MARRIAGE WHERE IT SHOULDN'T BE???

[jleewood]

Could SKS explain to me why the marriage of Thomas PIT to Mary Ann GRANT in 1802, at Brixham, DEV, is listed in the Boyd's Marriage Index for NFK???

I checked the IGI, and it is there, tho he is shown as PITT [as he should be!] and he was from NFK.

From his slightly demented ggg granddaughter, who often find him a pain in the 'neck'  

[Fitty]

could it be a transcription error?

If you know for certain he is who he is, then i would just put it down to an error.

[Sylviaann]

Perhaps, as he was from Norfolk, the Banns were called in his local Parish

Sylvia

[Chris in 1066Land]

jleewood & Fitty

"Could SKS explain to me why the marriage of Thomas PIT to Mary Ann GRANT in 1802, at Brixham, DEV, is listed in the Boyd's Marriage Index for NFK???"

Marriages were normally performed in the parish of the bride, unless they married by licence - A licence included an allegation and a bond.
Allegation was a sworn statement that canon or church law had been observed and there was no legal impediment to the marriage
Bond - two bondsmen lodged securities that parents or guardians had given permission and there was no pending impediment.  One bondsman was usually the groom and the other was very often a relative.
If married by Banns, they were called in both the bride and grooms own individual churches.

But - after saying that, many clergy were lax and often married couples without licence and without publication of banns and without them residing in a parish for the required period of time.

It could also have been a cross referencing system used by boyd to enable researchers to find marriages.

Chris in 1066Land (Hastings)  

[Fitty]

Of course!  I never thought of that...

[jleewood]

Thanks to everyone for their thoughts on this 'odd' marriage.

I have ordered the LDS film for the marriage in Devon, so I hope that will answer the question finally for me - that it is my ggg grandfather's first marriage.