Genealogy Chat

Angela, if only one father's name was missing it would strongly suggest illegitimacy, but if both are missing it could well be that the vicar didn't know that bit had to be filled in if the parties were over 21. If you can get a look at the parish register for that date then you would be able to look at the other marriage certs around then and see if they are the same. As for the residence, yes, I have one that says 'Hampstead'. How annoying is that?! Kate.

The most likely reason would be that they were illegitimate, with the next likely being that they might not have known who their fathers were. Do either of the couple have a middle name? This is often a pointer to an illegitimate child's father's surname. For example, an ancestor's sister, Sarah Gwilliam, had a daughter named Ann James Gwilliam; the father's name was William James. The baptism entry for either might reveal the father's name; your other main option is to find certificates for siblings and other family members that might not have the same omission. Oddly enough, we only recently got to see my maternal grandmother's marriage certificate for the first time, and it in fact is the only known place to give her father's name! A family secret revealed after a hundred years!!

Yes, I have one like that. In my case both the bride and groom were widowed and in their 40s. A friend who is a vicar said he thought it was just for those reasons they were not included - the parson made the (wrong) decision that the information was irrelevant. It was maddening because he was my ggg grandfather and his first marriage was before 1837 - I just wanted the certificate to confirm who I thought his father was! Thought it was a cunning plan :-( Anne

Most of my early marriage certificate only have the town/village in the residence column. The lack of fathers' names does point to illegitamacy. Helen

Maybe he had spent the last four years saying, ''Well we never had to record this before, so.....'' Drives you nuts doesn't it? Is the marriage before or after the census (June 7th) Merry

A friend has been trying for ages to track down the marriage of an ancestor. Now she has, the certificate is disappointing. It is for the marriage of a couple in Tunbridge in 1841 and in both cases there is a line through the boxes for information about their fathers. I have not seen one that has these boxes completely ignored in both cases before. The only possible reasons I could come up with were a)both were orphans b)both were illegitimate or c)the vicar was being lazy in the early days of civil registration (he also helpfully wrote the single word 'Tunbridge' in the residence box which suggests he was being a bit slapdash). Anyone else ever come across this? Angela