Author Topic: Bride's Occupation  (Read 2876 times)

Offline Deirdre784

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 4,030
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Bride's Occupation
« Reply #9 on: Tuesday 25 August 15 13:36 BST (UK) »
I have a marriage certificate - see clip - where the groom is a schoolmaster and there appear to be 2 ditto marks in the bride's occupation box - yet she can't sign her name.

And the place of residence says 'same place'  ???
CARDIFF:Lord,Griffiths,Barry,Cope,Mahoney ~ PEMBROKESHIRE:Griffiths,Rees,Owen,Thomas ~ ESSEX:Lord,Foreman,Hatch ~ SOMERSET:Lord,Cox,Hockey,Linham,Bryant ~ STAFFORDSHIRE:Cope,Elks,Hackney,Gallimore,Davenport ~ SUFFOLK:Lord,Lockwood,Hatch,Rix,Foreman ~ IRELAND:Barry,Meany,Cummins,Grogan ~
PONTYPRIDD:Leigh,Brooks,Adams,Davies,Thomas ~ KENT:Leigh ~ CHESHIRE:Adams,Tudor,Illidge ~ DENBIGHSHIRE:Edwards,Bolas ~BRECON:Leigh,Thomas,Davies ~SOMERSET:Adams,Keitch,Bridge ~ABERGAVENNY:Minton ~ MERTHYR:.....

Offline sami

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,905
  • Grannie M
    • View Profile
Re: Bride's Occupation
« Reply #10 on: Tuesday 25 August 15 16:07 BST (UK) »
Because of the ambiguity about wether it's a "ditto" or "elaborate blank" I would suggest (if you have the access) seeing if, elsewhere in the register, this vicar/rector EVER wrote out duplicate occupations in full.

 BugBear

This particular Curate does not appear much in the register. But when he does it is either blank or a similar line with marks. Here is another example of this kind of entry by him. I'm inclined to think that this is a kind of "elaborate blank" rather than the Bride's occupation. In the following years (1872 onwards) virtually all of the Bride's occupations were written no matter who the Vicar was.

Ruskie: This register begins in 1862. All of the Bride's occupations are blank except for 2 where one is recorded as 'Labourer' and the other with the same straight line and marks under the Groom's occupation as Gardener. I've never really thought that many of the Bride's with the blank occupation entries didn't work so much as it wasn't considered important enough to enter that information.

Deirdre: Now that is definitely a conundrum - not sure what I'd make of that  ;D

Thank you for you thoughts everyone. I always appreciate the ideas  :)

sami

England:  Archer, Bailey, Bates, Blower, Bosworth, Court, Hicklin, Orton, Palmer, Robbins, Sedgwick, Smith, Stevenson, Stone, Varnam, Wakelin, Walker
Canada:  Archer, Walker, Spencer, Shepherd
Australia:  Taplin
South Africa:  Risley

Online Ruskie

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 26,198
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Bride's Occupation
« Reply #11 on: Tuesday 25 August 15 23:35 BST (UK) »
Um ... different writing as you say sami, but your other examples make you doubt that Edith was a potter.

PS. I think you are probably spot on with your assumption that women's occupations were not considered important enough to record on official documents ....  ::)

Offline barryd

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 3,709
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Bride's Occupation
« Reply #12 on: Wednesday 26 August 15 01:02 BST (UK) »
What makes this whole question more problematic is that a woman is very capable of being a potter and in those days there probably were some female potters. Had he been a male in a male only occupation say a locomotive fireman we could have eliminated her from that occupation. I am sitting on the fence on this one!


Offline ecksdochter

  • RootsChat Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 537
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Bride's Occupation
« Reply #13 on: Wednesday 26 August 15 04:19 BST (UK) »
Hello sami,
     I first came across the 'dash ditto dash' style ditto marks quite recently while looking through WW1 Medal Roll Index Cards. Wasn't sure if it meant ditto or not.
     Found the following, so it seems to be down to personal taste whether two short strokes ( " ) or dash ditto dash (-- " --) is used. (Read down to reply by DieSse)
          www.pcadvisor.co.uk/forum/helproom-1/ditto-symbol-103410/
     
     The two examples you have posted look different. I think the 1st shows the 'dash ditto dash' style ditto, but the 2nd looks like ditto marks have been used by mistake and have been scored through.
               Regards,     Dod.
               
"Scotsman! I am not a Scotsman -- I am a Fifer."

Offline sami

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,905
  • Grannie M
    • View Profile
Re: Bride's Occupation
« Reply #14 on: Wednesday 26 August 15 05:07 BST (UK) »
Interesting points barryd and Dod  :)

I've gone from thinking that the ----- " ------ in Edith's register was just an elaborate blank that was the personal style of the Curate, to thinking she was actually a Potter and now I'm joining others on the fence  :P

Since this is for a transcription I think I'll just attach a note that Edith may or may not have been a Potter when she married.

Thanks again everyone  :)

sami
England:  Archer, Bailey, Bates, Blower, Bosworth, Court, Hicklin, Orton, Palmer, Robbins, Sedgwick, Smith, Stevenson, Stone, Varnam, Wakelin, Walker
Canada:  Archer, Walker, Spencer, Shepherd
Australia:  Taplin
South Africa:  Risley