You are hereForums / Genealogy Research / Ayuda

Ayuda

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/lafamilia/nuestrosranchos.com/sites/all/modules/mailhandler/mailhandler.module on line 123.

By Leticia - Posted on 11 August 2006

Anteriormente pedi ayuda con lo siguiente pero solo lo hice en ingles, disculpas.
ya e recivido algunas respuestas mas sigo un poco confusa.

en unas actas de nacimiento y bautizo se ve los terminos
Hijo ligitimo - hijo natural

yo tenia entendido que un hijo natural fue un hijo nacido a una madre soltera? mas en algunas actas se ve el nombre del nacido con el termino hijo natural de y los nombres de los padres, al igual se ve hijo ligitimo y nombre de los padres.

cual sera la diferencia.

Letty

Since the custom was to marry twice, once civil and once by the church could that make a difference in the status of the children when baptized? Could a civil marriage that might have preceded a church marriage not be seen as making the child ligetimate? There was such a long procedure to marry in the church with dispensations if there was a blood relationship that I can see marrying years apart in the church and civil.. plus I would think the church marriage is the one that would be considered more important. I noticed in the 1930 census for Jerez the record asks if they were married in both.. many people were not much to my surprise.
I'm using babel fish to translate this and to learn Spanish..

Linda in B.C.

Puesto que el costumbre era casar dos veces, una vez que sea civil y por la iglesia podría una vez que diferencia en el estado de los niños cuando está bautizada? ¿Podría una unión civil que no pudo haber precedido una unión de la iglesia ser visto como fabricación del ligetimate del niño? Había un procedimiento tan largo a casar en la iglesia con dispensaciones si hubiera una relación de la sangre que puedo ver los años aparte en la iglesia y civil que casan. más mí pensaría que la unión de la iglesia es la que sería considerado más importante. Noté en el censo 1930 para Jerez que el expediente pregunta si fueron casados en ambos. mucha gente no era mucha a mi sorpresa.

Erik Reynoso wrote:
Estimada Leticia:

Un hijo natural es un hijo bastardo, fuera del matrimonio. Por eso es que en
las actas aparecen los nombres de los padres aún siendo hijo natural.

Saludos

Erik Andrés Reynoso Palomar y Márquez

Erik,

En el caso en question que envi en mi e-mail horita donde el registro en el libro de hijos legitimos: en el margen escribieron "h. lego." pero tambien escribieron "h. n. de----" y solamente escribieron el nombre de la madre y los abuelos maternos. Este hijo despues decia que el apellido de su padre era el mismo de su madre pero el padre tenia otro apellido. El hijo usaba el apellido de su madre. Que piensa deste caso? (Dispense mi pobre espanol).

Emilie Garcia
Port Orchard, WA ---
----- Original Message -----
From: Erik Reynoso
To: research@NuestrosRanchos.com
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Nuestros Ranchos] Ayuda

Estimada Leticia:

Un hijo natural es un hijo bastardo, fuera del matrimonio. Por eso es que en
las actas aparecen los nombres de los padres aún siendo hijo natural.

Saludos

Erik Andrés Reynoso Palomar y Márquez

Erik, entonces lo siguiente es correcto.

hijo natural = mama y papa presentes no casados
hijo ligitimo = mama y papa casados legalmente

que es un hijo ilegitimo?

Letty

Erik,

Did you read the e-mail I originally sent in English titled "Hijo Legitimo/Hijo Natural"? That explains the case in detail.

Emilie
----- Original Message -----
From: Erik Reynoso
To: research@NuestrosRanchos.com
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Nuestros Ranchos] Ayuda

Dear Emilie:

Don't worry about your spanish. About the case you're telling me "h.n. de
...." means "hijo natural" meaning his parents were not married. I
personally do not think the last name of his father was the same as his
mother's. Probably the father did not want to recognize the son and left he
and her mother. About "h. lego", could refer to his mother, born as a
legitimate child of his granparents.

What do you think?

Kind regards

Erik

----- Original Message -----
From: "Emilie Garcia" >
To: >
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Nuestros Ranchos] Ayuda

Erik,

En el caso en question que envi en mi e-mail horita donde el registro en el
libro de hijos legitimos: en el margen escribieron "h. lego." pero tambien
escribieron "h. n. de----" y solamente escribieron el nombre de la madre y
los abuelos maternos. Este hijo despues decia que el apellido de su padre
era el mismo de su madre pero el padre tenia otro apellido. El hijo usaba
el apellido de su madre. Que piensa deste caso? (Dispense mi pobre
espanol).

Emilie Garcia
Port Orchard, WA ---
----- Original Message -----
From: Erik Reynoso>
To: research@NuestrosRanchos.com>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Nuestros Ranchos] Ayuda

Estimada Leticia:

Un hijo natural es un hijo bastardo, fuera del matrimonio. Por eso es que
en
las actas aparecen los nombres de los padres aún siendo hijo natural.

Saludos

Erik Andrés Reynoso Palomar y Márquez

Erik, de casualidad no sabes porque se usavan tantos terminos?
y en que momento se decide cual termino se va a usar Natural o ilegitimo?

letty

Erik,

Yes, I quoted the birth record for Ysac in the original message in English below. I was wondering why Ysac said his father's name was Encarnacion Cervantes iinstead of Talamantes in the birth records for his own children.

Emilie

---Original Message---

---the Cervantes name came from Ysac's mother Dorotea Cervantes who did not marry Encarnacion Talamantes until after Ysac's birth and that of his two brothers. Encarnacion and Dorotea were not married until July 10, 1839, three years after the birth of Ysac and six years after the birth of Ysac's brother Sotero. The Talamantes I believe were part Indian from Tlaltenango, and the Cerbantes' were espanoles from Encarnacion de Diaz.

I found Ysac's birth record for June 4, 1836 in "Hijos Legitimos" for La Encarnacion Church, Encarnacion de Diaz, Jalisco. In the margin the record reads: "h. lego.", yet in the body of the record it reads "bautise solamente---Jose Ysac de dos dias nacido en esta Villa h. n. de Dorotea Cerbantes. A. M. Anto. Cerbantes y Juliana Rovalcaba----. The record for Sotero reads the same, "h. lego." in the margin, and "h. n." in the body of the record for April 24, 1833. No father or paternal grandparents are listed in either record. ----
----- Original Message -----
From: Erik Reynoso
To: research@NuestrosRanchos.com
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Nuestros Ranchos] Ayuda

Dear Emilie:

I read it. About what I understood, the last name Talamantes, that was his
stepfather's, not his real father last name that is why he appeared as
Cervantes in his record. But I do have a doubt, when was Ysac Cervantes
baptized? In the record is established when he was born, do you have the
record for his baptism?

Regards.

Erik

----- Original Message -----
From: "Emilie Garcia" >
To: >
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 2:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Nuestros Ranchos] Ayuda

Erik,

Did you read the e-mail I originally sent in English titled "Hijo
Legitimo/Hijo Natural"? That explains the case in detail.

Emilie
----- Original Message -----
From: Erik Reynoso>
To: research@NuestrosRanchos.com>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Nuestros Ranchos] Ayuda

Dear Emilie:

Don't worry about your spanish. About the case you're telling me "h.n. de
...." means "hijo natural" meaning his parents were not married. I
personally do not think the last name of his father was the same as his
mother's. Probably the father did not want to recognize the son and left
he
and her mother. About "h. lego", could refer to his mother, born as a
legitimate child of his granparents.

What do you think?

Kind regards

Erik

----- Original Message -----
From: "Emilie Garcia"
>>
To: >>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 1:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Nuestros Ranchos] Ayuda

Erik,

En el caso en question que envi en mi e-mail horita donde el registro en
el
libro de hijos legitimos: en el margen escribieron "h. lego." pero
tambien
escribieron "h. n. de----" y solamente escribieron el nombre de la madre y
los abuelos maternos. Este hijo despues decia que el apellido de su padre
era el mismo de su madre pero el padre tenia otro apellido. El hijo usaba
el apellido de su madre. Que piensa deste caso? (Dispense mi pobre
espanol).

Emilie Garcia
Port Orchard, WA ---
----- Original Message -----
From: Erik
Reynoso>>
To:
research@NuestrosRanchos.com>>
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Nuestros Ranchos] Ayuda

Estimada Leticia:

Un hijo natural es un hijo bastardo, fuera del matrimonio. Por eso es
que
en
las actas aparecen los nombres de los padres aún siendo hijo natural.

Saludos

Erik Andrés Reynoso Palomar y Márquez

Gracias Erik
tu definiciones me ayudan mucho, Letty

Here's yet another example of acceptable unions in small towns, although not
recognized by church or civilly until actually married:

My mother-in-law "fue robada", which was often done in the olden days were
dating was not permitted. The two fell in love, and made a pact whereby she
would literally be swept away (on a horse) and taken to the hills for a
weekend. Upon returning, everyone knew that this was now a union, and she went to
stay at her mother-in-law's house where within a time when all the "hoopla"
of the event subsided, they made plans to marry quietly through the church and
civilly. She has never told me if this occurred before or after my husband
was born. Obviously, this was a widely accepted way of getting together with
two families who would not have normally blessed the marriage (my mother in
law came from an extremely poor family while my father in law came from a
wealthier family). To this day, neither sides of the family really intermingle
- and this is a very small town!

I am therefore thinking that hijo natural could have been from such a union
while subsequent siblings were hijos legitimos. So far as the law is
concerned, only the legitimate children of such a union could inherit property.

Esperanza
Chicagoland area

Esperanza you reminded me of my paternal grandparents marriage story in Jerez Zacatecas in 1914. My 20 year old grandfather Epitacio Castanon was away from home with his donkey caravan selling booze when he was robbed by bandits. They were going to take his mules and he told them if they did he'd be out of business with no more booze to sell in their territory so they let him keep his donkeys. When he got home to El Durazno he found his friend had stolen his girlfriend and married her. So my grandfather stole his friends jilted girlfriend Juana Sanchez. She was still 14 so he left her at the priests house for 3 days until she turned 15 then he married her in a civil ceremony and then later in a church ceremony.. She said he stole her from her home so she had to marry him. They remained married until his death in 1965. Your story is the first other 'stolen' bride story I had heard. Thank you for sharing the memory.
Linda in B.C.

Latina1955@aol.com wrote:
Here's yet another example of acceptable unions in small towns, although not
recognized by church or civilly until actually married:

My mother-in-law "fue robada", which was often done in the olden days were
dating was not permitted. The two fell in love, and made a pact whereby she
would literally be swept away (on a horse) and taken to the hills for a
weekend. Upon returning, everyone knew that this was now a union, and she went to
stay at her mother-in-law's house where within a time when all the "hoopla"
of the event subsided, they made plans to marry quietly through the church and
civilly. She has never told me if this occurred before or after my husband
was born. Obviously, this was a widely accepted way of getting together with
two families who would not have normally blessed the marriage (my mother in
law came from an extremely poor family while my father in law came from a
wealthier family). To this day, neither sides of the family really intermingle
- and this is a very small town!

I am therefore thinking that hijo natural could have been from such a union
while subsequent siblings were hijos legitimos. So far as the law is
concerned, only the legitimate children of such a union could inherit property.

Esperanza
Chicagoland area

Linda,
I actually did an ethnology on both of my in-laws many years ago. My
father-in-law insists that this arrangement was a "pact". She would go to the
church to clean with her two other friends, and she would wear a red dress. His
friend, who actually did the sweeping would be able to identify her this way.
However, her version is different: she states she was unaware. I suspect
she says this to protect her status in front of her adult children. I tend to
believe my father-in-law.

Someone mentioned that they doubted children born out of wedlock or even
conceived out of wedlock was not important as it was before - this is not true
with some families, even today! My surrogate family (from Los Altos, Jalisco
and La Barca, Jalisco) actually disowned their 15 year old daughter when she
had to marry because of pregnancy (she is now 38 years old and still happily
married).Today, this young lady who married (my niece) enjoys a relationship
with her family, but they do not accept her husband - despite the fact that
they have been married close to 25 years!

Her younger male siblings followed the old tradition: their parents had to
go to the female parents house and formally ask for the bride's hand in
marriage on behalf of their sons. With the assent of the bride's father, the
marriage was considered blessed, and was planned thereafter.

Esperanza
Chicagoland area

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Navigation

Who's online

There are currently 2 users and 6 guests online.

Online users

  • mgavela
  • arturoramos

Languages