Moderator Control Panel ]

Philpot alias Purver

A problem shared is a problem halved. Post your brick walls here and see whether you can offer advice to others

Philpot alias Purver

Postby woodchal » Sun Aug 19, 2018 10:14 pm

I have been chasing a Jane Purver b 1825 in Church Oakley.

In quite a detailed search too long to go into here we discovered that the family seemed to change their name (at will) between Philpot and Purver.

I have found a range of documented records from 1614-1801 that formally refer to "Philpot alias Purvor". (and variants Perver, Pourver, Puvior)

I have this situation in two families in my tree. For example Oliver Cromwell's family name was actually Williams and they were formally known for many years as "Williams alias Cromwell".

I have found documents describing the name change in my other two examples. I wondered if anyone had come across documents for how this "Philpot alias Purvor" situation came about.
Last edited by woodchal on Mon Aug 20, 2018 10:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
woodchal
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:09 pm

Re: Philpot alias Purver

Postby sdup26 » Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:48 pm

You say you've been chasing Jane Purvor, born 1825 in Church Oakley, Hampshire. There's a Jane Philpott bapt 29/5/1825 in St Leonard's, Church Oakley, parents James Philpott and Mary Ann Philpott (nee Watson).

The only Jane Purvor I can see born around that time was baptised 13/6/1824 in Catherington, Hampshire, parents John and Ann Purvor.

Some years ago, I heard about a family who changed their surname (unofficially, not through any form of legal action) to that of their benefactor, a bachelor who wanted his financial support to them repaid by having his surname carried on. But some family members stuck to their 'given' surname so it caused a lot of confusion. I thought it was a one off, but maybe your case is similar.
sdup26
 
Posts: 1483
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 4:34 pm

Re: Philpot alias Purver

Postby woodchal » Mon Aug 20, 2018 6:39 pm

Yes thats the one. She and all her siblings were baptised as Philpot, but on all official documentation they appear as Purver. Except Elizabeth who is listed as both Philpot and Purver on the same wedding registration.

The youngest George just overlaps with official registration and his mother's maiden name is listed as a Watson. There is a wedding between a James Philpot and a Mary Ann Watson, but George is registered as Purver and baptised as a Philpot (son of James and Mary Ann).

However the Philpot Purver conundrum had been going up for years. There are many records where the names are actually registered as "Philpot alias Purver" from 1614 to 1801.

One of my examples relates to inheritance and is covered in all the Heraldry and Pedigree books. The Cromwell examples is where the wife's name was more celebrated that the husbands.

I would be just interested in Philpot/Purver
woodchal
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:09 pm

Re: Philpot alias Purver

Postby ksouthall » Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:39 am

I think this may have been more common than we would expect and is to do with inheritance.

The following thread refers to some other examples: topic9393.html
ksouthall
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:26 pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Philpot alias Purver

Postby woodchal » Tue Aug 21, 2018 8:43 am

Agreed - its not uncommon. I have two other known examples in my tree. I understand the history behind those two. I am just trying to understand the background to the Philpot/Purvor example.

This may be interesting to any one reading this topic -https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/Use_of_Aliases_-_an_Overview
woodchal
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:09 pm


Return to General research queries


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests