"Graeme Wall" wrote in message news:PU_Ot.58036$hp7.33356@fx13.fr7... On 15/08/2013 01:31, Renia wrote: > > > On 14/08/2013 19:51, polygonum wrote: >> On 14/08/2013 10:19, eve@varneys.org.uk wrote: >>> 84. >>>>>>> >>>>> Assuming the most common change of name upon marriage, this >>>>> would >>>>> occur >>>>> if a man marries his deceased brother's widow. >>>> >>>> Marriage to deceased brother's widow wasn't actually legal in >>>> 1921 >>>> (whereas >>>> marriage to deceased wife's sister had been since 1908). >>>> However, >>>> there >>>> was a lot of it about, and if the authorities didn't spot it, who >>>> cared? >>> If the first husband was a cousin, no problem. >>>>> >>>> EVE >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians >>> Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society >>> >> Was it legal when the future Henry VIII married Catherine of >> Aragon? > > The problem with Henry VIII's marriage to Katharine of Aragaon was > that > she had previously been married to Henry's brother. >Which was the point of the comment. And the argument was an unconsummated marriage was nul and void. Lesley Robertson

On 17/08/2013 19:40, Lesley Robertson wrote: > "Graeme Wall" wrote in message news:PU_Ot.58036$hp7.33356@fx13.fr7... > > On 15/08/2013 01:31, Renia wrote: >> >> >> On 14/08/2013 19:51, polygonum wrote: >>> On 14/08/2013 10:19, eve@varneys.org.uk wrote: >>>> 84. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> Assuming the most common change of name upon marriage, this would >>>>>> occur >>>>>> if a man marries his deceased brother's widow. >>>>> >>>>> Marriage to deceased brother's widow wasn't actually legal in 1921 >>>>> (whereas >>>>> marriage to deceased wife's sister had been since 1908). However, >>>>> there >>>>> was a lot of it about, and if the authorities didn't spot it, who >>>>> cared? >>>> If the first husband was a cousin, no problem. >>>>>> >>>>> EVE >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians >>>> Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society >>>> >>> Was it legal when the future Henry VIII married Catherine of Aragon? >> >> The problem with Henry VIII's marriage to Katharine of Aragaon was that >> she had previously been married to Henry's brother. > >> Which was the point of the comment. > > And the argument was an unconsummated marriage was nul and void. > Lesley Robertson > Though that cannot have made the act of marrying not legal. -- Rod