Thanks for this interesting discussion about literacy and illiteracy. I know have a new perspective from which to ponder why g-g grandpa used the name Patrick then suddenly it's Peter. As for the hedge school (in Ireland) , I think they covered standard subjects such as language arts (Irish and English) and math. Other subjects were taught, I suppose according to the skill and knowledge of the teacher. The schools were unofficial and held sometimes beside a hedge, but often in a farm building. I think they started in the fields because of the prohibition on Catholic education. I'm told these schools flew under the radar and were tolerated as time went on. Bible stories and folklore would certainly have fit in. ( I do not speak as an expert). I do know that one of g-g grandmother's grandchildren recounted how all the children in the family for two generations learned their letters and numbers from her before they started school. Of course, whether that was reading them or writing them I now have to wonder. Thanks again for the insights. Mary On 9/3/2013 6:57 PM, Ray Hennessy wrote: > Hi Janet and Mary > > I don't know the answer to your question about Gaelic speakers, Janet, but > I do know that Gavin once pointed out that the inability to write didn't > necessarily indicate the inability to read. In the period before say 1900, > the main reading matter for the lower classes would have been a bible and > recognising the words handed down from the pulpit would have been easier > than trying to write without considerable instruction. > > In the case of Mary's g.g.grandmother, it is really quite possible that she > couldn't write but that didn't prevent her teaching the kids their Biblical > stories and local folklore. The term 'Hedgerow school' suggests that the > teaching could have been mainly how to recognise useful plants and edible > animals, probably stressing the 'God's gift' aspects! > > Just a thought!! > > Ray > > Ray Hennessy > www.whatsinaname.net > > > On 2 September 2013 19:38, Janet <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On another Rootsweb List to which I am subscribed we have been having a >> discussion about >> education which moved to people needing to put a cross because they could >> not write their >> name for the purposes of official record. It seems that it was not >> necessarily because a >> person could not read or write but that the requirement was to write a >> name in English, >> rather than Gaelic and some could not write their name in English. >> Could the historians amongst us tell us more about it? We know that not >> every person had >> an education sufficient to enable them to read or write but the incidence >> where language >> was the reason is of interest. I think we need to know rather than draw >> the wrong >> conclusions. >> >> >> Janet >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Mary Patrick and Peter are the same name and were used interchangeably up to quite recently. It's what got me started on my website. I already knew that Elizabeth and Isabel were interchangeable but finding a Patrick who suddenly became Peter was a shock! Interesting information on the hedge schools. How great to have a record going back so many generations! Best wishes Ray Ray Hennessy www.whatsinaname.net On 4 September 2013 01:19, Mary Pavlovich <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for this interesting discussion about literacy and illiteracy. I > know have a new perspective from which to ponder why g-g grandpa used > the name Patrick then suddenly it's Peter. As for the hedge school (in > Ireland) , I think they covered standard subjects such as language arts > (Irish and English) and math. Other subjects were taught, I suppose > according to the skill and knowledge of the teacher. The schools were > unofficial and held sometimes beside a hedge, but often in a farm > building. I think they started in the fields because of the prohibition > on Catholic education. I'm told these schools flew under the radar and > were tolerated as time went on. Bible stories and folklore would > certainly have fit in. ( I do not speak as an expert). I do know that > one of g-g grandmother's grandchildren recounted how all the children > in the family for two generations learned their letters and numbers from > her before they started school. Of course, whether that was reading them > or writing them I now have to wonder. > Thanks again for the insights. > Mary > > On 9/3/2013 6:57 PM, Ray Hennessy wrote: > > Hi Janet and Mary > > > > I don't know the answer to your question about Gaelic speakers, Janet, > but > > I do know that Gavin once pointed out that the inability to write didn't > > necessarily indicate the inability to read. In the period before say > 1900, > > the main reading matter for the lower classes would have been a bible and > > recognising the words handed down from the pulpit would have been easier > > than trying to write without considerable instruction. > > > > In the case of Mary's g.g.grandmother, it is really quite possible that > she > > couldn't write but that didn't prevent her teaching the kids their > Biblical > > stories and local folklore. The term 'Hedgerow school' suggests that the > > teaching could have been mainly how to recognise useful plants and edible > > animals, probably stressing the 'God's gift' aspects! > > > > Just a thought!! > > > > Ray > > > > Ray Hennessy > > www.whatsinaname.net > > > > > > On 2 September 2013 19:38, Janet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On another Rootsweb List to which I am subscribed we have been having a > >> discussion about > >> education which moved to people needing to put a cross because they > could > >> not write their > >> name for the purposes of official record. It seems that it was not > >> necessarily because a > >> person could not read or write but that the requirement was to write a > >> name in English, > >> rather than Gaelic and some could not write their name in English. > >> Could the historians amongst us tell us more about it? We know that > not > >> every person had > >> an education sufficient to enable them to read or write but the > incidence > >> where language > >> was the reason is of interest. I think we need to know rather than draw > >> the wrong > >> conclusions. > >> > >> > >> Janet > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >> > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >