RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: BumbleB on Wednesday 06 February 19 17:27 GMT (UK)
-
Possible stupid question, sorry :-[
How many versions of a marriage entry contain original signatures for bride, groom and witnesses?
We were married over 50 years ago, in a Register Office, and the certificate, given to us that day, does NOT have our original signatures.
So, how many copies do have original signatures? More interested in historical church marriages, rather than Register Office ones.
I am almost 100% certain the certificate given to my great grandfather, in 1876, contains original signatures for all parties.
-
I was married in a church in 1973 and the copy given to me does
not contain original signatures.
My niece who recently married in church has original signatures on every copy she had from the church.
Ignore me I have just checked and the 1973 certificate does have original signatures
-
Interesting, isn't it?
-
Sorry - You got me thinking so I checked and I was wrong the 1973 Church one does have original signatures, the later registry office one does not
-
We were married over 50 years ago, in a Register Office, and the certificate, given to us that day, does NOT have our original signatures.
I am almost 100% certain the certificate given to my great grandfather, in 1876, contains original signatures for all parties.
I have the original copy of my great grandparents's C of E marriage certificate in 1873. It was in the Family Bible that I inherited. It has the original signatures.
I've just checked our certificate of same age as yours, also reg office, and the signatures have been typed in.
Is it a C of E v Reg office difference.
Gadget
-
I've just checked the great grandparents' cert on FindMyPast and it is a very poor smudged version of the one I have.
-
Oh, so I'm not totally stupid :-\ :-\ :-X
I'm just checking with my daughter, who married in 1999 at a non-clerical venue.
Is this discrimination? :-* :-* :-X
-
This has been said many times - all certificates are copies, so you cannot have an 'original' copy certificate. You might have the first one you were given, but it is no better or worse or different from any other copy. They are all equally valid and should be identical in every respect.
Strictly speaking, signatures should appear only in the marriage register, and then the certificate is copied from the register entry. Some priests/celebrants let people sign the certificate handed out at the marriage, some do not. There's no discrimination, just a bit of bending the copying rules!
Melbell
-
This may be somewhat semantic but
An original copy is possible. It is an original copy of the original.
-
OK - all certificates, with the exception of the parish entry, are copies. SO should we be referring to them as "duplicates" rather than copies?
My 1876 marriage "certificate" is definitely an "original" paper version. It hasn't been photocopied, etc. It has an original one penny stamp affixed to it, and is signed and countersigned.
-
My 1876 marriage "certificate" is definitely an "original" paper version. It hasn't been photocopied, etc. It has an original one penny stamp affixed to it, and is signed and countersigned.
Ditto my 1873 one :)
-
So, I've not totally lost it, then!
-
BMD certificates are by definition "certificated copies" of information held in an original register.
Certificates should not have original signatures on them, other than that of the person issuing it (usually the registrar), unless they have been produced by photocopying of the original register entry.
However, many clergy are somewhat flexible in their following of the rules, so I've seen quite few examples where the bride/groom and witnesses have been invited to sign the certificates along with the register entries at the time of a marriage ceremony. My own marriage certificate (from 1985) has my original signature on it.
As a registrar I issued hundreds of certificates and NONE of them ever contained any original signature of the parties involved other than my own.
-
Many thanks Antony. I was talking about 1876 - so a bit before your time ;D ;D
-
I think the confusion comes about because many people have certificates issued at the time of the event (a birth, marriage or death registration) in their family records and they call these "original certificates".
But they are all still copies of something else so not really an "original" document in the true sense, but as close as you can get without looking at the register itself, so they are treated as such.
-
I'm not sure whether there was a standard colour for these copies but the one I have from 1873 is a blueish grey and quite thick paper.
-
Fine, thank you Antony. So, a "paper" copy, issued on the day, of the original entry :-\
-
I mainly have certs issued in England & Wales.
If yours is also issued in E &W, then look at the citation at the bottom, this is why we call them certificates - its certified to be a true copy of an entry in a register.
If its been issued by the local registrar (whether at the time of the marriage or at a later date) then the ones I have say
"Certified to be a true copy of an entry in a register in my custody" or words to that effect -in other words the original register, signed by bride, groom and witnesses at the time of marriage which is held at the registrars - under lock and key and the general public is not allowed to even peek at them.
If its been issued by the GRO, then the ones I have say
"Certified to be a true copy of an entry in the certified copy of a register of Marriages in the Registration District of [insert local registration district] "- in other words the local registrar made a copy of the the register and passed that along to the GRO - and they have issued the cert from the copy that is held at the GRO.
I understand that recently 'some' but by no means all, local registrars have the facility, like the GRO to issue a copy having scanned the entry in the original (signed on the day by the bride, groom, witnesses etc) register and printing it onto an offficial cert.
So its a minefield really, best advice is look at the 'handwriting' if the signatures look to be in the same hand as the info in the main body then its all been written by the same person who issued the cert. If each signature differs in style from both the writing in the main body and the other signatures
then its likely to be 'original' usually if its a parish marriage register entry or a local registrar who has scanned the original register - or a much later marriage than mine where they may have changed the procedure.
Boo
-
Thank you, Boo. I believe that AntonyMMM has answered my query.
-
Sometimes you will find images online of the original register. I remember one marriage where a cleric had entered the bride's surname as Heywood (a town in Lancashire not far from the marriage, as it happens) but she had signed, in very different handwriting, as Hayward - which was probably the correct spelling, she should know.
Just shows that the recorder writes whatever he/she thinks she hears. Beware.
-
Thank you Andrew. Yes, I'm well aware of that fact regarding mis-hearing or mis-spelling and have come across it many, many times. However, in this instance that was not my query, and I am more than satisfied with AntonyMMM's response.
-
Just to say that AnthonyMMM has reiterated what I said, but in much more detail - and more elegantly!
Thank you,
Melbell
-
Apologies, Melbel, I should have acknowledged your response. :'( :'(
-
BumbleB - no apology needed, but thanks all the same.
Melbell