Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 38

Thread: Accepted Child

  1. #11

    Default

    Maria Jane Griffiths, born 18 Aug 1903, holyhead, anglesey, wales

  2. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AMJohn View Post
    thanks again, it is my grandmother who we know went to live with what we think are her aunt and uncle (surnames are correct for them), her name is Maria Jane Griffiths, born 18 Aug 1903, thanks again for the responses
    But not Griffiths on the 1911 Census?
    "dyfal donc a dyr y garreg"

  3. #13

    Default

    Sorry, it’s Roberts as maiden name

  4. #14

    Default

    Just to confirm - Maria Jane is in Wynn Terrace in 1911 while parents and siblings are at Arthur Street?
    "dyfal donc a dyr y garreg"

  5. #15

    Default

    Parents are at Wynn terrace, Maria is at Arthur st

  6. #16
    Super Moderator christanel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Wairarapa New Zealand
    Posts
    9,982

    Default

    I have just taken a look at the original image and it looks more like Accepted to me.
    So Maria Jane is with her mother's relatives in 1911?
    Christina
    Sometimes paranoia is just having all the facts.
    William Burroughs

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christanel View Post
    I have just taken a look at the original image and it looks more like Accepted to me.
    So Maria Jane is with her mother's relatives in 1911?
    Christina
    Hi again and thanks you, ive looked and looked at really high zoom levels and I just cant see that, i can see there is something different in the last letters that may not "pted" almost looks like the P could be an f or q, I think we still have a mystery at the moment, ill find out who these relatives are, the surname is correct for relatives, but the first names look wrong and their occupation is also wrong I think, but i need to trace that family some more to be sure, thanks for your help so far its appreciated, thank you.

  8. #18
    Famous for offering help & advice
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cheshire
    Posts
    1,659

    Default

    Are there any Welsh speakers reading this? The final column of the 1911 entry indicates that three of the household spoke Welsh, and only the head was bilingual.

    The form looks to have been completed by two different people (different handwriting and different pressure/colour of ink); whoever wrote the mystery word had uncertain spelling (see 'Anglese' for the Head's birthplace), and I think they might have written it as 'accepdt'.

    As for the word itself, if the household was mainly Welsh speaking I'm wondering whether the word used in Welsh for 'adopted' could also be translated as 'accepted', and they mistakenly used that rather than 'adopted' on the form.

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by arthurk View Post
    Are there any Welsh speakers reading this? The final column of the 1911 entry indicates that three of the household spoke Welsh, and only the head was bilingual.

    The form looks to have been completed by two different people (different handwriting and different pressure/colour of ink); whoever wrote the mystery word had uncertain spelling (see 'Anglese' for the Head's birthplace), and I think they might have written it as 'accepdt'.

    As for the word itself, if the household was mainly Welsh speaking I'm wondering whether the word used in Welsh for 'adopted' could also be translated as 'accepted', and they mistakenly used that rather than 'adopted' on the form.
    Yes this could be Accpt'd, i did look up adopted and variants translation but thats totally different, my grandmother was bilingual (but not sure if she would have been then) and like you it looks like 2 lots of handwriting, thanks i look into this some more, also been trying to trace these people who we thought were relations, but the first names do not match any of the family Hughes's.

  10. #20
    Brick wall demolition expert!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    3,312

    Default

    I am not a Welsh speaker, but I can offer the following perspective. A great aunt and great uncle were unofficially adopted out of the family in the early 1900s after their parents died. They were born and brought up in Caernarfonshire, and were all Welsh speakers.

    It took me years to find my great aunt in the 1911 census, and that was because her adoptive mother had changed her surname to her own, and described her in Welsh as her daughter. She even filled in the columns about how many children had been born alive in the marriage, listing just the one, my great aunt, who of course was not born to the marriage.

    My great uncle, whose surname wasn't changed to that of his adoptive family, was described as "nai" or nephew. They were not related.

    My great great grandmother brought up the four older children and at the time of the 1911 census she described her grandsons as "nai" or nephews, and her granddaughter as "wyres", which is granddaughter. As a widow she should not have filled in the parts about years married and numbers of children etc. Luckily for me she did!

    So I think the point that I am trying to make is firstly to wonder whether or not the person filling in the form understood it correctly, and just how literate that they were.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Select a file: