Family Tree of Knowledge 5: Missing Marriage Records 1 (England)
In England, Lord Hardwick’s Marriage Act of 1753 was passed in order to prevent clandestine marriages, particularly those of minors, and other abuses. Thus, if one cannot find the record of a particular marriage of ancestors prior to that year then obviously there arises the question if such a marriage or liaison was legal or not.
Because the marriage cannot be found it does not necessarily imply that it was a clandestine – illegal or “Fleet” – marriage. The answer may simply be that it took place in a parish where the register that recorded it had been lost, stolen, burnt, severely damaged, destroyed, or had just been misplaced or had disappeared.
Unfortunately, there have been many such mishaps with our vital records in England. In northern Hampshire alone the earliest surviving registers for Eastrop, Hannington, Newnham, Nutley, Tufton, Tunworth, and Woodmancote date from around the middle of the 18th century, while Ashmansworth, Freefolk and Farleigh Wallop have registers that begin in the early 19th (although in most cases these date from when the parish was newly formed). There are even recorded instances of an enterprising clergyman transcribing entries from an old register and into a new one, in order to save these historical accounts for posterity. In this way David Renaud the curate had collected together several entries from various loose memorandum papers for the parish of Ewhurst from 1682 to 1773. As the rector of Hannington, Mr Renaud must also be commended for saving that parish’s extant registers as well, for they survive only from 1768, the year that he took up his post there.
Therefore, to some great degree, our success in discovering the records of our ancestors can merely be seen as being the result of good luck, particularly when the registers were held in the caring hands of such persons as David Renaud and his ilk. Unfortunately, though, a great number have not survived – and even after they had arrived almost unscathed at county record offices, a few were since stolen (or had pages removed) by selfish researchers, which eventually led to the security measures that we take for granted now, including reading microfiche copies instead of the originals.
The majority of pre-1753 marriages would have taken place in an Anglican church, for the very reason that a marriage was not considered legal unless it was celebrated according to the rites of the Established Church. Naturally, such a condition allowed unscrupulous “parsons” to prey on the ignorant. At least one member of each of the couples who were joined together in Fleet marriages would have believed that they were so legally bound. But they were only common law “husband” and “wife”, according to the law. Those married at sea did not fare any better.
Until 1689 nonconformists were being persecuted for their religious beliefs, and even marriages within their own congregations were not permitted by law. With the exception of Quakers and Jews, marriages performed according to other nonconformist services remained illegal up until 1837. Hence, dissenting groups (excepting Quakers) were careful not to record the marriages of their own members. The Quakers were particularly stubborn and continued to make such records even during the height of the Clarendon Code persecutions of them and other sects between 1661 and 1689.
Nevertheless, the strong feeling of illegality had undoubtedly caused numerous dissenters to attend Anglican religious services and also to marry within the Church of England, although it must be suspected that they had equally celebrated a wedding service within their own religious meeting. Such “Occasional Conformity” was widely known, and even encouraged in some communities, for while a family attended a church service at least once a month they were then immune from the penalties being inflicted by the authorities on those who would not conform to the State religion, which legislation had been in force since the last years of Queen Elizabeth’s reign.
Because one had found a marriage of one’s ancestors in an Anglican parish register, one must not always assume that those people were ardent Anglicans. They could have been forced to marry in the Church because of religious persecution. In the men’s minutes book of the Hampshire Quarterly Meeting one can read the continuous admonishing from their fellow Friends of Quakers who had married in “steeple houses” (Anglican churches), along with the complaint that this was becoming a fairly regular practice. While many Friends had stood up for their religious principles, there were always those who were weaker and thus afraid of the consequences.
If the marriage was not recorded in a surviving Anglican parish register or perhaps in a Quaker digest or original meeting book then the likelihood of discovering the actual marriage record would be extremely slight. There are, however, certain ways to hopefully find the maiden name of the wife, even if the marriage itself cannot be discovered - although it must be considered that the success rate will probably be very low.
Marriage licences and allegations for marriage licences are the most common source to look at when searching for the elusive marriage. Unfortunately, these are normally limited to those families of substance and wealth, leaving the poorer couples unrepresented, having to marry by banns (which were not usually recorded until after 1753).
The marriage settlement is naturally the most useful, for it records proposed marriages and the names of the interested parties, including the bride’s father in most cases. These can be found in various property deeds, but again they are severely limited, for they comprise indentures favouring the gentry class and above – that is, those with considerable lands.
Yet, another form of marriage settlement – although not specifically termed as such – can be found within manorial court rolls, but only in those that record the business of the courts baron. These were the courts held solely in the interests of the lord of the manor, recording local matters such as grants of reversion to copyholds, admittances, surrenders and deaths, as well as many other activities.
When a copyhold tenant had nominated a daughter instead of a son to the reversion of a copyhold, it was wholly in order to provide her with a dowry, and in due course she would nominally succeed to the tenure, but under the governance of her husband. Later grants and other warrants would record the woman’s married name. Copyholds were held by labourers as well as by yeomen, and later by tradesmen, professionals and gentry, as well.
Wills can often show the names of married daughters and even their husbands, but, of course, the problem here is exacerbated by the fact that one is normally looking for the wife’s maiden surname in the first place. Unless there is a wills index handy (which is extremely rare) one could not be able to locate one’s male ancestor in his father-in-law’s will. However, it can be useful to sift through several wills of the parish wherein the man was baptised, for it is probably more likely than not that he had married a local girl or even one within a small radius of his village.
More often than not a man would have married a woman within his own social circle. Farmers normally married farmers’ daughters, although they would also seek wives from the families of butchers, or other tradesmen, such as shopkeepers and innkeepers. Quite often, though, an older bachelor farmer would marry his housekeeper or servant, on the grounds that they would be able to look after him. A lawyer would naturally marry into a wealthy professional family, and so on. Locality and status were often thought to be important. So, if your male ancestor was a tradesman or professional, have a look at other families in that same or associated trade or profession.
Furthermore, the farmer or other businessman tended to marry later in life than the labourer - most probably after they had been able to get established in business, so as to be able to provide for a family. Quite often they took very young wives. The reverse did happen, on occasion, when the older woman married the younger man, and this was normally because the woman had wealth and property, which the man would then inherit.
See next Missing Marriage Records (England) after 1753
[The author is a professional genealogist and historical researcher of 35 years' experience, dealing with all types of sources in England, but now specialising in medieval, manorial and legal work. For more information visit http://www.thechangingseasons.com/index.php?main_page=page&id=22&chapter=40 ]
In England, Lord Hardwick’s Marriage Act of 1753 was passed in order to prevent clandestine marriages, particularly those of minors, and other abuses. Thus, if one cannot find the record of a particular marriage of ancestors prior to that year then obviously there arises the question if such a marriage or liaison was legal or not.
Because the marriage cannot be found it does not necessarily imply that it was a clandestine – illegal or “Fleet” – marriage. The answer may simply be that it took place in a parish where the register that recorded it had been lost, stolen, burnt, severely damaged, destroyed, or had just been misplaced or had disappeared.
Unfortunately, there have been many such mishaps with our vital records in England. In northern Hampshire alone the earliest surviving registers for Eastrop, Hannington, Newnham, Nutley, Tufton, Tunworth, and Woodmancote date from around the middle of the 18th century, while Ashmansworth, Freefolk and Farleigh Wallop have registers that begin in the early 19th (although in most cases these date from when the parish was newly formed). There are even recorded instances of an enterprising clergyman transcribing entries from an old register and into a new one, in order to save these historical accounts for posterity. In this way David Renaud the curate had collected together several entries from various loose memorandum papers for the parish of Ewhurst from 1682 to 1773. As the rector of Hannington, Mr Renaud must also be commended for saving that parish’s extant registers as well, for they survive only from 1768, the year that he took up his post there.
Therefore, to some great degree, our success in discovering the records of our ancestors can merely be seen as being the result of good luck, particularly when the registers were held in the caring hands of such persons as David Renaud and his ilk. Unfortunately, though, a great number have not survived – and even after they had arrived almost unscathed at county record offices, a few were since stolen (or had pages removed) by selfish researchers, which eventually led to the security measures that we take for granted now, including reading microfiche copies instead of the originals.
The majority of pre-1753 marriages would have taken place in an Anglican church, for the very reason that a marriage was not considered legal unless it was celebrated according to the rites of the Established Church. Naturally, such a condition allowed unscrupulous “parsons” to prey on the ignorant. At least one member of each of the couples who were joined together in Fleet marriages would have believed that they were so legally bound. But they were only common law “husband” and “wife”, according to the law. Those married at sea did not fare any better.
Until 1689 nonconformists were being persecuted for their religious beliefs, and even marriages within their own congregations were not permitted by law. With the exception of Quakers and Jews, marriages performed according to other nonconformist services remained illegal up until 1837. Hence, dissenting groups (excepting Quakers) were careful not to record the marriages of their own members. The Quakers were particularly stubborn and continued to make such records even during the height of the Clarendon Code persecutions of them and other sects between 1661 and 1689.
Nevertheless, the strong feeling of illegality had undoubtedly caused numerous dissenters to attend Anglican religious services and also to marry within the Church of England, although it must be suspected that they had equally celebrated a wedding service within their own religious meeting. Such “Occasional Conformity” was widely known, and even encouraged in some communities, for while a family attended a church service at least once a month they were then immune from the penalties being inflicted by the authorities on those who would not conform to the State religion, which legislation had been in force since the last years of Queen Elizabeth’s reign.
Because one had found a marriage of one’s ancestors in an Anglican parish register, one must not always assume that those people were ardent Anglicans. They could have been forced to marry in the Church because of religious persecution. In the men’s minutes book of the Hampshire Quarterly Meeting one can read the continuous admonishing from their fellow Friends of Quakers who had married in “steeple houses” (Anglican churches), along with the complaint that this was becoming a fairly regular practice. While many Friends had stood up for their religious principles, there were always those who were weaker and thus afraid of the consequences.
If the marriage was not recorded in a surviving Anglican parish register or perhaps in a Quaker digest or original meeting book then the likelihood of discovering the actual marriage record would be extremely slight. There are, however, certain ways to hopefully find the maiden name of the wife, even if the marriage itself cannot be discovered - although it must be considered that the success rate will probably be very low.
Marriage licences and allegations for marriage licences are the most common source to look at when searching for the elusive marriage. Unfortunately, these are normally limited to those families of substance and wealth, leaving the poorer couples unrepresented, having to marry by banns (which were not usually recorded until after 1753).
The marriage settlement is naturally the most useful, for it records proposed marriages and the names of the interested parties, including the bride’s father in most cases. These can be found in various property deeds, but again they are severely limited, for they comprise indentures favouring the gentry class and above – that is, those with considerable lands.
Yet, another form of marriage settlement – although not specifically termed as such – can be found within manorial court rolls, but only in those that record the business of the courts baron. These were the courts held solely in the interests of the lord of the manor, recording local matters such as grants of reversion to copyholds, admittances, surrenders and deaths, as well as many other activities.
When a copyhold tenant had nominated a daughter instead of a son to the reversion of a copyhold, it was wholly in order to provide her with a dowry, and in due course she would nominally succeed to the tenure, but under the governance of her husband. Later grants and other warrants would record the woman’s married name. Copyholds were held by labourers as well as by yeomen, and later by tradesmen, professionals and gentry, as well.
Wills can often show the names of married daughters and even their husbands, but, of course, the problem here is exacerbated by the fact that one is normally looking for the wife’s maiden surname in the first place. Unless there is a wills index handy (which is extremely rare) one could not be able to locate one’s male ancestor in his father-in-law’s will. However, it can be useful to sift through several wills of the parish wherein the man was baptised, for it is probably more likely than not that he had married a local girl or even one within a small radius of his village.
More often than not a man would have married a woman within his own social circle. Farmers normally married farmers’ daughters, although they would also seek wives from the families of butchers, or other tradesmen, such as shopkeepers and innkeepers. Quite often, though, an older bachelor farmer would marry his housekeeper or servant, on the grounds that they would be able to look after him. A lawyer would naturally marry into a wealthy professional family, and so on. Locality and status were often thought to be important. So, if your male ancestor was a tradesman or professional, have a look at other families in that same or associated trade or profession.
Furthermore, the farmer or other businessman tended to marry later in life than the labourer - most probably after they had been able to get established in business, so as to be able to provide for a family. Quite often they took very young wives. The reverse did happen, on occasion, when the older woman married the younger man, and this was normally because the woman had wealth and property, which the man would then inherit.
See next Missing Marriage Records (England) after 1753
[The author is a professional genealogist and historical researcher of 35 years' experience, dealing with all types of sources in England, but now specialising in medieval, manorial and legal work. For more information visit http://www.thechangingseasons.com/index.php?main_page=page&id=22&chapter=40 ]
posted by kensma | 3:45 PM
| 0 comments
