Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Would They Have Tied The Knot...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Would They Have Tied The Knot...

    The legal age for marriage in the 18th Century was I think if I am correct, 14 for men and 12 for women, but did couples actually marry at that age ?
    I have found a possible marriage at St. Georges in the Borough ,London for my couple but it makes Sarah only 13, so serious doubts are setting in.

    goodygumdrops

  • #2
    Need more info. Sarah is a very common first name, is the second name unusual? How many other Sarahs can you find who could be this bride? Any clues with the witnesses?

    I will say that the youngest bride I've found who is definitely in my tree was 15. Most of my females married between 18-30.
    ~ with love from Little Nell~
    Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

    Comment


    • #3
      How do you know Sarah's exact age? Not everyone was baptised as a newborn baby.

      I have one or two 12/13 year old girls marrying in my tree but it WAS unusual.

      OC

      Comment


      • #4
        info on Sarah...

        Thankyou Ladies,
        This Sarah's parents from Cookham, Berks. married in Buckinghamshire Nov 1783 and dau Sarah bapt. 1784.
        The marriage of a Sarah Hays and Thomas Weeks took place at St George in the Borough in 1797.
        I have had postings on other sites regarding this marriage, of which I have been searching for the last 5 years.
        Thomas died in Burchetts Green, nr. Cookham in Berkshire in 1820 Sarah says she was born in Hurley Berkshire. All children of that marriage born in Hurley, Berks.
        Sarah remarried in 1822 to a James Wernham, no children came out of that marriage.
        I have taken note of the bapts. in surrounding parishes of Sarahs born ca. 1782 and have spent hours and hours searching all the available parishes available to me via the Internet, checking surnames to match any of those recorded as having married a Thomas Wicks/Weeks, and the only matching surname to date is Hayes, but married at 13 ? I am very sceptical and wanted other opinions and experiences.

        goodgumd.

        Comment


        • #5
          I don't think you can ever say "It must be her because I can't find anyone else".

          Not everything is on the internet. There are often mistakes and omissions in transcribed registers.

          You need to check the original register for the marriage you have found, which will hopefully say something about parental permission. One of mine does, the other doesn't!

          But 13 WAS a legal age to marry. Was she, ahem, in an interesting condition? The Vicar could ignore her father's refusal to give permission if the bride was pregnant.

          OC

          Comment


          • #6
            Well its quite possible that it is your Sarah, but perhaps she was a bit older when baptised, say about 2. That would make her 15 which is still young.

            I suppose its plausible that Sarah was born in Berks and went to London to work in service, which is where she met Thomas.

            But I would have been happier if they'd stayed in Berks to marry, especially as that is where their children were all born.

            If you get a copy of the original marriage it should say if Sarah was a minor (I have a cert from 1817 when the bride was 18 and it says "married with consent of parents"; and one from 1846 when bride was 16 which says she is a "minor").
            ~ with love from Little Nell~
            Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

            Comment


            • #7
              and have spent hours and hours searching all the available parishes available to me via the Internet
              Time to think about all the parishes not available on the internet?

              Are you near to an LDS Family History Centre?

              Comment


              • #8
                I know I've said this before but I found a birth announcement in 1803 approx for a 14 year old girl, the newspaper said she was married the previous year aged 13 so it was legal back then, but not that common.


                Joanie

                Comment


                • #9
                  I know that not everything is on the Internet, but it is the only way I can do any research apart from paying to have searches done, plus the help of very kind people on forums like this, as I live abroad. My contact in England who shares the same family, has searched all surrounding parishes, as he lives in Berkshire, for links to this family, and for a marriage between Thomas and a Sarah. The London marriages which we thought to be a possibility, show to be all, 'of this parish'.

                  We are in the stages of desperation. Sarah must have been baptised in one parish but lived in Hurley where she was probably born. First child was bapt.(that we know about ) in Hurley in 1805.

                  Ah well ! back to the drawing board on this one :(

                  goodyg.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    "of this parish" on a marriage register just means that was where the bride/groom were living at the time of the marriage. It doesn't mean they came from there or even that it was a permanent address.

                    But if the London marriage is yours, I'm wondering why they didn't stay in London, or if they married away from Berkshire because of family opposition, why they went so far away?

                    I'm sorry, I don't think you will find a definite answer to this, but you never know.
                    ~ with love from Little Nell~
                    Chowns, Dunt, Emms, Mealing, Purvey & Smoothy

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by goodygumdrops View Post
                      I know that not everything is on the Internet, but it is the only way I can do any research apart from paying to have searches done, plus the help of very kind people on forums like this, as I live abroad.
                      Living abroad isn't a major problem - there are LDS family history centres in most countries, and they've microfilmed lots of records which aren't on the IGI.

                      Have a look for your nearest centre here:

                      FamilySearch.org - Family History Centers

                      The microfilms are available to view at the centre for a nominal charge.

                      More information here:

                      Latter Day Saints Family History Libraries - Family Tree Forum

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Have you checked to see if there are children baptised to a Thomas and Sarah in the parish where that marriage took place, which might help to rule the marriage out for your couple?
                        KiteRunner

                        Every five years or so I look back on my life and I have a good... laugh"
                        (Indigo Girls, "Watershed")

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Mary, I didn't realise that the LDS had records not shown on Website or on Batch Numbers. So that is perhaps my next job.
                          KITERUNNER when I do the above maybe, I can get order St. George's P.R's to do what you suggest.

                          Thanks
                          goodyg.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X