One of my ancestors also had no father listed and yes, one thinks maybe he had died etc, etc so there is always some doubt. I was lucky to find a newspaper article “a singular affiliation case” where the mother had taken the father to the Petty Sessions to claim modern day maintenance. They first met when he came selling bibles and also promised her marriage. Quite a long story but the outcome was he had to pay 2s a week maintenance and court costs, this was in 1867, Glossop. My conclusions: 1. No father listed - most likely illegitimate 2. A promise of marriage perhaps did consent to intimate relationships 3. Although illegitimate the father may well be known, as in my case, I now know who the father was It has taken me a number of years to finally unravel this part of my family tree so to all those seeking an answer to their illegitimate ancestor - keep trying. New information if being added all the time. > On 05 Jun 2017, at 12:57 AM, Jennifer via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have in my family where no father was listed on birth or his marriage certificate, his mother was married at the time of his birth He had her married name but no maiden name given on the birth certificate. Took a while to sort out who the mother really was > On the 1891 census he was living with a lady who said he was her grandson, but I have been unable to find a connection. However on the 1901 census he was living with the > sister of his mother. > I have come to the conclusion that I will never know his real father > Jen NSW > > > >> On 4 Jun 2017, at 10:30 PM, Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Like you I have poured over many a parish register, and have seen all varieties from the whimsical to the downright vicious comments in the margin >> >> But when the father is known, and they are a couple I would say most mention that father, sometimes in both names, others as though they were married already >> >> But when the father isn't mentioned at all it suggests to me illegitimacy >> >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

There has been no spits or spats ;-) All is well and its been an interesting conversation Lets have more conversations on the list please :-) Just listening to the Manchester concert , bless em all Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 04-Jun-17 7:59 PM, Joan M via DERBYSGEN wrote: > Ok, ladies and gentlemen, I asked this question in all innocence. We are a great group so let's not get into any spits and spats. >

Ok, ladies and gentlemen, I asked this question in all innocence. We are a great group so let's not get into any spits and spats. -----Original Message----- From: DERBYSGEN [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of SARA WHITE via DERBYSGEN Sent: 04 June 2017 17:37 To: Derbyshire genealogy Cc: SARA WHITE Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named And the post is entirely irrelevant. The reasons for a father's name being left of a baptism in Derbyshire at the time previously mentioned are governed by the social mores at the time and place of the baptism. The social mores in other times and other places are entirely irrelevant.

What is happening in one part of the World today may well have happened before somewhere else ~ even in Derbyshire! Margaret Switzerland Sent from my iPad > On 4 Jun 2017, at 17:44, SARA WHITE <[email protected]> wrote: > > And the relevance to Derbyshire is? > > > From: Margaret ELLIOTT via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> > To: Derbyshire genealogy <[email protected]> > Cc: Margaret ELLIOTT <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, 4 June 2017, 16:41 > Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named > > Where I lived for a while in Africa it was quite common for the couple to marry AFTER the first child was born, thereby proving that the woman was fertile. If the couple married before having children, and then the wife did not produce a child, divorce was considered entirely appropriate. If the couple wanted to stay together a relative would often give them a child. > > Kind regards > Margaret > > > Sent from my iPad > > > On 4 Jun 2017, at 17:30, Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi again Celia > > > > At no point did I say that try before you buy didn't happen, on the contrary its well known to have happened throughout time > > > > I have the book in question somewhere but see someone else has already checked it > > > > But I can see I am annoying you so will leave you in peace ;-) > > > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > > >> On 04-Jun-17 2:13 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: > >> All true Nivard, but that's why I pointed out the article I linked > >> described marriage/betrothal customs MORE BROADLY, ie. outside Scotland as > >> well! > >> And I also said the Marriage Law for Genealogists book probably gives the > >> definitive answer. I was hoping there was a lister who owns that book who > >> might take a look for us. > > > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >

Where I lived for a while in Africa it was quite common for the couple to marry AFTER the first child was born, thereby proving that the woman was fertile. If the couple married before having children, and then the wife did not produce a child, divorce was considered entirely appropriate. If the couple wanted to stay together a relative would often give them a child. Kind regards Margaret Sent from my iPad > On 4 Jun 2017, at 17:30, Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi again Celia > > At no point did I say that try before you buy didn't happen, on the contrary its well known to have happened throughout time > > I have the book in question somewhere but see someone else has already checked it > > But I can see I am annoying you so will leave you in peace ;-) > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > >> On 04-Jun-17 2:13 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: >> All true Nivard, but that's why I pointed out the article I linked >> described marriage/betrothal customs MORE BROADLY, ie. outside Scotland as >> well! >> And I also said the Marriage Law for Genealogists book probably gives the >> definitive answer. I was hoping there was a lister who owns that book who >> might take a look for us. > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

And to join in the fun, my 3 x great grandparents got married when their fourth child was on their way, the first three born out of wedlock. But rather an odd case. He was a very wealthy man with legal training. The baptism register names both parents in their own right on the baptisms of two of the earlier children. In his very lengthy will he refers to his natural born children all by name, leaves them very little, and makes sure there is no element of doubt that second son (born after the marriage) inherits. I am still on the search for any previous marriage, but to date nothing - and his name was not a common one. Nickie > On 4 Jun 2017, at 16:55, Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Sara > > The relevance is in the overall context of the conversation on the reason for a fathers name being left off a baptism > > So quite acceptable in the overall thread > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > On 04-Jun-17 4:44 PM, SARA WHITE via DERBYSGEN wrote: >> And the relevance to Derbyshire is? > > >> Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named >> Where I lived for a while in Africa it was quite common for the couple to marry AFTER the first child was born, thereby proving that the woman was fertile. If the couple married before having children, and then the wife did not produce a child, divorce was considered entirely appropriate. If the couple wanted to stay together a relative would often give them a child. >> Kind regards >> Margaret > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi Sara The relevance is in the overall context of the conversation on the reason for a fathers name being left off a baptism So quite acceptable in the overall thread Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 04-Jun-17 4:44 PM, SARA WHITE via DERBYSGEN wrote: > And the relevance to Derbyshire is? > > Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named > > Where I lived for a while in Africa it was quite common for the couple to marry AFTER the first child was born, thereby proving that the woman was fertile. If the couple married before having children, and then the wife did not produce a child, divorce was considered entirely appropriate. If the couple wanted to stay together a relative would often give them a child. > > Kind regards > Margaret

All of that is quite possible, but if the couple had a child before marriage the vicar or his clerk is likely to have made it very obvious, not leave the fathers name out completely Which is the question posed, ie what explanation could there be bar illegitimacy for no father being recorded Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 04-Jun-17 4:40 PM, Margaret ELLIOTT wrote: > Where I lived for a while in Africa it was quite common for the couple to marry AFTER the first child was born, thereby proving that the woman was fertile. If the couple married before having children, and then the wife did not produce a child, divorce was considered entirely appropriate. If the couple wanted to stay together a relative would often give them a child. > > Kind regards > Margaret

And the post is entirely irrelevant.  The reasons for a father's name being left of a baptism in Derbyshire at the time previously mentioned are governed by the social mores at the time and place of the baptism.  The social mores in other times and other places are entirely irrelevant. From: Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: Nivard Ovington <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, 4 June 2017, 16:56 Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named Hi Sara The relevance is in the overall context of the conversation on the reason for a fathers name being left off a baptism So quite acceptable in the overall thread Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 04-Jun-17 4:44 PM, SARA WHITE via DERBYSGEN wrote: > And the relevance to Derbyshire is? > >  Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named >    > Where I lived for a while in Africa it was quite common for the couple to marry AFTER the first child was born, thereby proving that the woman was fertile.  If the couple married before having  children, and then the wife did not produce a child, divorce was considered entirely appropriate.  If the couple wanted to stay together a relative would often give them a child. > > Kind regards > Margaret ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi again Celia At no point did I say that try before you buy didn't happen, on the contrary its well known to have happened throughout time I have the book in question somewhere but see someone else has already checked it But I can see I am annoying you so will leave you in peace ;-) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 04-Jun-17 2:13 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: > All true Nivard, but that's why I pointed out the article I linked > described marriage/betrothal customs MORE BROADLY, ie. outside Scotland as > well! > > And I also said the Marriage Law for Genealogists book probably gives the > definitive answer. I was hoping there was a lister who owns that book who > might take a look for us.

And the relevance to Derbyshire is? From: Margaret ELLIOTT via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> To: Derbyshire genealogy <[email protected]> Cc: Margaret ELLIOTT <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, 4 June 2017, 16:41 Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named Where I lived for a while in Africa it was quite common for the couple to marry AFTER the first child was born, thereby proving that the woman was fertile.  If the couple married before having  children, and then the wife did not produce a child, divorce was considered entirely appropriate.  If the couple wanted to stay together a relative would often give them a child. Kind regards Margaret Sent from my iPad > On 4 Jun 2017, at 17:30, Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi again Celia > > At no point did I say that try before you buy didn't happen, on the contrary its well known to have happened throughout time > > I have the book in question somewhere but see someone else has already checked it > > But I can see I am annoying you so will leave you in peace ;-) > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > >> On 04-Jun-17 2:13 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: >> All true Nivard, but that's why I pointed out the article I linked >> described marriage/betrothal customs MORE BROADLY, ie. outside Scotland as >> well! >> And I also said the Marriage Law for Genealogists book probably gives the >> definitive answer. I was hoping there was a lister who owns that book who >> might take a look for us. > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I have the book, but I've deleted the question:(  What was it? From: Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: Nivard Ovington <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, 4 June 2017, 16:31 Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named Hi again Celia At no point did I say that try before you buy didn't happen, on the contrary its well known to have happened throughout time I have the book in question somewhere but see someone else has already checked it But I can see I am annoying you so will leave you in peace ;-) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 04-Jun-17 2:13 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: > All true Nivard, but that's why I pointed out the article I linked > described marriage/betrothal customs MORE BROADLY, ie. outside Scotland as > well! > > And I also said the Marriage Law for Genealogists book probably gives the > definitive answer. I was hoping there was a lister who owns that book who > might take a look for us. ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Perhaps she said it in the talk she gave on marriage then at our conference. I'm sure I'm not making it up.... ________________________________ From: SARA WHITE <[email protected]> Sent: 04 June 2017 15:58 To: Derbyshire genealogy Cc: carole williams Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named I think the book you are referring to is "Marriage Law for Genealogists". However, I can find nothing in it along the lines which you mention. She says "the vast majority of pre-marital pregancies resulted in a marriage", but I cannot find that she says anything about social pressure to be able to reproduce. ________________________________ From: carole williams via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> To: Derbyshire genealogy <[email protected]> Cc: carole williams <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, 4 June 2017, 13:10 Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named Prof Rebecca Probert's book on marriage covers this aspect I think. She asserts that often parents married after the first child was born as social pressure to be able to reproduce was quite intense. (sorry can't quickly recall the book title) Carole Sent from my iPad > On 4 Jun 2017, at 10:51, Nicholas.Shorthose--- via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > I find this a fascinating thread , having a couple of "blanks" or mismatches between birth and marriage cert father's details in my tree. > Is any anywhere of academic research on illegitimacy in C18-19s ? > > Nicholas Shorthose > > -----Original Message----- > From: DERBYSGEN [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN > Sent: 04 June 2017 10:17 > To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> > Cc: Nivard Ovington <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named > > As others have said, illegitimacy is the most likely reason > > But have you checked the original parish register entry? > > Vicars sometimes entered a note in the margin > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > >> On 03-Jun-17 3:15 PM, Joan M via DERBYSGEN wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Apart from illegitimacy, is there any other reason that the father >> wouldn't be named? >> >> Thanks >> >> Joan > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I think the book you are referring to is "Marriage Law for Genealogists".  However, I can find nothing in it along the lines which you mention.  She says "the vast majority of pre-marital pregancies resulted in a marriage", but I cannot find that she says anything about social pressure to be able to reproduce.  From: carole williams via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> To: Derbyshire genealogy <[email protected]> Cc: carole williams <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, 4 June 2017, 13:10 Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named Prof Rebecca Probert's book on marriage covers this aspect I think. She asserts that often parents married after the first child was born as social pressure to be able to reproduce was quite intense. (sorry can't quickly recall the book title) Carole Sent from my iPad > On 4 Jun 2017, at 10:51, Nicholas.Shorthose--- via DERBYSGEN <[email protected]> wrote: > > I find this a fascinating thread , having a couple of "blanks" or mismatches between birth and marriage cert father's details in my tree. > Is any anywhere of academic research on illegitimacy in C18-19s ? > > Nicholas Shorthose > > -----Original Message----- > From: DERBYSGEN [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN > Sent: 04 June 2017 10:17 > To: [email protected] > Cc: Nivard Ovington <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named > > As others have said, illegitimacy is the most likely reason > > But have you checked the original parish register entry? > > Vicars sometimes entered a note in the margin > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > >> On 03-Jun-17 3:15 PM, Joan M via DERBYSGEN wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Apart from illegitimacy, is there any other reason that the father >> wouldn't be named? >> >> Thanks >> >> Joan > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Excellent article. Liz -----Original Message----- From: DERBYSGEN [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN Sent: 04 June 2017 14:27 To: Derbyshire genealogy Cc: Celia Renshaw Subject: Re: [DBY] Baptisms where father isn't named Here's another piece of work on betrothal/marriage customs - many kinds from many locations: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Betrothal Celia Renshaw in Sheffield UK On 4 June 2017 at 13:30, Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN < [email protected]> wrote: > Like you I have poured over many a parish register, and have seen all > varieties from the whimsical to the downright vicious comments in the margin > > But when the father is known, and they are a couple I would say most > mention that father, sometimes in both names, others as though they were > married already > > But when the father isn't mentioned at all it suggests to me illegitimacy > > I think a lot of the stories of hand fasting etc are invented much later > by people finding illegitimacy in their lines and trying to paper over the > cracks > > For one thing how would they know? there are few if any records for > handfasting > > But you are right regarding the variance in vicars or their clerks in how > they recorded events > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > On 04-Jun-17 1:24 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: > >> Hmmm... haven't seen that very often myself Nivard :) Most PRs I've seen >> have no ministerial comments at all. >> >> Depended on the minister I'd guess. All part of the secret & lies for him >> not to say anything when the child was born 'early'. >> >> Celia Renshaw >> in Sheffield UK >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message > ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com

Here's another piece of work on betrothal/marriage customs - many kinds from many locations: http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Betrothal Celia Renshaw in Sheffield UK On 4 June 2017 at 13:30, Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN < [email protected]> wrote: > Like you I have poured over many a parish register, and have seen all > varieties from the whimsical to the downright vicious comments in the margin > > But when the father is known, and they are a couple I would say most > mention that father, sometimes in both names, others as though they were > married already > > But when the father isn't mentioned at all it suggests to me illegitimacy > > I think a lot of the stories of hand fasting etc are invented much later > by people finding illegitimacy in their lines and trying to paper over the > cracks > > For one thing how would they know? there are few if any records for > handfasting > > But you are right regarding the variance in vicars or their clerks in how > they recorded events > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > On 04-Jun-17 1:24 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: > >> Hmmm... haven't seen that very often myself Nivard :) Most PRs I've seen >> have no ministerial comments at all. >> >> Depended on the minister I'd guess. All part of the secret & lies for him >> not to say anything when the child was born 'early'. >> >> Celia Renshaw >> in Sheffield UK >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

All true Nivard, but that's why I pointed out the article I linked described marriage/betrothal customs MORE BROADLY, ie. outside Scotland as well! And I also said the Marriage Law for Genealogists book probably gives the definitive answer. I was hoping there was a lister who owns that book who might take a look for us. I remember someone in the past posting a message, possibly here to Derbysgen, about historical research into the proportion of births conceived before marriage - using the time period between marriage and first baby's birth, if I remember correctly - plus those without benefit of marriage at all. The answer came out at about 25%. So there was a lot of it about. Historians have written at great length about past customs of marriage, birth, death etc so I guess they are getting their material from somewhere - there must be documentary evidence available and I'll take a punt that some of that evidence concerns historical betrothal customs. The original material I read - about how sex between betrothed couples (I used the word handfast, I shouldn't have done, clearly) often included sex before marriage, and that evidence of fertility was welcome - was an authoritative researched text, not just someone romantically imagining it! Celia Renshaw in Sheffield UK On 4 June 2017 at 14:03, Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN < [email protected]> wrote: > > Hi again Celia > > It is as you say a Norse custom and there are similar customs in Scotland, > both of which are far removed from rural England > > That is not to say that this type of custom went on in England, try before > you buy is an old custom ;-) , of course it did but I believe its often > used as an excuse to pretty up someones findings in their research, I would > just repeat, how would a researcher today know their relations used this > custom, there are few records of same > > Irregular marriage was common in Scotland right up to 1939 but that is > Scotland > > Lots online on the practice and its romanticised history > > http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/history/tying_the_knot_handfas > ting_through_the_ages.shtml > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > On 04-Jun-17 1:48 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: > >> Well this has prompted me to have a look around! This is what the OED >> says: >> >> "handfasting, n." and "handfast, v." OED Online. November 2010. Oxford >> University Press. "Old Norse hand-festa to strike a bargain by joining >> hands, to pledge, betroth" The earliest cited English usage in connection >> with marital status is from a manuscript of c. 1200, when Mary >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_(mother_of_Jesus)> is described as >> "handfast (to) a good man called Joseph >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Joseph>". "?c1200 Ormulum >> (Burchfield >> transcript) l. 2389 "Ȝho wass hanndfesst an god mann Þatt iosæp wass >> ȝehatenn." >> >> And this page has interesting stuff too - even though it's from info about >> Medieval Scotland, it talks more broadly about hand-fasting/betrothal >> customs: >> http://medievalscotland.org/history/handfasting.shtml >> >> That seems to suggest that betrothal (equiv to handfasting) was normal and >> indicated consent to sex. >> >> I haven't read the book that another lister referenced previously - >> Marriage Law for Genealogists by Rebecca Probert, but I'm starting to >> think >> I should. It probably explains the handfasting/betrothal situation! >> >> Celia Renshaw >> in Sheffield UK >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Hi again Celia It is as you say a Norse custom and there are similar customs in Scotland, both of which are far removed from rural England That is not to say that this type of custom went on in England, try before you buy is an old custom ;-) , of course it did but I believe its often used as an excuse to pretty up someones findings in their research, I would just repeat, how would a researcher today know their relations used this custom, there are few records of same Irregular marriage was common in Scotland right up to 1939 but that is Scotland Lots online on the practice and its romanticised history http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/history/tying_the_knot_handfasting_through_the_ages.shtml Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 04-Jun-17 1:48 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: > Well this has prompted me to have a look around! This is what the OED says: > > "handfasting, n." and "handfast, v." OED Online. November 2010. Oxford > University Press. "Old Norse hand-festa to strike a bargain by joining > hands, to pledge, betroth" The earliest cited English usage in connection > with marital status is from a manuscript of c. 1200, when Mary > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_(mother_of_Jesus)> is described as > "handfast (to) a good man called Joseph > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Joseph>". "?c1200 Ormulum (Burchfield > transcript) l. 2389 "Ȝho wass hanndfesst an god mann Þatt iosæp wass > ȝehatenn." > > And this page has interesting stuff too - even though it's from info about > Medieval Scotland, it talks more broadly about hand-fasting/betrothal > customs: > http://medievalscotland.org/history/handfasting.shtml > > That seems to suggest that betrothal (equiv to handfasting) was normal and > indicated consent to sex. > > I haven't read the book that another lister referenced previously - > Marriage Law for Genealogists by Rebecca Probert, but I'm starting to think > I should. It probably explains the handfasting/betrothal situation! > > Celia Renshaw > in Sheffield UK

Well this has prompted me to have a look around! This is what the OED says: "handfasting, n." and "handfast, v." OED Online. November 2010. Oxford University Press. "Old Norse hand-festa to strike a bargain by joining hands, to pledge, betroth" The earliest cited English usage in connection with marital status is from a manuscript of c. 1200, when Mary <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_(mother_of_Jesus)> is described as "handfast (to) a good man called Joseph <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Joseph>". "?c1200 Ormulum (Burchfield transcript) l. 2389 "Ȝho wass hanndfesst an god mann Þatt iosæp wass ȝehatenn." And this page has interesting stuff too - even though it's from info about Medieval Scotland, it talks more broadly about hand-fasting/betrothal customs: http://medievalscotland.org/history/handfasting.shtml That seems to suggest that betrothal (equiv to handfasting) was normal and indicated consent to sex. I haven't read the book that another lister referenced previously - Marriage Law for Genealogists by Rebecca Probert, but I'm starting to think I should. It probably explains the handfasting/betrothal situation! Celia Renshaw in Sheffield UK On 4 June 2017 at 13:30, Nivard Ovington via DERBYSGEN < [email protected]> wrote: > Like you I have poured over many a parish register, and have seen all > varieties from the whimsical to the downright vicious comments in the margin > > But when the father is known, and they are a couple I would say most > mention that father, sometimes in both names, others as though they were > married already > > But when the father isn't mentioned at all it suggests to me illegitimacy > > I think a lot of the stories of hand fasting etc are invented much later > by people finding illegitimacy in their lines and trying to paper over the > cracks > > For one thing how would they know? there are few if any records for > handfasting > > But you are right regarding the variance in vicars or their clerks in how > they recorded events > > Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) > > On 04-Jun-17 1:24 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: > >> Hmmm... haven't seen that very often myself Nivard :) Most PRs I've seen >> have no ministerial comments at all. >> >> Depended on the minister I'd guess. All part of the secret & lies for him >> not to say anything when the child was born 'early'. >> >> Celia Renshaw >> in Sheffield UK >> > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Like you I have poured over many a parish register, and have seen all varieties from the whimsical to the downright vicious comments in the margin But when the father is known, and they are a couple I would say most mention that father, sometimes in both names, others as though they were married already But when the father isn't mentioned at all it suggests to me illegitimacy I think a lot of the stories of hand fasting etc are invented much later by people finding illegitimacy in their lines and trying to paper over the cracks For one thing how would they know? there are few if any records for handfasting But you are right regarding the variance in vicars or their clerks in how they recorded events Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 04-Jun-17 1:24 PM, Celia Renshaw via DERBYSGEN wrote: > Hmmm... haven't seen that very often myself Nivard :) Most PRs I've seen > have no ministerial comments at all. > > Depended on the minister I'd guess. All part of the secret & lies for him > not to say anything when the child was born 'early'. > > Celia Renshaw > in Sheffield UK