Hello List and Angela, Here is my short answer... As I mentioned the Biblical Law and the Civil Law were at variance... the Dissenters were actually not in sync. with the Church of England... ergo 'Dissenters'... they were at times punished excessively for this. I have no doubt that you are right re the Kindred Tables and the book of Common Prayer...I can still quote it verbatim... incidently, my mother dragged us every sunday to the Church of England and my sisters and myself attended Cof E schools... My elder sister was also exposed to Catholicism early on as there were no Cof E schools in the vicinity. I have also studied Ancient and Modern Jewish History at University... Where we differ is that the interpretation of the Law was not homogeneous... wide variance. I do have to wonder where and by whom the 'Laws' were decided upon. Biblical Law for the most part took precedence 'Morally' over the Civil Law... I suppose it was decided by conscience in the end as to who was right...it didn't mean that the Marriages didn't occur or that they were ruled 'illegal' this did not happen... I wouldn't think that anyone had a definitive answer to this problem... All I know is that there were a lot of Vicars in the Dixon and extended families, mostly Dissenters... As for the Banns not being read, I have very early examples, which would prove this was not so......I again suppose that it depends on the angle from which one is approaching this. The Marriage of my 4Xs Great Grandmother was recorded in 1764, after Banns, and I have many other certificates which show that their Marriages were after Banns. I also think that we are digressing away from the subject which I am referring to in my earlier email, time frame of late 1700's through the early 1800's. My 3Xs Great Grandfather was married in Rotherham in 1807 and the Marriage cert was signed by the Bride's brother, a friend of the Groom and a Church Warden... Having said this I have evidence that Marriages and Births were being' recorded' in both Hampsthwaite and Sheffield simultaneously as early as 1606. From that time until 1643, the records were duplicated and appear at St. Peter's Cathedral and in Hampsthwaite. This practice seemed to end in the year 1643, when the entries started to appear only in Sheffield... It is unwise to generalize by saying that "one only has to look at St Peters' Cathedral Marriages to know that this did not happen" , this in reference to the fact that I said that it was required that someone who knew the couple sign as a witness to the Marriage. I stand by this statement, although there were of course exceptions. I would agree that not everyone could afford to Pay Fees etc, and I don't doubt that there was finagling re fictitious addresses etc...as we know the question "if there is anyone here who knows of any reason why these two should not be wed", could hardly be asked of a stranger? I also concur on the fact that a Church Warden or some other person often Officiated as a witness. I think it is misleading though that you do not mention that the reason why a Church Official stood in was because a Marriage required more than one witness. There was still usually a member of the family present to witness a Marriage or a friend as well as a Church appointed witness... I doubt that the Church Warden or other official was the only witness in the majority of cases as you infer... I suppose I come from a different experience of what constituted normality as far as Marriage Services (requirements) went. While the Laws Governing Banns may have been instituted on paper in 1823 (I have to check this fact as it is surprising to me). My experience is that Banns were being read long before that time, as evidenced by documents in my possession. I cannot argue re the legality of reading of Banns before 1753 at this time...I do have one example of a 21- 6- 1736 Marriage which was granted by License to be accomplished in a choice of 3 locations. This Licence was granted on the 1st June 1736... the Marriage was after Banns on the date stated... however as previously stated notations of B.M.D.s in two places concurrently was occurring as early as 1606. Kindest regards, Josephine. ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Treweek" <[email protected]> To: "list sheffield" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 2:10 PM Subject: [SHEFF] (no subject) > > > Hi Josephine and list. > > >Re your re-interpretation of an interpretation of forbidden Marriage>Laws and the fact that these Laws originated in 1560 and remained unchanged>until the 20th Century... > It is not my interpretation......the table of kindrid and affinity is printed in the back of every book of common prayer. > > >The statement 'they were likely from>different Parishes' was unlikely to make any difference, because this is why>they read Banns in both Parishes, in order that such a situation was>unlikely to occur. > > >Also someone who knew the couple's history was required>to go with them to attend the Marriage...i.e. witnesses... > You only have to look at Sheffield St Peters marriages to know that this did not happen,as the same two people sign as witnesses in numerous marriages,and people could not afford to pay for the Banns to be read in both parishes that is why they gave ficticious addresses. They only had to testify that they had lived in the parish for 3 weeks to be married in that parish. > It was only after 1823 that banns had to be read in both the bride's and groom's parishes, and before 1753 (Hardwickes Act) there's generally no recording of banns having been read. > Angela > _________________________________________________________________ > The next generation of MSN Hotmail has arrived - Windows Live Hotmail > http://www.newhotmail.co.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 >