Genealogy Chat

If the groom was 20 then would he not need consent as he would be a minor? Pippa

Jane, Thanks for your suggestions. The more I dig into this the more confusedI get. I have asked someone to check the parish records for me to see if any of the births are in there and who the parents are. I have my fingers crossed that they find something for me. Another thought occured to me though. The couple married in a Baptist Chapel, but not the one in the local village. I have been led to believe that the minister for the Baptist chapel was possibly more 'liberal' than others. Apparently there were a few 'stray' marriages in this chapel from the bride and groom's village. The bride was 24 and the groom 20. Maybe it was for religious reasons that the bride's father is not named. The bride was age 24 and the groom 20 so I don't think the bride needed parental consent to marry. Typical isn't it, just when you think you have made a breakthrough you hit another brick wall. Thanks for your help Jenny

Jenny, This sounds distinctly dodgy ... don't be fooled, it could be that either bride or groom or both were marrying without parental consent or approval ... or indeed that bride's Mum had a number of kids out of wedlock - one of mine had 5 and we're wondering if she was on the game! (If she was, she can't have been very successful - by 1830 she was on parish relief.) Incidentally, have you checked whether there's a 'parish chest' for the village concerned? The local records office might have some early 1800s material tucked away - or maybe even on microfilm. These sort of records can show parish relief claims, settlement certs and bastardy bonds (sometimes) ... you'll solve one query and raise about 10 others, but even so! Good luck Jane

Thanks again everyone, I haven't seen an actual imageof the 1841 just a transcript which says mother is a 'widow/er' I agree there could be more children, and on the IGI I can find only one other , born 1810, again only mother's name is given. Doh! I have a couple of branches on my family tree where every step of the way finding information on them has been like pulling teeth. This is one of them. Jenny

If mother is 60 in 1841 and has two children aged 20 and 17, she may have had other children before then, who had left home. In my experience, at around 1840s/50s women started having children as soon as (if not before!) they married and went on until they died or reached their mid-40s. Have you tried checking baptism records for the children on www.familysearch.org? Or, if you think both children were illegitimate, have you looked for baptism for mother? nell

That did occur to me although none of mine have that! Lou **stamping feet cos that one word would make things sooooo much easier**

Perhaps her occupation is given as widow? Kate.

How do you know her mother was widowed on the 1841 census? The 1841 doesn't normally give marital status, just name, age and whether born in county. Lou

Perhaps her mother married his father? That happened to my GGGrandfather.

Thank you Kim and Nell, I am a little confused as I have found the bride on 1841 census living with a younger brother and someone I am assuming to be mother, who is described as widow. Mother is age 60 and bride 20 and brother 17. Mother and brother still live with bride and husband in 1851. So, an old mother to be having illegitimate children and somewhat promiscuous if she has another afterwards. She could be calling herself a widow for appearances sake but I tend to think mother was married. So why wouldn't bride mention father. Both bride and groom come from a small area in the Forest of Dean where families intermarry regularly. Groom's father is called Giles Griffiths and it is actually possible that the bride's father could be called Giles Griffiths as well. There were two living in the same area at the same time and of the same age (cousins). But again why would she be called something different. Ahh well, another mystery to ponder over. Jenny

Usually means the bride either did not know father, or was illegitimate, or could be that she did not wnat her father named. The ones where I have this have turned out to be illegitimate, but not always the case. Kim

No idea. Usually if something isn't recorded, its either left blank, or a line drawn through. Unless the registrar was exceptionally lazy and the bride's father had the same name as the groom's! nell

I have just obtained a marriage certificate for ancestors from 1845. The groom's father is named in the father's name column. Where there should be a name for the bride's father all there is are ditto marks ie '' '' ''. I took this to mean that the father is not named. This is the first time I have come across this so is this usual?? Jenny