• Welcome to this forum . We are a worldwide group with a common interest in Birmingham and its history. While here, please follow a few simple rules. We ask that you respect other members, thank those who have helped you and please keep your contributions on-topic with the thread.

    We do hope you enjoy your visit. BHF Admin Team

Hand Writing interpretation

changinman1

master brummie
I am currently doing my family tree and have come across a kind of marriage cert if thats what it is but im having trouble understanding it , can anyone translate it for me , I thought that if there are people on here that are used to reading old handwriting they could give me their best guesses. Its the row that ive marked with a red arrow. Thankyou so much in advance.

1591894502533.png
 

pjmburns

master brummie
I think the first word is possibly "Thos" - so Thomas. Not sure of surnames but of "Wimbledon?" in the county of "Surrey". He was a husbandman (I assume that is husbandry). She was Elizabeth Vokes and looks like she was from Barnes W.
That is my best shot - perhaps someone else can agree or disagree.
 

MWS

master brummie
It looks like...

27th. Ths Field of Wimbelton in the County of Surrey W and husbandman and Elizabeth Vokes of the same W J G 3 - 6

I'd say Ths - Thomas; Wimbleton - Wimbledon; W - widower and widow;
 

changinman1

master brummie
I think the first word is possibly "Thos" - so Thomas. Not sure of surnames but of "Wimbledon?" in the county of "Surrey". He was a husbandman (I assume that is husbandry). She was Elizabeth Vokes and looks like she was from Barnes W.
That is my best shot - perhaps someone else can agree or disagree.
I have never ever heard Thomas abbreviated to Thos ,,,so did people actually address him as THOS ?? WOW , and what does husbandry mean
 

changinman1

master brummie
Wimbledon has been inhabited since at least the Iron Age when the hill fort on Wimbledon Common, the second-largest in London,[3] is thought to have been constructed. The original nucleus of Wimbledon was at the top of the hill close to the common – the area now known locally as "the village".

The village is referred to as "Wimbedounyng" in a charter signed by King Edgar the Peaceful in 967. The name Wimbledon means "Wynnman's hill", with the final element of the name being the Celtic "dun" (hill).[4] The name is shown on J. Cary's 1786 map of the London area as "Wimbleton", and the current spelling appears to have been settled on relatively recently in the early 19th century, the last in a long line of variations.
 

A Sparks

master brummie
Also , what sort of book was that more than like recorded in ?? church book or local govt. ?
I can't help there I'm afraid - the addresses of the other people are from various London Parishes - Lambeth, Holborn which are a a distance away from Surrey, so not all the same locality.
 

changinman1

master brummie
I can't help there I'm afraid - the addresses of the other people are from various London Parishes - Lambeth, Holborn which area a distance away from Surrey, so not all the same locality.
thats weird then mmmm i wonder how they came to be all on that same page ....ps its from an ancestry hint on my family tree
 

MWS

master brummie
I don't think it says Barnes, I think it says same which would mean the same parish as Thomas Field, ie Wimbledon.

I think the title of the document is the clue to why they come from various places - Clandestine Baptism & Marriage Register - you wouldn't get married in your own parish if you wanted it to be secret.

Also the same marrage is listed under non-conformist records on familysearch, so maybe that's another reason why the marriage didn't take place in Wimbledon.
 

Ken_R

master brummie
I don't think it is Barnes. See the 'B' in the entries above, viz, Bachelor, Bat, St. Brides. I think it may be St James.

For those that haven't seen one before, this is a typical pre 1813 Church Register.
 

Ken_R

master brummie
changinman1, can you give the original reference on Ancestry?

Sometimes they can be manipulated to make them easier to read.
 

Ken_R

master brummie
And to answer my own question,


Rules of Marriages


Ecclesiastic laws governing marriage have changed during England’s history, and during this period (1667–1754), marriage within the church came with certain restrictions. Banns required a couple to post an announcement of the intended union for three weeks prior to the marriage. Banns could be waived by obtaining a license, but church officials could also dictate where and when a couple could marry. Residency requirements, although at times loose, had to be met, and there were certain times during the ecclesiastic calendar when marriages were not to be performed. There were also age restrictions: parental consent was required if either party was under the age of 21.


Most couples were married at the family church, but a significant portion of the population, for various reasons, chose to skirt these regulations and get married outside the church. Here, requirements were much looser. Grooms could be as young as 14, and brides 12. The bride and groom needed only to give their consent to the union for it to be recognized. Clergy and witnesses were not necessary, though they were often present to provide proof that the marriage had taken place. These marriages are commonly referred to as “irregular” or “clandestine.”


Who Performed Clandestine Marriages?


The demand for clandestine marriages was met by institutions that considered themselves exempt from church canon and in some cases, like that of May Fair chapel, by a cleric who simply flouted the regulations.


Prisons like the Fleet and the King’s Bench Prison became popular destinations for couples interested in quick, no-questions-asked nuptials because of the number of clerics imprisoned for debt who had nothing to lose and welcomed the income. Many of them lived in the “Rules” or “Liberties,” which were areas around the prison where prisoners could pay for the privilege of living outside the gates.


In an effort to crack down on clandestine marriages, legislation in 1711 attempted to coerce prison keepers to require banns or licenses before performing marriages. That legislation only succeeded in pushing more marriages outside the prison walls into the Rules, or in the case of King’s Bench Prison into the area known as “the Mint,” until the passage of Hardwicke’s Act of 1753, which went into effect March 24, 1754, and required formal ceremonies, thus shutting down the marriage centers.


What You May Find in the Records


The contents and format of the registers may vary slightly, but they will typically include the following details:


  • full names of the couple (in some cases a maiden name may be absent)
  • marital status
  • residences (generally parishes)
  • occupation of the groom
  • minister's name or initials

This collection also contains about 2,800 records of clandestine baptisms.
 
Top