I have a similar one. Child baptised with name of a man as the father, and his daughter as the mother ! On two subsequent census child is with the "father" labelled in the first census as a grandson, and the second census 10 years later as the son of the "father". The "mother" had moved on and married. I presume the child was illegitimate (rather than the incestuous offspring of father/daughter, especially as the mother/grandmother was still around and part of the household). I have also seen cases where the father's name was mistakenly given a marriage certificate - again from this distance it is not possible to work out if this was a mistake or deliberate obfuscation. Would be great to time travel and find out what was actually happening at the time. Julie On 14/11/2011 18:08, Jim Fisher wrote: > Yes, that sort of thing was common at that time (with variations), > not always for obvious reasons and not only in Norfolk. My paternal > grandfather was illegitimate, although his parents lived openly > together and produced several children, all with their mother's > surname, When he married in 1906, on the certificate he gave his > father his correct first name but the same surname as his own and his > mother's. This was in a small Wiltshire village where he and his > parents were all locals. His new wife and father-in-law were from > distant London, but the reason could not have been to deceive them > since his mother and his new mother-in-law were sisters! > > Jim Fisher > > On 14 Nov 2011 at 9:05, Tony Ellis wrote: > >> Hi All >> >> I have a relative born in Norfolk in 1910. His birth certificate does >> not show a father, and the mother is living with her parents with the >> person in question shown as a grandson in the 1911 census. He was born >> out of wedlock. However, when he marries in 1938 the marriage >> certificate has a name for his father, which is identical to that of >> his grandfather. We have a very good idea who the biological father >> was, and his name was quite different. >> >> Was it common in this circumstance to do this? Was a father's name >> required and could not be left blank? Other thoughts :- a 'white lie' >> to either help any children from the marriage or the bride's family >> were religious and wouldn't have accepted such a son-in-law. >> >> Any thoughts, knowledge of general practice, legal requirements, >> theories - all gratefully accepted.. >> >> Tony >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> NORFOLK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > -- Julie Harold FreeREG Norfolk Coordinator http://www.freereg.org.uk