Early honeymoon?

[Gardengirl]

Don't you just hate it when something sparks a string of questions and you haven't got time to follow it up. I'm going on holiday tomorrow and this morning I got a letter from my cousin, who I have been in touch with over the past few months to help me ID the people in some old photos. He is about 15 years older than me and has lots of knowledge about our grandparents that is new to me.

Anyway, today his letter contained a surprise.

Our grandparents were married 11 July 1914 and their first child (my cousins mother) was born in February 1915 - only 7 months later. I have certificates for both of these events and I remember back in the 80s, when my aunt was still alive and I first started sharing my new found research facts with her and my father (her brother), she was quite shocked about those dates and said 'No, no, my dear, that can't be right, there must be a mistake. My parents were married in 1913' I didn't pursue the discussion as I had no need to upset her sensibilities and was happy that the two certificates were right.

But, in today's letter from my cousin is a copy of a photograph which he says is our grandparents on their honeymoon. They are in the back of some kind of open wagon and written on the side (I assume by the photographer) is a date 16*8*13 !



My cousin is very clear that this was a honeymoon photo so what is going on? I can't think of an explanation for the date sequence. Could the marriage certificate be wrong?

I'd love to hear any thoughts on this. Unfortunately as I'm going on holiday tomorrow I haven't got time to really follow it up until I get back so don't be offended if I don't reply to later responses. I'll catch up when I get back.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Was he in the military? If he .arried in 1913 without permission then the 1914 marriage would be to get himself out of trouble with his CO. Just a thought!

OC

[Gardengirl]

But wouldn't the first marriage be on the GRO registers? I did wonder if they might have had a registry office marriage and a church service but have only found one registered 1914 Q3

[Gardengirl]

I've just checked my file for the actual certificate and realised that what I have is the actual original certificate, not a copy, so the date must be right surely?

[cbcarolyn]

How odd, you have the cert and it is def them? in the place that they were supposed to have been married?

they went on honeymoon with a lot of people

have you looked in the papers - wonder if there are any announcements that may help

[cbcarolyn]

Sorry posts crossed....

[Gardengirl]

Was he in the military? If he .arried in 1913 without permission then the 1914 marriage would be to get himself out of trouble with his CO. Just a thought!

OC

Yes, he was later but not at the time of his marriage as far as I know. Unfortunately he was killed at Passchendaele in 1917 leaving his young wife with two very small children.

[Gardengirl]

have you looked in the papers - wonder if there are any announcements that may help

Good idea. I'll have a look on Find My Past

[Gardengirl]

No, nothing obvious there apart from a few articles about them and their Concert Party 'The Qui Vives' which I already knew about.

[cbcarolyn]

I have found that - she is clearly 'Miss' and it is in Chelsea News and General Advertiser 27 February 1914 after August 13

[Gardengirl]

So my cousin must be mistaken. Maybe it is a honeymoon photo but the photographer wrote the wrong date?

[cbcarolyn]

not their honeymoon, or not a honeymoon at all?

I can't decide if there is anything there to say it is a wedding, no flowers, dresses not sure what they would have worn then.

[Olde Crone Holden]

I think it's a coverup, lol. The marriage cert is an official record. The photo isn't proof of anything.

I was once in the local family history research room when an elderly woman flew in and demanded that the manager corrected the date of her parents' marriage. (Manager was opc for the local area and has transcribed marriages which were on line). The woman was adamant that her parents had married a year before the church record "which must be wrong as I was born 5 months after that date and my parents were respectable people!" . Manager told her to take it up with the vicar, lol.

I suspect the same thing has happened here. Good luck trying to convince the disbelievers!

OC

[kylejustin]

Agree with OC, definitely lied about the marriage date for respectability. Anybody could write a date on a photo, not necessarily a photographer. Also it might not commemorate marriage or honeymoon, could have been assumed or the person passing on the anecdote lied or was lied too.

[Jill on the A272]

I agree with OC that it's a coverup, the date on the photo may well be another event they attended and the date has been "passed off " way back in time as the honeymoon to make it fit a fictitious wedding date.

My friend has a family bible with all the Victorian family birthdates, it's a coverup of the fact that the couple were both married to other people so the first three were registered in their mother's legal husband's name not that of their natural father.

[Gardengirl]

I think you are probably right. It was my cousins mother who was upset about the dates so maybe, way back in time, she used that photo to show him when her parents were married rather than revealing the certificated truth.

I think I have some evidence, possibly somewhere in a newspaper article, that their concert party did performances in Ilfracombe so the picture may have been taken during one of those. I'll re-look at the newspapers and see if the dates match up. if anyone else wants to explore further, just for fun, they were known as Bert Goodall and Ruby Caesar and the concert party was the Qui Vives. There's a bit more about them in my blog post here https://ourpaststories.weebly.com/blog/the-qui-vives

​​​​​​​Thanks for your thoughts, very helpful as always.

[cbcarolyn]

the photo could be just a day trip, the photos were probably taken and sold to all the trippers?

Did your aunt say when they were married in 1913? I feel if I was going to lie i would just take a whole year off! so month of marriage was correct.

aren't folk funny, all of their peers at the time would have known, it would only be the next generation that could be told differently

[Gardengirl]

Nothing more was said by my aunt. She just politely put me in my place and I decided not to pursue it.

I’ll do some more research when I’m back from my holiday and update this thread if I find anything else.

Must stop now - packing needs to be done!

[GallowayLass]

When you are back, try looking through issues of The Stage magazine to see where the Qui Vives might have been performing on the date written on the carriage.

[Sylvia C]

I never knew when my maternal grandparents were married. The anniversary was never celebrated, not even their 50th in 1952, although my grandmother had a stroke that year and was then bedridden until she died in 1955 which could be a reason for no celebrations.

However that doesn't really explain why it was never mentioned.

When I got their marriage certificate about 10 years ago I discovered they were married only 7 months before my mother was born .............. which could explain why no mention of anniversaries!