Great Grandmother Ellen Field nee Ray/Reay

[changinman1]

Hi , thats so sad .....its awful , poor lady . Thanks for finding that out . (is there no other way of finding her birth name)

 

[pjmburns]

I must say there is no certainty that this is what happened but several of us have come across this situation before so we are guessing it is likely. Parents did sometimes not register births if they couldn't afford it but that seems unlikely here. I can't think of a way - if you found her birth name it would be by luck. Ellen may not have known if she was very young when it happened.

 

[Astoness]

and of course if ellen was taken in by the ray family and as janice said it is by no means certain this means that you cant go any further back with her line as she may not have been a ray..i was lucky with my grandmother..even though she is down as kate doyle daughter to head of house on the 1911 the doyles must have told her that they had taken her in aged 8 months and told her real name of harrington as she married as kate harrington and of course my dad knew this

however i will keep looking for her birth but it is looking as though this could be one of those family mysteries that may never be solved

lyn

 

[changinman1]

and of course if ellen was taken in by the ray family and as janice said it is by no means certain this means that you cant go any further back with her line as she may not have been a ray..i was lucky with my grandmother..even though she is down as kate doyle daughter to head of house on the 1911 the doyles must have told her that they had taken her in aged 8 months and told her real name of harrington as she married as kate harrington and of course my dad knew this

however i will keep looking for her birth but it is looking as though this could be one of those family mysteries that may never be solved

lyn

Sorry for not responding earlier , iv had a terrible year , if there is anything that you can do to find out id really appreciate it.

 

[changinman1]

So if you traced back william ray and caroline houghton does Ellen not pop up anywhere at all as a birth

 

[jonnybrowne]

Ah, the name REAY - but is it really RAY? My maternal great grandfather James LONGMORE married Mary REAY at Edgbaston in 1831, but all the children that were born after the start of civil registration in 1837 have different spellings of their mother's maiden names on their birth certificates - READ, REED, REID, etc., making it almost impossible to go further back on that line. Since many were illiterate at that time, we can't be certain what the real surname was.

Maurice

The "true" spelling of the name is something I've been puzzling over for the twenty years I've been researching my family history. My mum's maiden name was spelt Ray, but further back (early-mid 19th century) I've come across Reay as more standard although in the 18th century I have William Rea as a direct ancestor.

I'd agree that the low rate of literacy in past times (and errors in census entries) makes it uncertain (and I had the same problem with my own surname - turned out there was no "e" on the end until the 1880s) but one small clue was that on a relative's 19th century marriage certificate the spelling Ray was corrected to Reay.

 

[sospiri]

Jonny and ChanginMan1,

I think you also have to take into account accents, speech impediments, and mass illiteracy. Unlike today, when you are required to produce proof of identity and quite often that has to be your own birth certificate, none was then required. The Victorian singer/dancer popular at the old Theatre Royal, Marie (Mary) Longmore was registered twice several months apart, the first time by her mother and the second time by her nursemaid. Same address, birth date, everything. Why, I have no idea and can only assume that the mother had forgotten that she had registered her or had lost the certificate. It was even the same registration district.

So all things are possible and you can only do your best to try and double-check via some other source. Also bear this in mind (from the Society of Genealogists website):-

Although civil registration was introduced in 1837, it was not until 1874 that the registration of a birth became compulsory. Between these dates, children may not have been registered. There was in fact a loophole as the act was not fully understood and people genuinely thought that to have a child baptised was to register that child. The 1874 Act made registration compulsory within a 6 week period and imposed a fine for non-compliance.

Maurice

 

[jonnybrowne]

Jonny and ChanginMan1,

I think you also have to take into account accents, speech impediments, and mass illiteracy. Unlike today, when you are required to produce proof of identity and quite often that has to be your own birth certificate, none was then required. The Victorian singer/dancer popular at the old Theatre Royal, Marie (Mary) Longmore was registered twice several months apart, the first time by her mother and the second time by her nursemaid. Same address, birth date, everything. Why, I have no idea and can only assume that the mother had forgotten that she had registered her or had lost the certificate. It was even the same registration district.

So all things are possible and you can only do your best to try and double-check via some other source. Also bear this in mind (from the Society of Genealogists website):-

Although civil registration was introduced in 1837, it was not until 1874 that the registration of a birth became compulsory. Between these dates, children may not have been registered. There was in fact a loophole as the act was not fully understood and people genuinely thought that to have a child baptised was to register that child. The 1874 Act made registration compulsory within a 6 week period and imposed a fine for non-compliance.

Maurice

Thanks for your message, although I'm not entirely clear as to its relevance in terms of my comments.

 

[changinman1]

The "true" spelling of the name is something I've been puzzling over for the twenty years I've been researching my family history. My mum's maiden name was spelt Ray, but further back (early-mid 19th century) I've come across Reay as more standard although in the 18th century I have William Rea as a direct ancestor.

I'd agree that the low rate of literacy in past times (and errors in census entries) makes it uncertain (and I had the same problem with my own surname - turned out there was no "e" on the end until the 1880s) but one small clue was that on a relative's 19th century marriage certificate the spelling Ray was corrected to Reay.

so potentially we could be related ?