Illegitimate child given father's surname

[Kentincomer]

Having received parish records for my ancestor's birth parish, Lower Heyford, Oxfordshire, I saw that he was 'baseborn', but had not been given his mothers surname, but that of what I can only assume was the father:
'PIESLEY Francis baseborn of Margaret Mumford'
On the same page of the register, was a second 'baseborn' child of Margaret, but this time with only her surname. Also on the same page, was a Piesley christening for Hannah, daughter of Richard Piesley and his wife, Ann. Obviously, I cannot be sure that Richard was the father, but does anyone know in what circumstances a father's surname would be given to an illigitimate child? -This was 1823.

Another puzzle I have, is if there is any difference between someone who is described as 'baseborn', and someone who is described as 'illigitimate'? These two terms were both used in this register, for people born in the same era.

[Kentincomer]

Sorry-I have just read the thread re Difference between baseborn and illigitimate-other part of post, I would be grateful for any discussion.
Chris

[Guy Etchells]

Having received parish records for my ancestor's birth parish, Lower Heyford, Oxfordshire, I saw that he was 'baseborn', but had not been given his mothers surname, but that of what I can only assume was the father:
'PIESLEY Francis baseborn of Margaret Mumford'
On the same page of the register, was a second 'baseborn' child of Margaret, but this time with only her surname. Also on the same page, was a Piesley christening for Hannah, daughter of Richard Piesley and his wife, Ann. Obviously, I cannot be sure that Richard was the father, but does anyone know in what circumstances a father's surname would be given to an illigitimate child? -This was 1823.

Another puzzle I have, is if there is any difference between someone who is described as 'baseborn', and someone who is described as 'illigitimate'? These two terms were both used in this register, for people born in the same era.

The incumbent would register any name given in Parish Registers, often in a small parish they would know the parents and fill in the blanks without being told.

As to the difference between baseborn and illegitimate there was none it just depended on his mood at the time.

Here are a few alternative terms used in Parish Registers-

bastard, base, baseborn, a by-blow, begotten in fornication, chance begot, chance child, illegitimate, love-child, love-begotten,
natural, misbegotten, merrily begotten, merrybegot, spurious, a scape-begotten child, whoreson, child of a harlot, child of shame.

In Latin there are filius nullius (son of none), filius populi (son of the people), filius meretricis (son of a prostitute).
Cheers
Guy

[Kentincomer]

The incumbent would register any name given in Parish Registers, often in a small parish they would know the parents and fill in the blanks without being told.

Yes, it was a small parish, but I wonder why, in that case, no father's name was given for the second child? The mother married two years later, but the second child kept his mother's maiden name all his life (as censuses show).

[Guy Etchells]

[QUOTE=Guy Etchells;363021]The incumbent would register any name given in Parish Registers, often in a small parish they would know the parents and fill in the blanks without being told.

Yes, it was a small parish, but I wonder why, in that case, no father's name was given for the second child? The mother married two years later, but the second child kept his mother's maiden name all his life (as censuses show).

Very possibly because no father's name was given the second time.

Perhaps the mother did not want to admit the possibility of a different father for her second child.
Perhaps if the father was married he did not want his wife finding out he had been unfaithful.
Another possibility was a different person filled in the register, is the handwriting the same as the earlier baptism?
Was there a change of incumbent?
Cheers
Guy

[Kentincomer]

[QUOTE=Kentincomer;363034]

Another possibility was a different person filled in the register, is the handwriting the same as the earlier baptism?
Was there a change of incumbent?
Cheers
Guy

Hi Guy
Don' know the answer to those questions, as I only received a transcription of the parish records from the OFHS.

[Marie C..]

All sorts of possibilities! In first case the father would have/might have/ most probably admitted paternity and wanted the child to have his name and would have to pay for the child's upkeep.
With the other one paternity might have been in question therefore he/she was given the mother's surname. Often where paternity was known and admitted the father's surname was given as a middle name. I have one such and his father must have taken an interest in him as he attended his son's wedding. The mother married some other fellow and left the child with grandparents.
Some baptismal entries for illigitimate children sounded very harsh.
marie

[Peph]

Um...I'm probably being quite stupid here, but is it possible that if a married woman or widow had a child by another man illegitimately then the child's surname would have been the mother's maiden name?

[Kentincomer]

, is it possible that if a married woman or widow had a child by another man illegitimately then the child's surname would have been the mother's maiden name?

In this case, I don't think this is so- I have found the christening of the mother, Margaret Mumford in Warwickshire, and the child's surname is one which goes back a couple of generations in this village in Oxfordshire, whereas, Mumford is not a local name. Also, two years later, there is another child with the mother's surname, and two years after that, a marriage for her, where she is a spinster.

[benny1982]

I think using the fathers surname as a middle name was a way also to expose him if he wouldn't admit paternity.

Back in them days priests were very outspoken and if they put "Whoreson" or "Son or daughter of the people" they would get defrocked and banned from the clergy. How times have changed.

[Mutley]

Do you have the marriage of Francis, does he mention a father then?

[Kentincomer]

Yes - I had forgotten that!-how stupid of me! It's down as Francis Pesley, labourer! Now what I need to do is find a Francis Piesley in Lower Heyford!
(Or maybe nearby.)
Thanks, Mutley- I forgot the obvious thing in trying to track him down.