Yesterday’s tip was about children’s knowledge of their mother’s maiden name. Genealogy theory gurus would say that a child’s knowledge of their mother’s maiden name and date of birth is secondary because they were not there.
Yes it’s true that a child is not present at their mother’s birth. We’re doing genealogy, not writing time-bending historical fiction. I was not there when Mom was born in 1942. But in terms of her last name (and even my Grandma’s maiden name), I do have quite a bit of “first-hand” knowledge. Mom was always referred to as her parents’ child. Their siblings referred to her as such. Her one living grandmother referred to her as her granddaughter. That all counts for something.
Some children have a significant amount of interaction with their parents’ families of origin. That definitely impacts their knowledge of that family. Do they know when certain before they were born took place? No because they were not there. But they do have other knowledge about what relationships were acknowledged publicly during their life time.
Of course people can lie about who a child’s actual parents were; there were secret adoptions. Sometimes these things are kept from anyone outside the immediate family and people openly act like things are true that are not. There are times where the “truth” isn’t even what’s in the records. But the majority of time, the relationships that are acknowledged as being true in fact are. And, short of DNA analysis, if the records and “common knowledge” are consistent it can be difficult to prove otherwise.
Children are sometimes correct about their mother’s maiden name–even when we think they are not.
The best example in my research is the maiden name of a 2nd great grandma. Marriage records from 1868 (church and civil) gave one last name. Children all said a completely different last name. Short version is that the marriage records listed her step-father’s last name and the children gave the last name of her actual father–they knew their grandpa’s name. I thought they were wrong but records more contemporary to their mother’s birth confirmed the name they listed.
Just some things to think about.
3 Responses
As a genealogy librarian, I have worked with people who know very little about their parents’ or grandparents’ history. It could be due to divorce, or in the case of grandparents, not growing up in the same area. OTOH, I always knew when and where my parents and grandparents were born, as well as middle and maiden names. I lived next door to one set of grandparents and about 3 miles away from the other set, so I knew them well. We celebrated birthdays and anniversaries, so I always knew the dates.
This is very interesting, thank you. I think that some of this knowledge is based on how/if the information is shared and some of it is based on the child’s interest in the information. I was the kid who always asked questions, so I knew my maternal Grandma’s maiden name and basic info about her parents and grandparents. Some days she was more willing to share than others, but when she passed and left me her memoir, so many of the names she mentioned were familiar and I felt like I already knew a bit about them. Now, I try to share family names, tidbits and facts with my daughters and brother as I can. They’re not as interested as I was/am, but I trust the seeds are being planted 🙂
It absolutely varies from family to family. Although 3 of my grandparents died before I was born and the 4th before I was 2 years old, I know a great deal about them through my parents and my many older cousins. Yet I have friends who can tell you little about their parents’ details, much less that of their grandparents.