Clandestine marriage at South Wingfield

[Nottschick]

While reseaching my 7 x gt grandparents I found that they had a clandestine marriage at SW 5/11/1699.  The Phillimores entry says " Mem - as by a certificate produced, Samuel Ragge and Sarah Towndrew were married, I suppose clandestinely, by one William Pointon".  Does that mean that there was an entry in the registers stating the above?   Is it likely to mean that either bride or groom was either greatly under age or married already?

Whether they were actually married or not isn't a problem as they were my ancestors regardless, but I wondered if anyone knew any more about the doings of William Pointon and whether he may have made a habit of this.  Was he a vicar or maybe a defrocked vicar?  I thought that the Marriage Duty Act of 1695 made this illegal at parish churches. 

Any information from someone with knowledge of SW records would be very welcome, thanks.

NC.

[spendlove]

Hi,

Probably the original marriage did not take place at South Wingfield, they like the entry above them
in Phillimore are just showing a certificate to the Vicar of South Wingfield which shows they were
married.

It could be that one or both were under age, and did not have permission of parent.

Have you found their christening records? If so what age were they on 5.11.1699?

Spendlove

[mazi]

I can find no trace of a William Pointon or similar on "theclergydatabase" site, there is a suggestion that south Wingfield may not have had a resident incumbent following the death in jan 1669 of barnabas poole.
The living was in the patronage of the Earl of Scarsdale

I assume you have seen the marriage on familysearch of sarah to Samuel Rogge in 1700

mike

[t mo]

hi all
for what it,s worth in FindMyPast parish marriages , place south wingfield all saints .
comments , married at clandestinely
record source Derbyshire marriages
data provider , Helen betteridge and  jean Shannon  [ transcribed by them ]

it would be worthwhile getting in touch with Derbyshire family history soc  see if they can find more
regards
trevor

[Derbysderek]

The marriage IS recorded 5.11.1699 in the SW Pr's......"Married at Clandestinely" (sic)

neither of the participants were baptised at SW..

Derek

[BumbleB]

To quote "Marriage Law for Genealogists" by Rebecca Probert, who I believe is held to be one of the foremost experts on marriage laws (I received this book for Christmas and have spent many hours reading it   ) -

Before 1754, a clandestine marriage was simply one celebrated by an Anglican clergyman that failed to comply with all of the requirements of the canon law. ....... After 1754, however, the term 'clandestine' became associated with secret elopements .......

[mazi]

For me it is interesting to think that this young couple's parent and grandparents would have been present when wingfield manor was alternately besieged by both sides during the civil war, with both sets of soldiers pillaging the village for food and supplies.

I wonder what stories they passed down, and given that the church may have been targeted by the puritans it is no surprise that records are a bit variable.

mike

[lemur41]

Hi,

Throwing this in for consideration

I also have a copy of the SW PR CD. Looking at the Ragg/Ragge/Wragg marriages I see that several  of the OH's are not from S W.

One of the parishes mentioned  is Morton, and I also have the Morton Holy Cross CD.

And there is this marriage : 3rd September 1677 George Ragg to Mary Knowles.

George is shown as being from the parish of Ashover.

 There are no children of George and Mary shown as baptised at Morton

Could Ashover Baptisms be the place to look for Samuel's, just thinking that these may be his parents. Sorry don't have the Ashover CD.

[Nottschick]

Thank you everyone for your helpful comments.

I don't have a baptism for Samuel Ragge yet and the only possible one so far for Sarah is from the IGI and unchecked by me is in 1678 at Ashover.  Any thoughts? I hadn't seen the marriage of Samuel Rogge so thanks for that. 

I know the Civil war played havoc with registrations as I have many acestors in Newark and they went to several different parishes at that time.

 BumbleB - can you enlarge on exactly what is meant by " failed to comply with all of the requirements of canon law" please, from your book.  I can only think of age restrictions or residence requirements but there may be more. 

Have just seen the post by lemur41 - Ashover baptisms for both parties would seem to be a good idea if anyone can help with this please? 

NC.