) because he was conceived out of wedlock, or (b) because there was some doubt as to the identity of the father, or even (c) that there was no doubt who the father was, and it wasn’t William (and may or may not have been John someone)?

I can’t find anything to support any of these possibilities, so my question is: is there some precedent for, or tradition of, giving a son the name John in such circumstances?

In case it helps, the elder John Smith was born 1857 in Ardrossan, Ayrshire, and died 1867 in Saltcoats, Ayrshire.  My great-grandfather John Smith was born 1878 in Saltcoats.

Thanks in anticipation of some assistance from the knowledgeable folk out there.  I’m hoping the answer might help to explain the circumstances of my great-grandfather’s upbringing, but that’s a story for another time...

[David Nicoll]

Hi,
    On of these conundrums. Most of the situations I have come across like this either involve a well thought of man, minister or someone else who helped the family.
    Almost impossible to prove but fun making the stories up.
    You say that there are no John’s in the family, though I do see that there is a John Smith having children at the same date in Ardrossan, a cousin, second cousin?

Happy Hunting

[Rena]

My paternal grandfather was the son of John and was given the name of a local benefactor (his employer). In those days grandparents had large families and it's certainly a tangled web when  (for instance) seven sons give their first sons the name William and they all married a "Mary (which is what hap;pened in olne of my lines.  One reason babies died was smallpox and the other was that the father lost his job, which meant mother was hungry and didn't produce sufficient milk.  A couple might not be able to afford a  "wet nurse" (e.g. a mother who had had her own baby) would charge to feed somebody else's baby)   My maternal grandmother's youngest brother was kept alive by a "wet nurse" after their mother died of an infection when the baby was three weeks old.

One of my uncles has quite a long list of given names;  some family surnames names and the name of a local doctor named "Cameron".  My maternal gt. grandfather carried the name of a local employer, which, presumably the parents hoped could have helped him get a job in later life

.Scottish naming patterns traditionally followed a specific, repeating cycle:

the 1st son after the paternal grandfather,
2nd son after the maternal grandfather,
3rd son after the father;
4th son after the father's oldest brother.

the 1st daughter after the maternal grandmother,
2nd dau. after the paternal grandmother,
3rd dau. after the mother,
with surnames often used as middle names

It was cheaper to have a civil marriage service given by the local sheriff.  It took me years to find the parents of Mary Bell and only found out when her parents came forward to the local church and confessed that they had married outside of the church and please would the vicar baptise their adult daughter Mary Marshall Bell.

Good luck.

[Ruskie]

It’s a naming pattern not a rule. Many didn’t follow it. Many did. Some following it partially.

The father of a family I researched a few years ago wrote a family history (very useful) and in it explained how each of his children’s names were given and why. One was given the middle (sur)name of a woman who had been kind to his wife. Simple as that.

Another family gave each of their ten children the same middle name. No mystery there - it was the wife’s maiden name.

Another family gave the surname of the employer as a child’s middle name. I discovered that when doing a bit of further research.

If you have concerns of the paternity of your John, have you considered tracing the family down to living descendants and asking if they would be willing to take a DNA test?

[Forfarian]

It was cheaper to have a civil marriage service given by the local sheriff.

The sheriff was not involved in the marriage ceremony itself.

If you didn't want a religious marriage the procedure was that you got together with two witnesses and declared yourselves to be married. As long as both parties were free to marry, that was a perfectly legal marriage.

If such a marriage came to the notice of the kirk, for example if you wanted to have a child baptised, the kirk session would scold you and fine you for an irregular marriage. The sheriff was not involved at all.

After the start of civil registration, you and your witnesses went to the sheriff after you had made your declaration. You told the sheriff that you had married by declaration, and the witnesses testified that they had been present, and the sheriff then issued a warrant authorising the registrar to record the marriage in his marriage registrar. I suppose you could short-cut the procedure by arranging to make the declaration in front of witnesses in the sheriff's office, but unless the sheriff was one of your witnesses his only part in the procedure was to authorise the registrar to create the civil record of the marriage.

[Rena]

 I thought that was "hand clasping",  which is not the type of record that I have.

[goldrich]

Sorry for being slow to respond, everyone.  However, I think the circumstances surrounding the first of the John Smith boys are going to remain a matter for speculation.

Which brings me to the second one, my great-grandfather.  The most obvious reason for naming him John would have been in tribute to the first one, who died before the second one was born.  However, my great-grandfather's upbringing seems to have been unusual...

My great-great-grandmother died 4 days after John was born.  The 1861 and 1871 censuses have the family living in Saltcoats, Ayrshire.  According to the 1881 census, John, aged 2, was living as a "boarder" in nearby Ardrossan with a Mrs Margaret McCormack, recorded as being a 60-year-old widow from Saltcoats.  I haven't managed to identify any other members of the Smith family (5 sisters ranging in age from 9 to 20, and a 7-year-old brother, as well as my great-great-grandfather, who was in the merchant navy so may well have been at sea) anywhere in 1881, certainly not in Saltcoats or Ardrossan, so I've no idea where they went but they don't seem to have stayed together.

In 1891 John, now 12, was still living in Ardrossan with Margaret, surname now recorded as McCormick, described as 74 and unmarried, and John recorded as being her grandson.  Margaret McCormick died at that address in 1898, single, at the recorded age of 84 according to the informant, apparently her daughter (also Margaret McCormick).  Helpfully, the death record gives the names of the deceased's parents, whose origins I have found, but I've drawn a blank with the births of both Margarets.

I can understand John effectively being given up for adoption, but why place her with a woman old enough to be his grandmother and who appears not to have been a relation? I haven't found any connection between the Smiths and the McCormicks.

Whatever the circumstances, the story passed down to my mother and uncle was that John's father had been a "sea captain" (whatever that might mean - in fact, he was an able seaman), and that the family were descended from Clan MacLaine of Lochbuie, which is on the island of Mull off the west coast of Scotland near Oban.  I doubt if that part of the story is true either, but historically the MacCormicks were a sept of Clan MacLaine, and whatever the actual truth - which I suspect I'll never find out - three successive generations of Smith sons descended from my great-grandfather have been given the middle name McCormick.

It's a fascinating pastime, but so frustrating!

[Rena]

I once had the same problem of not finding a birth/baptism for one of my ancestors.  A rootschatter found him for me.  The problem was that when a family moves the census taker in the new place might write down what they heard .  For instance my family name of "Shearing" was translated as "Sharring" when the oldest son moved many miles away from his home county.  Going further back in time I think the original surname was probably "Shearen" from Ireland.
  Maybe the "mick" at the end of your surname should be something else.   Residents in coastal places could be from anywhere as I discovered when I tried to trace the  surname of sea captain  "Ward" (getting results such as "Howard" "forward", etc)  - so hard luck!

Looking at the rootschat SIT list of surnames it appears others are looking for similar surnames - perhaps you could refer to their histories to see if it helps you.

http://surname.rootschat.com/sit-surnames.php?letter1=M&letter2=5#top_data

P.S. In olden days newspapers used to print arrivals and departures of ships which I found extremely helpful.

P.P.S.   I found one of my OHs seaman ancestors records were held in Canada!   

Key Collections in Canada
Maritime History Archive (Newfoundland): Holds roughly 70% of British crew lists and agreements for the periods 1863–1938 and 80% for 1951–1976. These are arranged by the year the voyage ended and by the ship's official number.
Library and Archives Canada (LAC): Holds copies of Lloyd’s Captains Registers (1851–1947), which include information on British masters and mates, as well as records of Canadian-registered ships that were closed out.
British Military and Naval Records (RG8): Held at LAC, this fonds contains records from 1757–1932, including Admiralty Pacific Station records (1858–1903).
How to Search for Records
Identify the Ship's Official Number: To locate crew lists, you usually need the vessel's official number, which can be found using the Crew List Index Project (CLIP) database.
Search the MHA Database: The Maritime History Archive has a combined crew list search tool available on their website.

Good luck
Rena

[David Nicoll]

Hi,

    Definitely a conundrum, but 1850’s is well within reach of DNA matching and clustering, if you are interested and have a following wind.

Happy Hunting