Genealogy Chat

Hi All,
If two couples appear on the same page of the marriage index is there any significance to this/? i.e. was it at the same church or just the luck of the draw?
I have two women of the same surname on the one page and both appear as 'daughter' on an earlier census but I know that they were not sisters. One was my GGAunt living with her stepfather, the other may have been related to him. Too canny to buy a cert for an unrelated person.
Thanks in advance.
Bernie

Thanks Lainie,

Unfortunately I'm in the storm battered southern seas so a long hop!
GGAunt was born in Dodbrooke, Sth Hams, the other gives her birth as West Alvington - unless there was a doppelganger, so I'll discount #2.

Your insight is appreciated.
B

Hi 39,
It feels like the south pole - but actually in Bay of Plenty, NZ.

B70

Going back to your original question it's usually just luck of the draw - they happened to get married in the same area in that 3 month period.

But, check out the page numbers.

Like these:

Marriages Mar 1860 (>99%)
Mocock George Bethnal Gn 1c 532 Scan available - click to view
Mocock William Bethnal Gn 1c 531 Scan available - click to view

These two married on the same day in the same church. They are on adjoining pages of the register.

There is an article somewhere on line (I think) that explains the volume and page numbers of the registers. They change according to which church the marriages took place at - so the further apart the volume and page numbers are the more likely it is that the churches are different. Does that make sense?

Jill

Thanks Jill,

Yep - they are on the same page which made me wonder if it was the same church or just the order in which they were copied. I have enough problems with the ones that I know are related to me, so chasing wild geese can wait.
Cheers,
B

If its the same volume and the same page it will likely be the same church but not necessarily the same day ...

Might be worth posting some details in case someone can help with a look up on the parish registers.

Jill

The volume number and page number may have nothing to do with the church where the marriage took place, Edit;( for a better insight into this checkout the link's below it can be complicated) as mgnv point's out below

The volume number relates to the registration district the event took place and the page number relates to the page number entry at the GRO

The GRO index is not used at local registry offices they all have their own referencing system's

For any info about bmd's i would recommend

http://home.clara.net/dixons/Certificates/indexbd.htm

but take a look at this

http://home.clara.net/dixons/Certificates/marriages.htm#COL1

Roy

Contrary to what others have posted, events in the GRO index with the same page # occurred in the same place. For Bs & Ds, this means the same subdistrict - for Ms, this means the same church (except it can also mean the registrar`s own register - this would be used for rego office marrs, but also for marrs the registrar attended - pre 1898, only C of E, quakers and jews were authorized to keep regos. Non-conformist marrs needed the registrar to attend - post 1898 thru 1980ish this would only be RC marrs).

At the end of each quarter, the local subdistrict registrars and the church authorized keepers of regos would copy out their regos for the previous quarter, and send them in to the local district superintendent, who would check them over, bundle them all together, and ship them off to the GRO.
The GRO would bind them together pretty much as they got them.

Knowing this behaviour sometimes has a practical consequence.
I don`t live in the UK, nor do I have a UK bank account, so ordering a BMD cert has to be thru the GRO if the local RO don`t take credit cards.
However, if the local RO has an online index, and that index contains identifying info not in the GRO index, sometimes I can identify the local record I need, but matching it up with the GRO index is a bit problematic.

Wigan & Leigh RO don`t take credit cards, but suppose I wanted one of the following (because the age/mother is right)

Lancashire Birth indexes for the years: 1839
Surname Forename(s) Sub-District Registers At Mother's Maiden Name Reference
SMITH John Standish Wigan & Leigh BIMSON STND/1/210

Lancashire Death indexes for the years: 1839
Surname Forename(s) Age Sub-District Registers At Reference
SMITH John 66 Wigan Wigan & Leigh WIG/4/365

If I look up all the John Smiths in Wigan at FreeBMD, then click on the page #, then look all sets of the other 9 names up in the local index and note their local ref #, it`ll soon be clear which GRO record I want.

Thankyou to all,

I reckon that these ladies were unrelated. #1 is with her stepfather in 1851 with #2 in the same house, both listed as a daughter. . 1861 #2 is elsewhere, different older people of the same surname and also listed as daughter.

Are you confused? I am!

Cheers,
B

Check this out. As it says it is a work in progress but it explains how the page numbers work ...

http://www.marriage-locator.co.uk/

Jill

Not sure how you can tell which woman is which from just the index - unless they have a rare name?

Jill

Jill, to find out who married who just look for them on the next census using the all the male names on same page to cross reference its not 100% proof but a good guide.

Roy

Hi Roy

Yes - I've used that in the past - I was just wondering how the OP had worked out that the two women with the same name on the same page might have been related. Just curious how she came to that conclusion really. If I saw two names the same on the same page I would assume the record had been duplicated or there was some sort of error.

Jill

There is a portal to local online indices at:
http://www.ukbmd.org.uk/local_bmd

In particular, at Tower Hamlets RO
Result Year Forename Initial Surname Ref Next
1 1860 Emma JARVIS /C9 3/116/ Order
2 1860 William MOCOCK /C9 3/116/ Order
Result Year Forename Initial Surname Ref Next
1 1860 Abigail JARVIS /C9 3/117/ Order
2 1860 George MOCOCK /C9 3/117/ Order

These show both were wed in Church C9, and were consecutive entries in the rego, but doesn't identify which church C9 is.

In Jill's example, they were wed on the same day, but here's two siblings who were wed 6 w apart, but are consecutive entries in the rego.

Marriage: 25 Aug 1894 St Elizabeth of Hungary, Aspull, Lancashire, England
Robert Hill - 21 Collier Bachelor of Heyes Square, higher Gullet, Aspull
Ellen Westhead - 21 Pit-Brow Woman Spinster of 2 Leigh's Yard, Hr. Gullet, Aspull
Groom's Father: Richard Hill, Collier (decd.)
Bride's Father: John Westhead, Collier (decd.)
Witness: Emmanuel Seddon; Alice Hill, (X)
Married by Banns by: George F. Grundy M.A. Vicar
Register: Marriages 1883 - 1900, Page 101, Entry 202
Source: LDS Film 1885720

The next marr in the rego is:

Marriage: 13 Oct 1894 St Elizabeth of Hungary, Aspull, Lancashire, England
Emmanuel Seddon - 20 Collier Bachelor of 284 Chorley Road, Wingates, Westhoughton
Mary Jane Hill - 19 Pit-Brow Woman Spinster of 11 Lr. Gullet, Aspull
Groom's Father: Emmanuel Seddon, Collier
Bride's Father: Richard Hill, Collier
Witness: Thomas Westwell; Sarah Barstow
Married by Banns by: George F. Grundy M.A. Vicar
Register: Marriages 1883 - 1900, Page 102, Entry 203
Source: LDS Film 1885720
[Seems Lazarus went by the name of Richard]


*** Jill *** - thanks for that URL - hopefully I can build a key for N Tyneside churches.

Hang on Jill - with the same SURNAME. A not unusual name in the South Hams, but the forenames suggest that they were both daughters of head of house in 1851.
I'll save me pennies for a cert.

Marriage locator only comes up with the RD on this one but will have a look for a few others.

Thank you all.
B

Ah - that makes sense Bernie - I thought you meant the complete name was the same ...

Jill