Question

Need help. Can anyone decipher this baptism record? please. Its on profile Hamilton-29841

Comments

Hi Megan
I'm not very good at reading older handwriting either so I won't attempt it, but I do think it is unlikely the surname is Hamilton.

---

Many thanks John. I thought that also, however, the word 'Allanshaw' after the name, had me leaning towards Hamilton. I have noticed when searching records that sometimes there appears to be errors in the spelling of names.

---

Although I agree that often the spelling of names isn't always consistent in this time period, the name, whatever it is, just doesn't look long enough to be interpreted as Hamilton.

Also I don't think we can conclude that just because the person is from Allanshaw that it necessarily has to be a Hamilton.  There may be other families from Allanshaw, or the Hamilton's might have tenant farmers or servant families working for them.  They could all legitimately claim to be from Allanshaw.

---

Thanks John, something to think about.

Answer 1

To me the first one looks like "Ham: of Allanshaw" - the colon in records of this time generally indicates an abbreviation. If the name Hamilton was common in this register/parish it may have been shortened by the clerk/minister.

The second one again is "Ham: alias ..." (cannot work out what the last word).

Comments

I agree about the colon indicating a contracted word. The name also has a 'line' over it indicating missing letters..

I also thought that the word after the second James might be alias (but can't read  what).

In a parish with lots of men with the same name like Hamilton  (or is it Hamilstone like the Duke?) adding where they came from or their job or an alias  would help distinguish between them. Theres a 'Robert Ham: wright at the top. '
 

'James Ham: of Allanshaw had a child bapt called [ Johne? ]

'James Ham: [alias?] [   ].had a child bapt called Bessie'

Edited Hamiltone

---

Many thanks for your comment. Jay. I believe that they would of been well known to this parish.

---

Many thanks Helen.

Answer 2

"The Lord Duke Hamiltone.": The writer doesn't cross his "t's" left to right he starts at the middle to the right. The lowercase "L" ( half loop at the top) in the name "Charles" below is the same as the "L" in Hamiltone..

Comments

Upon closer inspection after having thought about it. I believe I am wrong. It looks to be "My" not "The" Lord Duke Hamiltone. Also https://twonerdyhistorygirls.blogspot.com/2012/03/my-lord-duke.html

Answer 3

the "of" Allanshaw is telling, it should mean that the James, who had the son John on 19th Jan 1664), was indeed of Allanshaw otherwise it would have said "in" Allanshaw if was just to differentiate  families

the other James, the alias has been transcribed as "Whom" on a couple  of births .. I would venture to suggest it should be "Hume" as  that sounds the same in the local tongue..

there's the Bessie birth you have in your picture there is also a "Maren" (unknown gender again but I think it could be Marion?)  b: 23 Jan 1662, Hamilton

there is also a James, alias Mungoes/Monges having children about this time .. the word in the image could be that too? 

couple of births for him, and one is a Robert