The 1855 Marriage of Wm HANNAH and Eliza RITCHIE in Blythwood, Glasgow, Scotland does have some helpful information, but mostly for Wm. 1855 Marriages, entry #34 - On 1st January, 1855 at St. Mary's Episcopal Church, Glasgow, Marriage [after Banns] was solemnized between us according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Episcopal Church of Scotland. Signed William HANNAH presently residing Spring Bank, Glasgow, usually residing same place. Age 22y, a Labourer and Bachelor, son of William HANNAH, Weaver and Mary Ann HANNAH. He was born Drumhome, Donegal. He wed Eliza RITCHIE, her Mark [X] presently residing Glasgow, usually residing same place. Age 20y, a Spinster, daughter of Andrew RITCHIE, Labourer and Isabella RITCHIE. Signed John WARRAN, B. A. Curate of St. Mary's Episcopal Church, Glasgow. Witnesses were John LYONS and Sarah CLARK, her Mark [X]. Registered Feb 5 at Glasgow. David MacBrayne? Registrar. The names of the parents of both the bride and groom are written differently than the previous 33 entries and at least 15 of the following entries. There is no 'maiden name' or 'married name' given. If these couples were wed, it should have been entered so : Parents were Wm HANNAH and Mary Ann HANNAH ms DOE. That clearly would be the married name and the maiden name of the mother. This Registrar knew what was required and knew to ask for the parent's names and the maiden name of the mother. In this case, there is nothing to indicate the parents were wed to each other. Listing it as such on this Registration is not PROOF they were not wed, after all, they do have the same surname [Wm HANNAH & Mary Ann HANNAH and Andrew RITCHIE and Isabella RITCHIE]. Based on the dozens and dozens of correctly entered registrations this Registrar did [entry #33 was registered the same day, Feb 5] I have to surmise that neither set of parents were wed at the time of the bride and the groom's birth, and they had the same surname by happenstance or by blood relationships. If you have marriage data for them from a family bible or written history, I have no explanation for the Registrar getting this wrong. Every correction had to be numbered and then entered on an official page with specifics about the correction and proper signatures that the corrections were done properly. There are no corrections anywhere on this marriage Registration. The word CURATE actually resembles PIRATE ! There is even a stray dot nicely placed. However I doubt a Pirate would be performing a marriage in an Episcopal church.... Drumhome is given for the groom's birthplace, but the bride only reported Donegal. This could indicate it was Donegal PARISH if the Registrar was consistent with his questions for the couples he interviewed. Can send JPG of the Registration, there will be 2 pages. Meg Greenwood / Oklahoma USA ========================