Thank you Nivard for such a quick response and just what I hoped for. Your information now shows us that she actually could have been around the age of 12 in 1792.... As you say, proof by purchase of the MC, may not help at all, but there may be a clue to be had. Yes I saw Pallots comment....keeping a very open mind on this lady's surname. Many thanks again..... Robyn -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nivard Ovington via Sent: Saturday, 26 September 2015 5:39 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [LAN] MIN. AGE for MARRIAGE 1792 Hi Robyn Legal age for marriage at the time was 12 for a female and 14 for a male However it was a very rare occurrence in England Your marriage was at St Giles Cambridge so I would seek out the marriage itself Witnesses are very often not connected however so it may not tell you a lot but its necessary to check it just in case The marriage was by banns, Pallots states Eliz'th BIGGE (BIGGS in banns) Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 26/09/2015 06:34, Robyn Clarke via wrote: > Hello Everyone, > > Please excuse this enquiry on Lancsgen, this is still part of my > current Lancs. family enquiries and I know I shall get some valuable help here. > > I have a Marriage which occurred in St. Giles Cambridge UK, 23 > December 1792. Numerous Index only found, no original copy to show Witnesses. > > The Wife, Elizabeth Gray nee Bigge, wife of Daniel Gray, became a > Convict and was transported to Sydney N.S.W. in 1807 on the Sydney Cove. > > We are trying to identify her by age and have found conflicting evidence. > > However my question to those with more knowledge than myself.. > > Could she have been 12 yrs. At the time of her Marriage?? > > Unfortunately most convicts' ages at conviction were not given, > however we know who she was, as it states in some records wife of > Daniel Gray, but still no age given and she was convicted with her > Sister in Law, Ann Single nee Gray. (We do have the FH for the Gray > family, but not the BIGGE family). > > At time of Release in 1813 (Ancestry etc.) no age given, however a > "new copy" of release papers (Ancestry) issued in 1825 stated she was 45 yrs. > Born Gibraltar and 1828 NSW Census 50 yrs. A free citizen with "new husband" > also aged 50 yrs. > > Even if she exaggerated her age a little for her Marriage in 1792, > thereafter having 3 children prior to Conviction, how can we > positively identify her through her age. > > Thank you for reading this.. > > Cheers, > Robyn > > > > > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No fees! > > The list's administrator can be contacted at > [email protected] > > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: > > > > ------------------------------- > 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 > :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: Buy or sell family research items on the GEN-MAT-UKI mailing list. No fees! The list's administrator can be contacted at [email protected] :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: :-+-: ------------------------------- 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 Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Hi again I would only say again, marriage at 12 was *very* rare You won't get a marriage certificate, you need a copy of the parish register and BT (preferably both) and the banns if they survive Personally I would not be accepting the legal age as being proof it was the same girl unless there was more proof of it Nivard Ovington in Cornwall (UK) On 26/09/2015 09:04, Robyn Clarke wrote: > Thank you Nivard for such a quick response and just what I hoped for. Your > information now shows us that she actually could have been around the age of > 12 in 1792.... > As you say, proof by purchase of the MC, may not help at all, but there may > be a clue to be had. Yes I saw Pallots comment....keeping a very open mind > on this lady's surname. > > Many thanks again..... > > Robyn