Advice to find Marriage record

Jellybaby1

I've been searching for a marriage record for my aunt. I have her birth record here in Dublin, and her death record in England in the 1980's. She died a widow with no children. I can't find any record of her marriage in Ireland or England or in 'World records' on Ancestry, Findmypast, FamilySearch or FreeBMD. I have also searched using her husband's name without any luck. Is it time to give up? Any suggestions welcome.

The Chieftain

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

I've been searching for a marriage record for my aunt. I have her birth record here in Dublin, and her death record in England in the 1980's. She died a widow with no children. I can't find any record of her marriage in Ireland or England or in 'World records' on Ancestry, Findmypast, FamilySearch or FreeBMD. I have also searched using her husband's name without any luck. Is it time to give up? Any suggestions welcome.

Well, just random thoughts but
- Might have used Gaelic form of names?
- Married in Scotland, or on the Continent, or Isle of Man....
- And then, there is always the possibility that they were not married!

Hermy

I had a similar difficulty with a relatively recent marriage (1930's) which could not be found for love nor money. I happened to mention this to an elder relative of the family and he claimed that 'they were married at night' which he seemed to think was due to their not being able to afford a 'proper' wedding.
I have another marriage from a previous generation of the same family for which the Scottish birth record of the first born gives the exact date and Midlands [Irish] parish of the marriage but there is no sign of it in the Irish civil records.
So I'm resigned to the fact that within this family there appears to have been a reluctance to engage with civil registration of marriage.

Jellybaby1

The Chieftain wrote: »

Well, just random thoughts but
- Might have used Gaelic form of names?
- Married in Scotland, or on the Continent, or Isle of Man....
- And then, there is always the possibility that they were not married!

No chance of Gaelic names with my aunt or her husband. I also searched the India military marriages as he was stationed there with the British Army. I thought searching World records would also include Scotland but maybe I'm wrong?

Hermy wrote: »

I had a similar difficulty with a relatively recent marriage (1930's) which could not be found for love nor money. I happened to mention this to an elder relative of the family and he claimed that 'they were married at night' which he seemed to think was due to their not being able to afford a 'proper' wedding.
I have another marriage from a previous generation of the same family for which the Scottish birth record of the first born gives the exact date and Midlands [Irish] parish of the marriage but there is no sign of it in the Irish civil records.
So I'm resigned to the fact that within this family there appears to have been a reluctance to engage with civil registration of marriage.

I never heard of nocturnal weddings, but perhaps as The Chief says, these pair were never married. In my bones I feel my mum would have told me if they weren't married.

pinkypinky

Jellybaby - what timeframe is the marriage? Have you looked at the 1939 Register in England? Have you found her husband separately on any records?

The Chieftain

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

I've been searching for a marriage record for my aunt. I have her birth record here in Dublin, and her death record in England in the 1980's. She died a widow with no children. I can't find any record of her marriage in Ireland or England or in 'World records' on Ancestry, Findmypast, FamilySearch or FreeBMD. I have also searched using her husband's name without any luck. Is it time to give up? Any suggestions welcome.

How about a different possibility. These sites vary in their tolerance for spelling errors/name variants. For example, i think the search engine on the Free BMD site is completely ignorant of such variations (or is there an option to change that?). I know that other sites also vary on this subject, - some allow the amount of variation to be specified. So, could that be at the root of this - a spelling error or name variation that is causing the search engines to miss? (I learnt this the hard way with some Australian records, where the variability in how they spelled Irish names seemed more extreme than anywhere else I ever encountered).

Jellybaby1

pinkypinky wrote: »

Jellybaby - what timeframe is the marriage? Have you looked at the 1939 Register in England? Have you found her husband separately on any records?

Yep, I did find them together on the 1939 Register, which was brilliant because it gave me his middle name which I didn't have and his date of birth which I thought would help me to find their marriage, but not a squeak. They were both 'M' (married) on the form. They were both born in the early 1890's so marriage could have been from 1910-ish onwards.

The Chieftain wrote: »

How about a different possibility. These sites vary in their tolerance for spelling errors/name variants.....

Yep, I have searched using variants too. I think I've exhausted all the usual avenues now.

Thanks for the suggestions.

P. Breathnach

You know well enough that we have some diligent and effective researchers on this forum.

If you think you can share with us the facts you do have, somebody might find the missing bit(s). Obviously, it's for you to make your own judgement about privacy.

Jellybaby1

Sorry, I am not allowed to divulge family information on the internet as present family members would disown me!

P. Breathnach

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

Sorry, I am not allowed to divulge family information on the internet as present family members would disown me!

The search for truth has a price.

Jellybaby1

It has indeed - I could lose my whole tree! :eek:

Hermy

Ah come on - you can tell us - we won't tell anyone!

tabbey

Hermy wrote: »

Ah come on - you can tell us - we won't tell anyone!

Every individual has to weigh up the pros and cons of revealing information on the internet or anywhere else.
Fortune favours the brave, but there are some things I would be reluctant to reveal publicly.

Hermy

tabbey wrote: »

Every individual has to weigh up the pros and cons of revealing information on the internet or anywhere else.
Fortune favours the brave, but there are some things I would be reluctant to reveal publicly.

Absolutely tabbey.
My words were only in jest.

Jellybaby1

Hermy wrote: »

Ah come on - you can tell us - we won't tell anyone!

Awwww. Nope!

In the meantime, out of the blue, I had a very bright idea (:rolleyes:) which MIGHT help me. I will follow this up and will report back here if I get anywhere or not. Thanks everyone for your interest.

P. Breathnach

Further to my suggestion that help might be sought from participants on this forum, I think it might be good to consider guidelines on privacy.

Those with good memories might recall that I have sought (and received) help in relation to some specific people.

There is a convention that we should not disclose anything about living people. I choose a stronger degree of privacy - living memory within the family. For example, I have a grandfather who died in 1950. Some of his children are living, so he is off-limits for mention outside the family circle.

Do other people have privacy guidelines for themselves, or do they make case-by-case decisions?

shanew

I aim not to mention details of anyone living or possibly living, online - so try to be careful when it comes to anyone born late 1910s+

Within family or for requested research obviously it's a little different

DamoRed

With regard to marriage searching, as a newcomer to genealogy, I've spent a fair bit of time in the last few days, and nights - note the time of this post - on Familysearch.org. One of the peculiarities I've found is marriage records with only one of the spouses named. Some have been possible to verify and cross reference with known info of the respective spouse, and some not. It just seems totally senseless and illogical to have a record of a marriage where only one of the two people being married are named.

All the film/volume/page numbers etc have been recorded on my file for my mother's and father's sides of the family. Do these records, when viewed in the National Archive or wherever else, give further detailed information that will fill in some blanks? Do the subscription sites show more detail? And if so, what level of detail is shown?

Thank you

Coolnabacky1873

DamoRed wrote: »

It just seems totally senseless and illogical to have a record of a marriage where only one of the two people being married are named.
Do these records, when viewed in the National Archive or wherever else, give further detailed information that will fill in some blanks? Do the subscription sites show more detail? And if so, what level of detail is shown?

Thank you

Welcome to genealogy as a hobby. I hope you are enjoying it.

You were probably looking at the Civil Registration Marriage Index database.

It is important to understand how original records were created to understand the records that are online today. Original records that we use today for genealogy were nearly always created chronologically (birth, marriage, death, Church records) and/or geographically (Church records, census).

Indexes, usually alphabetised, are created to facilitate easier access to these records. In essence, an index is a listing of individual names with some limited extra information from the original record that allows quick access to that record.

Example - I know my ancestor Michael Brennan married in Kilkenny about 1880. Without an index I would have to consult every marriage in Kilkenny from 1878-1882. With the index I just consult the Michael Brennan Kilkenny marriages for those years.

What can be frustrating is the commonality of names in Ireland. Most likely 50+ Michael Brennans married in Kilkenny from 1878-1882.

If you have identified a potential ancestor, or narrowed it down to a few entries, note the name, registration district, volume and page number. (There is an extra step I could mention here but you have to walk before you can run ). That is the relevant index information. Apply to the General Register's Office or go to the office on Werburgh St Dublin and get the 4 Euro certs. They will have more information.

I strongly recommend reading the excellent intro sticky in this forum. If you stay with this hobby, read John Grenham's Tracing Your Irish Ancestors or Claire Santy's online Irish Genealogy Toolkit.

Best of luck!

jeamimus

I understand that in Ireland, when a church marriage took place, it was the duty of the clergyman to officially inform the authorities. In some cases this was not done, events may have intervened or he may simply have forgotten. The marriage record may never have reached the Registrars office. In such cases the only option, if you know the religion and can narrow down the location and time, might be a visit to the likely parishes to see if the marriage appears in their church records.

pinkypinky

jeamimus wrote: »

I understand that in Ireland, when a church marriage took place, it was the duty of the clergyman to officially inform the authorities. In some cases this was not done, events may have intervened or he may simply have forgotten. The marriage record may never have reached the Registrars office. In such cases the only option, if you know the religion and can narrow down the location and time, might be a visit to the likely parishes to see if the marriage appears in their church records.

In the very early days of civil registration, there would have been some slippage, but by about 1875 - 11 years after its full introduction, we should have everything.

I do not suggest ever calling to a church to ask if you can see records. Firstly, the vast majority are online with images. Secondly, parishes do not always have someone who can deal with these requests. Only visit/contact churches as a last resort.

Alan259

pinkypinky wrote: »

In the very early days of civil registration, there would have been some slippage, but by about 1875 - 11 years after its full introduction, we should have everything.

To add to that, I have heard that about an estimated 15% of events were registered but weren't indexed. E.g. You could find a birth in a local Registrar's registration volume but not find the corresponding index entry anywhere. Another genealogist told me that she heard of a marriage where only the groom's name was entered in the index and the bride's name wasn't entered at all.