Banns .....

[carmentea32]

I wonder if somebody can clarify this for me please?
I have an 1852 OPR that reads
" 20th November 1852
Thomas Sampson, engineer and Margaret Grieve, both residing in Port Glasgow, were booked in order to proclamation for marriage (2)"

It does not go on to say they were married. Does this mean they were married somewhere else? Is this all I will find as regards their marriage? Any idea what the (2) might stand for?

All help, suggestions etc. gratefully received

[emanday]

maybe - The Banns had to be read 3 times (to my recollection) so maybe this was their "booking" for the second reading

[AnneM]

It just means that they had their banns proclaimed. I would think that the 2 means that they were being proclaimed for the second time. Some OPRs state that they were subsequently married in terms such as "and having been duly proclaimed were married on 4th August 1852 by Rev John Watson" or similar but the fact that this is not added does not mean that the marriage did not take place or took place elsewhere.

Banns had to be proclaimed in the parish of the bride and the groom but the marriage usually took place in the bride's parish.

If you have other evidence that they were married e.g from birth certificates of children born after 1855 it is likely that the marriage did take place.

Anne

[DavidWW]

Also worth a look at all the records on the page as well as a couple of pages either side.

If all the entries are of this format, then extremely likely that the couple duly married.

If however, every other entry also records the marriage, and this entry is the only one that doesn't, then maybe this couple didn't actually marry !

David

[carmentea32]

thank you. I checked the page the certificate is on, and of 4 entries, only one says "and were married etc etc". The others, including mine, don't.

I'll check the birth certs as I know one of their children was born in 1857.

[DavidWW]

thank you. I checked the page the certificate is on, and of 4 entries, only one says "and were married etc etc". The others, including mine, don't.

I'll check the birth certs as I know one of their children was born in 1857.

Hmmmm..... that's sort of in-between !

In 1857 there won't be the place and date of the marriage, but there will be the wording in relation to the parents, John SMITH and Mary SMITH MS BROWN if they were (or, rather, represented themselves to the registrar as married )

David

[carmentea32]

I've just checked the birth cert. for 1857 and it does not mention parent's marriage. It appears that the cert. isn't supposed to, because there's no "box" for this. So I'm still none the wiser!!

[LesleyB]

Hi Carmen
What David was indicating you should look at was the wording:
John SMITH and Mary SMITH MS BROWN
Is the wording similar to the above or does it just say John SMITH and Mary BROWN or similar. The first wording suggests they were married (or were representing themselves as being such) the second wording suggests that they were not married.

The entries between 1856-60 inclusive did not give the date of the parent's marriage. Did they have any children from 1861 onwards?

Best wishes
Lesley

[nelmit]

Hello,

If you look at Thomas's birth entry in 1855 this should give you date and place of marriage. It should also tell you Thomas senior's age and place of birth as requested in your other post.

Regards,
Annette M

[DavidWW]

Hello,

If you look at Thomases birth entry in 1855 this should give you date and place of marriage. It should also tell you Thomas senior's age and place of birth as requested in your other post.

Regards,
Annette M

That 1855 birth register entry does indeed show the place and date of marriage, with the date and location matching perfectly.

But beware , as the surname spelling isn't SAMPSON, - use the obvious wildcard

David