Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
Missing father on Marriage
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Graham | Report | 20 May 2006 10:49 |
|
see below on a mo' |
|||
|
Graham | Report | 20 May 2006 10:49 |
|
I have just received a marriage certificate from the GRO for Robert Shaw, age 21, Bachelor & Mary Cottom, age 21, Spinster. 11 Sept 1853. The father of the bride is not entered. On the face of it I would assume that she was illegitimate. However: The baptismal entry, for the bride, shows: Mary Cottam 3rd child, 2nd daughter of John & Elizabeth Cottam. Baptised 31.1.1833 Born 18.12.1832. This position in the family fits in with the other children that I have found of John & Elizabeth (Betty) I have found them on the 1841 census - HO107/524/3 Folio 24 Page 7 And on the 1851 census - HO107/2201 Folio 360 Page 17 – by this time her father has gone and her mother (Betty) is a widow. I haven’t yet got a copy of her father’s (John Cottam) death certificate. In 1853 on Mary’s marriage certificate her father is not entered. For information – one of the witnesses is Elizabeth Cottom – I presumed that this would be her sister – but as I am typing I wonder whether it could be her mother Betty. Is it likely that a mother would be a witness at her daughter’s wedding in 1853. It is puzzling me as to why the father is not showing (entered as deceased) as I thought it would look more respectable if the bride did have a father and I can’t see any reason on the face of it for not entering him. Surely she would have known her father’s name even if he had died just after the 1841 census.. Can any of you more experienced genealogists throw some light on what might have happened? Thanks |
|||
|
Heather | Report | 20 May 2006 10:58 |
|
I think that the vicars or whoever filled in these forms didn't know what they were doing half the time. Our first thought when seeing no father's name is that the person was illegitimate but it isn't always true. The witness could be sister or mum, but I'd rule out the possibility of another person with the same name as the bride living in the area. Heather |
|||
|
Graham | Report | 20 May 2006 17:50 |
|
Thanks for your thoughts on this. Much appreciated |
|||
|
Colin | Report | 20 May 2006 19:21 |
|
I have a wedding cert from Yorkshire were both the father of the groom and the bride are not shown...just a line drawn through...I have no idea why but it makes going back another generation very difficult |
|||