ESSEX-UK-L Archives

Archiver > ESSEX-UK > 2002-05 > 1020988307


From: "norman.lee1" <>
Subject: Re: Moral standards
Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 00:51:47 +0100
References: <11d.10b3ae0a.2a0942aa@aol.com> <002501c1f775$351e5860$b3ab403e@tinypc>


Perhaps it's because it seems to be less ambiguous than the alternatives.
Looking at the registers over the years and also probate documents, I can't
say that it seemed to carry such a stigma at all times and in all
circumstances. I suppose it's all the emotions and turmoil that is produced
at the same time as the child born out of wedlock that is somehow tacked
onto the word and the poor person that is the end result of it all.

Audrey

----- Original Message -----
From: "p-pgriffiths" <>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2002 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: Moral standards


>
>
> Dear Rich
>
> Good for you re the B word. I'm constantly amazed at the insensitivity of
> people in the family history world who throw it around carelessly. Either
> they've never been on the end of it, as in 'you effing B' etc, or they
are
> from the upper class, who couldn't give a damn anyway.
>
> All the best,
>
> Peter G.
> London, Essex
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 3:46 PM
> Subject: Moral standards
>
>
> > I can't speak for my fathers side ( from essex), but on my mothers side,
> who
> > come from Guernsey, "natural " births are more the norm than being
> unusual.
> > Natural being the term used rather than the horrendous "B" word.
> >
> > My own mother was born this way, with three siblings of different
> fathers,
> > while the mothers mother etc being the same. Indeed, the islanders joke
> that
> > they are all related !
> >
> > The main cause being WW1 and 2, while prior to that, the fathers would
be
> > away at sea for years at a time, perhaps having their own "natural"
> children
> > in different ports.
> >
> > So, one wonders the use of tracking ones "family" name. I think one
> > researcher tracked his family name using DNA ( and others, of the same
> > family name, I believe in Essex) and found that perhaps 30 % were actual
ly
> > direct descendants of that name, while the others were of natural births
> at
> > one point or another. I would say though, that my own family back
through
> the
> > 1780 in Essex were married, but this does not mean that the wives did
not
> > have other liasons.
> >
> > So, perhaps many of us are related, but will only find out WHO we
REALLY
> > are, when DNA bcomes more readily available to researchers. This
> "Hemmings"
> > black family claiming descendancy from President Jefferson, may actually
> have
> > MORE Jefferson blood than the "white" family claiming direct
descendancy.
> lol
> > Just some thoughts.
> > Rich
> >
> > ______________________________
>
>


This thread: