« on: Monday 24 July 23 20:19 BST (UK) »
One ancestor of mine wed her first husband, and he died just months later. She remarried under her previously married name in the same parish but said she was a singlewoman, the witnesses confirmed though that it was the right marriage, plus the name of the groom and the bride's first name. Also the first marriage when she signed her first name "Elizabeth" the signatures matched to her 2nd marriage.
Also her children's baptisms gave her maiden name, in the 1810s, in a rare occurrence where a parish gave mmn's for all couples "Jones, late Smith" for example. And that tied in with Elizabeth's first marriage when she wed under her maiden name.
So you cannot always assume a singleman and singleowman had not been married before. This may explain why you may not find a baptism for the bride, if she was actually a widow and using her previous married name, but said she was a singlewoman when she remarried.
For instance, an example is, a Sarah Bloggs wed James Hamilton in 1800, James died in 1803, and Sarah remarried as Sarah Hamilton in 1805 but said she was a singlwoman. Yet any researcher would assume her birth name was Hamilton and be unaware she had been married before.
Researching:
LONDON, Coombs, Roberts, Auber, Helsdon, Fradine, Morin, Goodacre
DORSET Coombs, Munday
NORFOLK Helsdon, Riches, Harbord, Budery
KENT Roberts, Goodacre
SUSSEX Walder, Boniface, Dinnage, Standen, Lee, Botten, Wickham, Jupp
SUFFOLK Titshall, Frost, Fairweather, Mayhew, Archer, Eade, Scarfe
DURHAM Stewart, Musgrave, Wilson, Forster
SCOTLAND Stewart in Selkirk
USA Musgrave, Saix
ESSEX Cornwell, Stock, Quilter, Lawrence, Whale, Clift
OXON Edgington, Smith, Inkpen, Snell, Batten, Brain