Genealogy Chat

Thank you all for your thoughts on this. You are right Geoff, the registers can be very hard to read and I've known 2 people to be sent handwritten copies of the same certificate from the same office but at different times. On one the woman is shown as Maria and on the other, Maud. We can only do our best to find other documentation to clarify this.

Hi Brenda, As you may know, well into the 20th century some ministers of religion would only accept so-called proper names or reject non-Biblical names. However, despite that, it seems to me that some names recorded in the 19th century registers depended on local custom. That might be because naming conventions and spelling were not so formalised at that time. In this case, the name Silvey has appeared on Gwyneth's hand-written copy from the register office. When making copies, today's Registrars and transcribers are expected to write what they see in the register, not what they think is proper. You made a good point about "always called Milly, no matter what they were named." I have an ancestor baptised William James Follett who was forever after known only as James Follett, the same as his son... very confusing to us family historians. Geoff

It could be that the parents wanted her to be called Silvey, and the vicar objected, on the grounds that it wasn't a proper name. The Millys in my family are baptised as Amelia, Milly or Millicent. The Millicents later turn up as Amelia. They were always called Milly, no matter what they were named. Brenda

Silvey or not Silvey... I have a comprehensive list of 19th century names collected from numerous BMD registers and census indexes. As one might expect, Silvia and Sylvia are in that list, not Silvey, but does that really matter? Silvey could well be the actual name registered. As for bad transcriptions, criticised here and elsewhere in the GR boards, registrars and transcribers are human and from time to time they make mistakes... some 19th century hand-written registers can be incredibly difficult to read. Geoff

Surely it must be the name Sylvia, Silvia. Sometimes I wonder what these registrars were on I have a birth cert from my Whilding the same registrar registered both children first is Whilding and he signed his own name next birth she is down as Whildrew and he has a stamp for his name??? Do you think their job was so boring they had one of those Whiskey bottles stashed in the drawer the later you came in the worse the transcription LOL Don't mean to be flippant but I do wonder sometimes. Pat x

When I applied for a copy of my 2xgreat grandmother's birth certificate,(b. 1837) I received a handwritten copy from the register office local to her birth naming her as Silvey. Was this a proper name or is it likely to be a poor transcription? She was baptised Jane Silvia and thereafter appeared as Sylvia Jane, Silvia or most often just Jane.