RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: pelirroja on Monday 31 August 20 00:25 BST (UK)
-
I have a marriage register for my 6x great grand parents, James Renwick and Agnes Scot, who were married in the Parish of Temple on Nov 25, 1915. I can't figure out the words before James and the words after married. I outlined the event in yellow.
I would be very grateful for any or all help. Thank you so much.
-
The word before James is Likewise. the witnesses are Wm ( William ) Kinnaird and Ja:Rule
Regards Orkrad
-
I'd agree with orkrad
Likewise James Renwick and
Agens Scott were married
Witnesses Wm Kinnaird & Ja: Rule
So the same day as the couple above them - November 25th.
'Ja:' will be an abbreviation for James.
I'm presuming you have realised there is a lovely long paragraph about them further up the page?
-
Just in case.
October 28th
Intima(ti)on of a purpose of marri
=age betwixt James Renwick and
Agnes Scot both in this paroch
was given & they not having two
dollars to pay in pledge th(a)t w(i)t(h) in
fourtie dayes they shall fulfill the
bond of marriage & in the meantime
carry themselves as single per
=sons Rott Winsone in Outterstowne
gave ? obliga(ti)on to make the s(ai)d
pledges furthcoming & effectual
to this less: in case the s(ai)d parties
transgress the s(ai)d conditions
Witnesses Geo: Brown & Wm: Brown
'?' this may be an amount of money, but from the context it would appear to mean something like 'his' obligation
Rott = Robert I would think
I think his surname is Winsone
'less: ' = lesson?
Anybody know any different?
The kirk always knew how to get revenue in! ;)
Added:
Just re-read the title of your post which says 'Two documents..........',
so I see you already knew this other part was about them.
In which case you may have already transcribed it! Ah well, all good practice. :)
-
Thank you for the help, Okrad and Goldie61. As I look at the words now deciphered, I can
make out the words. Good to know that Ja. is short for James because there are
8 of them in my Scottish ancestors. Thank you again.
I just saw the third response.
-
Picking up a coupe of matters queried by goldie:
...gave yr obliga(ci)(o)n... [= their]
I think Ro(ber)tt may be Wmsone = W(illia)msone
He appears to be from Huntlicoat.
-
Picking up a coupe of matters queried by goldie:
...gave yr obliga(ci)(o)n... [= their]
I think Ro(ber)tt may be Wmsone = W(illia)msone
He appears to be from Huntlicoat.
Ah, wondered what that hieroglyph was.
Good call with Wmsone being 'Williamson' HD.
I completely failed to see the two words after his name! You're right of course - he's from Huntlicoat.
-
I do have two documents but the second one was too large and wouldn’t load. I’ll try again
after I trim the file down today. So lovely to read all of your comments.
Bev
-
Hi, here is my second OPR document which is the baptism of the son of James Renwick and Agnes Scot (or is it Scott?). I know that the baby, named James, was born on Sept 9, 1717 in the town of Ancrum? in the Parish of Temple. The event is circled in yellow again, and now to see if the file will load.
-
Eodem tempore James Renwick & Agnes Scot in Ancrum
had a Son called Ja: Baptized Witnesses Jo: Lainge & Ja: Dicksone
Eodem tempore = At the same time ie just after John Blackie on September 15.
Ancrum - has been contracted but it's not clear exactly how. Probably it's just Ancru(m)m(e) or similar.
-
It is just Ancrum. The line over the top is not the sign of an abbreviation, but a long version of the mark you find written over u (the equivalent of the dot over an i). You can see it lower down over the u in Muirefoot and the u in daughter.
-
Horselydown86 and GR2, thank you for your deciphering! Very helpful.
Bev
-
I am trying to understand the paragraph that Goldie61 kindly deciphered. My take is that James Renwick and Agnes Scot didn’t have the $2.00 at the time to pay for the marriage ceremony but in 40 days they will have the sum. Then something about parties transgressions and the witnesses are George and William Brown. Am I correct? What am I missing?
Thank you again for your replies.
Bev
-
When a couple wanted to get married, they went to the session clerk and "contracted" i.e. stated they intended to marry. They also paid "pledges", a sum of money to show that they were serious (the dollars in this case were silver coins). An alternative (as in this case) was to give the name of a "cautioner" for one or both of the couple who would stand surety for the pledges. The banns were then read three times and if there were no objections, the couple was married. The marriage was supposed to take place within forty days of the initial contracting. If the marriage went ahead in good time and there was no scandal attached to it (e.g. premarital sex aka antenuptial fornication), the pledges were returned to the couple or the cautioners were released from their obligation. The money was not payment for the marriage, but a returnable deposit designed to discourage frivolity and encourage seriousness.
-
GR2, thank you for the very clear explanation. Cultural values have sure changed since over the years!
Bev
-
In rereading all this information another question occurs to me. What word or phrase in the document indicated that James and Agnes needed a cautioner? What is the name of this person for the couple?
Is it one of the witnesses? Thank you again for the explanations. My grandparent father was born in Denholm in 1890.
-
It says that they didn't have the two dollars (one each) which would have been the usual amount put down as pledges. The cautioners (the word is not used here) are Robert Williamson and William Kinnaird.
"Robert Williamson in Huntlicoat and William Kinnaird in Outterstowne gave their obligation to make the saids pledges furthcoming" i.e. they will pay the money if necessary (i.e. if there is a scandal attached to the marriage and the pledges are forfeit).
-
GR2, thank you for your patience in explaining all this to me.
Bev
-
I have a couple more questions about the marriage document of James Renwick and Agnes Scot. Who was the “session clerk” who collected the money? A county or church official? Where were the banns read so that the community could know about the upcoming marriage?
Thank you again for all this help.
-
Each parish had a kirk session composed of the minister and those who had been chosen elders of the kirk. The session appointed a clerk to record its business in the minutes book and also to write the entries in the parish registers. It was very common for the schoolmaster to be session clerk. It was a paid position, but not a full-time job. Each kirk session also appointed one of the elders to be treasurer and any money would go to him to look after. His main job was usually distributing money to those on the poor roll.
28th October 1715, the day the couple intimated their intention to marry was a Friday. They married on 25th November, which was also a Friday. There were four Sundays between these dates and on three of them the minister would read the banns (announce that the couple intended to marry) to the congregation at the weekly service. That gave an opportunity for anyone to raise any objections to the marriage. Weddings in Scotland very rarely took place in church until the 20th century. They were normally held in the bride's parents' home.
-
GR2, Thank you for answering my questions. You write a very clear explanation also.