RootsChat.Com

Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: Yvonne Donnellon on Sunday 14 April 19 12:31 BST (UK)

Title: Exciting new generation
Post by: Yvonne Donnellon on Sunday 14 April 19 12:31 BST (UK)
I've just had a DNA confirmation that the couple in this record are my 5 x Great Grandparents! The transcribed records have the bride as Juliana, but it looks more like Joanna to me? Also can anyone deciepher any parents of J? and Nicholas?

Thanks in advance
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: Ruskie on Sunday 14 April 19 12:51 BST (UK)
Her name looks like Joanne. Other "e"s on the page are different but the scribe appears to write that form of e at the end of some words. There is another bride with the same forename in the top entry.

There are three names in the column on the right. Are you sure these the names of the parents (I didn't think parent's would be on a marriage at that time? I thought the people in that far right column might be witnesses, though one of them seems to have the same name as the bride ....  :-\

Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: trish1120 on Sunday 14 April 19 13:04 BST (UK)
Names on right appear to be witnesses to me.

Its on Anc. Ruskie;

Name:   Nicolai Freeman
[Nicholas Freeman]
Gender:   Male
Event Type:   Marriage
Marriage Date:   Jan 1775
Marriage Place:   Tralee, Ireland, Ireland
Diocese:   Kerry
Spouse:   Joanna Horgan
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: Ruskie on Sunday 14 April 19 13:07 BST (UK)
Thanks Trish, I was going to ask where it came from.  :)

I suppose witness with the same name could be mother or cousin of the bride.
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: Yvonne Donnellon on Sunday 14 April 19 13:12 BST (UK)
Oh now, I've learnt something today, when did the practice of parents not being on the marriage cert change? So far, having the father's name has been a god-send!
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: JenB on Sunday 14 April 19 13:15 BST (UK)
There is another record of this marriage on Ancestry, and the bride’s Christian name is clearly written as Juliane  :-\
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: Bookbox on Sunday 14 April 19 13:16 BST (UK)
The bride's name (as given in this source) is Joanna Horgan -- it’s written Joanne only because of the Latin case-ending.

The witnesses are John McDonall, John Horgan and Alice Murphy.
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: Treetotal on Sunday 14 April 19 13:18 BST (UK)
I thought it looked more like Allicia/Allivia Murphy?
Carol
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: JenB on Sunday 14 April 19 13:20 BST (UK)
There is another record of this marriage on Ancestry, and the bride’s Christian name is clearly written as Juliane  :-\

Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: Bookbox on Sunday 14 April 19 13:20 BST (UK)
I thought it looked more like Allicia/Allivia Murphy?

Alicia is a latinized form of Alice.
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: Treetotal on Sunday 14 April 19 13:25 BST (UK)
Aw thanks for the clarification BB...you learn something new every day on here  8)
Carol
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: Ruskie on Sunday 14 April 19 13:26 BST (UK)
Aw thanks for the clarification BB...you learn something new every day on here  8)
Carol

I certainly do.  :)
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: JenB on Sunday 14 April 19 13:43 BST (UK)
The transcribed records have the bride as Juliana, but it looks more like Joanna to me?

Unless I am seeing things, this marriage appears twice on opposite pages of the register.

In the first, on the left hand page the bride's christian name appears as Joanne (original posting).

The marriage appears again at the head of the right-hand page opposite. It appears among the February marriages, but is clearly dated 20th January. In this the bride's christian name is given as Juliane (reply #8)

In all other respects the record is the same including the names of the witnesses.
Title: Re: Exciting new generation
Post by: Yvonne Donnellon on Sunday 14 April 19 14:40 BST (UK)
Thanks for replies everyone, so taking into account Jen's observation, can we assume that the second record is a correction of the first?