ESSEX-UK-L Archives

Archiver > ESSEX-UK > 2007-05 > 1178539649

From: "Jenny De Angelis" <>
Subject: Re: [Ess] Christenings
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 14:12:24 +0200
References: <001401c78f4e$2a202800$0300a8c0@MumsComputer><011501c78fb0$c1167900$0201010a@pamzmocwe33zpr><001a01c78fc0$47330fd0$4001a8c0@Gwenda>

I have noticed that when the term "Spurious child of" is used this usually
refers to the father named by the mother of an illegitimate child. You might
read something like "John son of Jane Smith spurious child of James Brown"
etc., etc.,

A child can't be the spurious child of the mother as she would have borne
him but he could be the spurious, or supposed, child of the father named by
the mother, especially if she was known to be flighty and might not have
known exactly who was the father of her child, then the child might be said
to be the spurious child of ----.

I have seen in burial registers against the entry for a female saying she
was a "Common Strumpet" in another the woman being buried was noted as being
a "Notorious Mendicant" Not very Christian is it to make such comments
about the dead. But then the incumbents writing such things would not have
expected such as us researchers ever wanting to read his writings I suppose.

Jenny DeAngelis

> >I noticed a lot of base children and sometimes the minister had Bastard
> >in large letters. Such was the attitude of those times.
> ***I've noticed that the most common expression in the parish registers
> I've been looking at is 'spurious child of...'

This thread: