are Peter and Patrick the same guy?

winger · Post by **winger** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 12:21 am

I wonder if anyone can help with this problem.
I was looking for the marrige of Patrick McNair and found an entry for him in the OPR for Houston and Killern for 1775. The entry is written on a page headed Baptism and the entry is dated 27th July 1775 - this is the date the proclamation was made.
I then looked up children of this marriage to Mary Barr and the only children born to McNair/Barr have the father listed as Peter. When I looked up the marrige for Peter McNair it is listed under paisley and is the last entry dated 27th July 1775 - this lists Peter McNair and Mary Barr.
My question is are these the same people. could Patrick have posted the bans and on the date and entry could have been made in a different book with Peter instead of Patrick - or am I just clutching at straws?
thanks in advance

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 1:06 am

Hi Winger

Glad to see you are now making some progress - backwards !

Are genealogists the only folk who progress backwards I wonder

Did I understand you, that the marriage was recorded in amongst a list of Births ? As far as the OPR's are concerned that would not be an uncommon event. Often the church officer recording births, marriages and mort cloth hires would record them on a separate scrap of paper and enter them into the register at a later date. That's when problems and inaccuracies could occur.
There are a few names which can be interchanged - Daniel and Donald, Peter and Patrick, Jane and Jean are the most common I think.
You also said that the marriage took place in Paisley. Was that Abbey, Paisley ? Abbey was not the church building in Paisley, rather it was geographical location(s) and comprised quite a wide area (several miles) around the town of Paisley. It took in places like Neilston, Johnstone, Elderslie. Each of these is now a parish in its own right but previously their records were historically linked to Paisley Abbey.
Most marriages were conducted in the home of the bride or groom or perhaps the Manse rather than in a church.

Just to confuse the issue a little further I have seen families where there was a Peter and a Patrick recorded on the same census so there are no strict rules regarding names. The traditional naming patterns are a different matter and were quite widely adhered to. Where that breaks down is often where a family is comprised of only sons or daughters.
By the way Houston and Kilellan parish is within easy walking distance of Kilbarchan.

Russell

winger · Post by **winger** » Thu Oct 23, 2008 11:34 pm

thanks for coming back to me - I have found records before where peter and patrick were interchangable - I just wasn't sure if this was the case with scottish records - I've only seen it on irish ones - but I think my assumtion is correct that they are the same. if houston is that close to Kilbarchan then I think Houston could be the female parish and then they went to Patrick/peters parish and put in the bans there.

morgano · Post by **morgano** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:20 am

I know of a Peter Ferguson who is called Patrick Ferguson on his wedding record (Dundee, 1810). There is an Irish connection: Daniel Higgin, the deceased father of the bride (whether Agnes Higgin, too, was a native of Ireland is not clear and, I suspect, likely to remain that way). I've generally assumed that, when he came to do his neat version, the clerk couldn't read his own handwriting and, perhaps influenced by the reference to Ireland, guessed Patrick, rather than Peter. If he realised his mistake, he wasn't about to waste a good piece of paper by starting again.

Elsewhere, in the census, the Dundee Wesleyan records and in his daughter's death certificate, Peter is always Peter, so I don't think that there was any genuine interchangeability between Patrick and Peter in this case.

LindaMc · Post by **LindaMc** » Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:33 pm

My husband has one on his tree who was Patrick when he married in 1869 but on the 1871 census and thereafter he is called Peter.

Family story is that he changed his name to make it easier to gain employment as Peter didn't sound as Irish as Patrick.

I think he would have had an Irish accent anyway so did he think no-one would notice that.

Linda

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:25 pm

Hi Winger

Just a comment about posting Banns. If the couple were from different parishes each would have to ask (and pay) to have their Banns posted the required three times in their own parish. This is why IGI can sometimes have up to six entries for a couple. Yet there was no requirement for the actual marriage to be Registered.
Sometimes the Banns could be called twice on the one day e.g. a morning and evening service, or would be called at an additional church activity mid-week so dates can look remarkably close together. Sometimes the OPR entry will merely state that "Banns have been called" or worse still "....gave in their names to be married" with no dates even of the calling of Banns other than the original Register entry date.
We have one marriage where the Banns were called in Leith yet were called again in Penninghame despite a letter of confirmation from the Leith parish.
It makes the detective work that tiny bit more complicated.

Russell