Genealogy Chat
Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!
- The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
- You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
- And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
- The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.
Quick Search
Single word search
Icons
- New posts
- No new posts
- Thread closed
- Stickied, new posts
- Stickied, no new posts
HELP! WHY MARRY TWICE?
| Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Vanessa | Report | 6 Sep 2005 22:06 |
|
I found out my GG Grandfather Thomas Croke married in 1887 then found out my GG Grandfather married again in 1891 to the same person Eliza Jane Parish in Plymouth!! I have both marriage certs for both occasions, the names, ages and their father's names are the same. But the occupations for the fathers and Thomas Croke for 1891 are different to 1887. Plus they are bachelor and spinster in 1891. Married in a Church 1887 and Registry Office 1891. Is this freakily coincidental or did they marry twice and possibly why? Any suggestions would be great. Thanks |
|||
|
Crista | Report | 6 Sep 2005 22:09 |
|
Vanessa, Was he in the navy or army? Quite often people had to prove they were married so the spouse could receive housing, benefits, etc. Sometimes people lost the first marriage cert and had to remarry. Seen this quite a few times in the army or navy. Crista |
|||
|
Debbie | Report | 6 Sep 2005 22:12 |
|
Hi vanessa I had this one, he married twice in India to the same woman. and I emailed the british Library and explained that it was possibly that they were two different religions. Debbie |
|||
|
Vanessa | Report | 6 Sep 2005 22:13 |
|
Hi Crista Funny you should say that!! In 1887 he was in the Royal Irish Regiment then in 1891 he was in the Royal Navy. Thanks for your response : ) |
|||
|
Vanessa | Report | 6 Sep 2005 22:16 |
|
The registry office looked at the originals for me and compared the signatures which were identical. They couldn't figure it out either!! |
|||
|
Christine in Herts | Report | 6 Sep 2005 22:41 |
|
There's also the possiblity - you don't mention. If the first was by Licence and the second by Banns, there may have been a problem with the validity of the Licence - but not discovered for a while. Christine |
|||
|
Unknown | Report | 6 Sep 2005 23:10 |
|
The fact that the second marriage was in a register office suggests to me that there was some legal complication, as opposed to a religious one. nell |
|||
|
Anne | Report | 6 Sep 2005 23:29 |
|
When one of my aunts married, the person conducting the wedding missed out part of the vows, and the registrar made them take tham again in the vestry - for legal resons. Anne |
|||