Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Stanwix England

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 66
1
Glad to hear you've got it sorted.

2
The Common Room / Registry office marriage questions
« on: Tuesday 04 May 21 16:25 BST (UK)  »
Hi everyone,

Today I've received a copy of a marriage certificate for a Ralph Harwood and Elizabeth Benson, who married on 29th August 1877.

When looking at the certificate, I noticed that it says 'Married in the Register Office' and the pre-printed line which says 'according to the rites and ceremonies of' is crossed out.

It then says 'By certificate' and the preprinted word 'by' is crossed out and only the preprinted word 'mo' is left.

It then gives two names, George Something Something - Registrar and William Something Something - 'Supt' Registrar, which I assume means superintending or supervising?

I know register office marriages are common nowadays, I had one myself, but my research has suggested they were not so common back then.

According to this research
https://media.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php/early-civil-registration/
Quote
In fact, register office marriages were very, very rare. The main purpose of the civil registrars of marriage was that they would be present at marriages conducted in Catholic churches, Baptist churches, you name it. There were very, very few which were pure civil marriages. There are statistics that were kept, and the number is absolutely minute. So itís really quite rare. If someone was married in the register office in the 19th century, itís extremely unusual. 20th century, it becomes common as anything. But in the 19th century itís pretty rare.


I'm just wondering then, what might have motivated Ralph and Elizabeth to have a register office wedding. According to the certificate, they were both unmarried and both old enough to marry, Ralph being 22, Elizabeth 21.  They are to my knowledge, an unremarkable family with no particular circumstances that would necessitate this. I was under the impression that they were both Protestant families, although I suppose my research on that could be wrong.

Does anyone have any idea about this. Is the idea that register office marriage was rare back then, simply wrong? Thank you

UPDATE: Ralph and Elizabeth's children seem to be baptised in the Church of England, which to me seems to rule out religious dissent as a reason.

3
The Lighter Side / Re: Most children of same gender in a row
« on: Tuesday 04 May 21 16:16 BST (UK)  »
I think the most of one gender I've ever seen in a row was 5, so nothing like the records that you have all included!

The thing I found strangest about naming conventions was naming younger siblings the same name as older, deceased children. Even if those older children had lived a few years.

When I first encountered it, I was convinced I was wrong, but I think someone here explained that I wasn't. I've noticed it now in several families, particularly in one region.

I don't think people would do that these days. Perhaps because we are fortunate enough that child mortality is quite low, thank goodness.

4
Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition / Stannis or Stanwix or someone else?
« on: Tuesday 04 May 21 16:09 BST (UK)  »
Hello,

I've just today received a copy of a marriage certificate for Ralph Harwood and Elizabeth Benson on 29th August 1877, in Durham.

I was expecting Ralph's father, who was deceased by the time of this wedding, to be Stanwix Harwood. Stanwix was named after his mother's maiden name, which I believe comes for a location in Durham where the family are from. I do not know how it was pronounced at the time.

Having seen the record, I'm not sure now. It looks like it could be Stannis. I feel like I can definitely see a Sta----- but I'm not confident on the rest. Perhaps Stannis is the pronunciation or a shortened version?

I would just appreciate a second pair of eyes on it. Thank you

5
The Common Room / Re: Saving a divorce record from Ancestry
« on: Tuesday 04 May 21 15:56 BST (UK)  »
I would try looking at the same record with a different web browser. You might be able to see the button on a different one.

6
The Common Room / Re: Saving a divorce record from Ancestry
« on: Tuesday 04 May 21 15:38 BST (UK)  »
I've tried various ways and it does look like the only way to download it is one page at a time. Not brilliant really.  :(

7
The Common Room / Re: Saving a divorce record from Ancestry
« on: Tuesday 04 May 21 14:54 BST (UK)  »
For me, using Safari as a browser, I go in to the image for the record.

On the right hand side of the image are some buttons, one of which is a little spanner and hammer.

When I click on that, it brings up some options, one of which is 'download', second one down under print.

However that's just a record I pulled up at random. Not sure it will work on what you are looking at.

8
The Common Room / Re: Saving a divorce record from Ancestry
« on: Tuesday 04 May 21 14:51 BST (UK)  »
Ancestry has been particularly 'buggy' of late, so it might be that if you refresh the page or log back in later, that the ability to download the record will suddenly reappear.

What browser are you using at the moment? Are you able to take a screen shot of what it looks like so we can see what the options are?

9
Lol!

Well there is that old saying, "The cobbler's children go unshod!"

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 66