Marriage July/first child November the same year.....

[joette]

Is it just my Family-all sides just about that from about 1860's to the 1900's seem to marry in July then first child in Nov.?
I could understand a lot of Sept births with Christmas/New year celebrations bringing their own "wee feet" with them(something my Granny used to say.) I am puzzled by the Marriage in July- the Fair Holiday maybe?-trades week to you East-Coasters.
It occurs again & again if they married in July I automatically look for the first child in Nov.of the same year & usually Bingo there they are.
Is it a statistically anomally in my Family or have others noted the same/similiar patterns in others?
The funniest? was my Great-Grandparents who made the most collosal fuss when my Grandparents who had had to postpone their Marriage several times because of bereavement,unemployment "had" to get Married.They married in May & my Uncle was born Oct.
I checked their details & they were one of the Married July/First child born Nov same year brigade! My poor Granny was put through hell by her Mother-in-Law for corrupting her poor youngest son.

[DavidWW]

Is it just my Family-all sides just about that from about 1860's to the 1900's seem to marry in July then first child in Nov.?
I could understand a lot of Sept births with Christmas/New year celebrations bringing their own "wee feet" with them(something my Granny used to say.) I am puzzled by the Marriage in July- the Fair Holiday maybe?-trades week to you East-Coasters.
It occurs again & again if they married in July I automatically look for the first child in Nov.of the same year & usually Bingo there they are.
Is it a statistically anomally in my Family or have others noted the same/similiar patterns in others?
The funniest? was my Great-Grandparents who made the most collosal fuss when my Grandparents who had had to postpone their Marriage several times because of bereavement,unemployment "had" to get Married.They married in May & my Uncle was born Oct.
I checked their details & they were one of the Married July/First child born Nov same year brigade! My poor Granny was put through hell by her Mother-in-Law for corrupting her poor youngest son.

horror

Actually there is a long long tradition in Scotland stretching back many centuries, possibly even before the Middle Ages, - wha kens?, - of a man wanting to prove his potential wife's fertility prior to finally tying the knot.

Back at that time, let's face it, in terms of a subsistence economy, unless a man and his wife could produce children who would contribute to the household economy and support their parents in old age, the future would be more than bleak.

Up until the 1600s at least there was a firm tradition of a "trial marriage" whereby, if there was no child or pregnancy after one year and a day, the couple parted with no recriminations on either side.

The extent to which such ancient traditions continued into the 18th and 19th centuries is very much an area for vigorous academic debate , but, suffice to say, the opinion of the Kirk Session apart , it is far from uncommon to find that many a bride must have "walked down the aisle" pregnant (actually, as the great majority of marriages in those periods took place in the home of the bride, or some local meeting place suitable for the post marriage celebrations, or the manse, it's nonsense for me to write "walked down the aisle" )

OK, yes, there must have been a proportion of "shotgun weddings", but, I'd have to believe, up until the 19th century at least, it was perfectly acceptable (apart from the view of the Kirk) for a bride to be pregnant, as long as they had been "walking out", i.e. following the courting traditions.

And I haven't even mentioned "bundling"

David

[darrenst]

I've an interesting family from Aberdeen.

In 1886 Ann Buyers gives birth to an illegitimate son, registered James Begg Buyers, no father on the register until an RCE adds Charles Begg as father in 1949.

From the following year onwards, they were not so shy about putting both names on the certificates, even though they were all marked as illegitimate. The remaining kids were all registered with the Begg surname after the father. One is Margaret Begg, my great grandmother.

In all they had 9 children together up to 1900, and lived as a couple. On the 1901 census, Charles is marked as "Married" (he wasn't), and Ann is marked as a boarder, a "?" in the marriage column, and occupation as housekeeper.

Then in 1915, Charles and Ann get married at the ages of 61 and 58 respectively in a civil ceremony, prior to the eldest daughter being married the following year. I believe that under Scottish law, this legitimises the births of all their children, so they could all now get married with no problems on their marriage certificate!

So I guess this is the longest "Trial Marriage" I have seen, 29 years!

Darren

[Alison Plenderleith]

I'm not sure what was going on with my g grandparents.
They married 5th June 1863 and their first child was born the following day.
Maybe it was such a good party the baby arrived early

Alison

[DavidWW]

.....snipped.........Then in 1915, Charles and Ann get married at the ages of 61 and 58 respectively in a civil ceremony, prior to the eldest daughter being married the following year. I believe that under Scottish law, this legitimises the births of all their children, so they could all now get married with no problems on their marriage certificate!

Correct !, just as long as they were free to marry at the time of the births.

So I guess this is the longest "Trial Marriage" I have seen, 29 years!

Darren

Not necessarily, as they could have been irregularly married for many years before they decided to formalise the marriage in terms of an entry in the statutory register.

After that interval of time the process of formalising an earlier irregular marriage would have meant an expensive process in the Court of Session, so maybe it was the case that they just kept quiet about any earlier irregular marriage, and/or concluded that the expense of proving a marriage "by habit and repute" wasn't worth the hassle, so used the conventional process !!............

David

[ASGROOMBRIDGE]

Hi David,

Now you know what happens when you drop a little note like "and I have not mentioned bundling" please tell me what it is.
Many thanks,

Audrey

[rita]

Hi David,

Now you know what happens when you drop a little note like "and I have not mentioned bundling" please tell me what it is.
Many thanks,

Audrey

Yes go on tell us
Thanks Rita.

[WilmaM]

http://www.rampantscotland.com/know/blknow_marriage.htm

m

[ASGROOMBRIDGE]

Thank you what an interesting site.

Audrey

[StewL]

Looks like "tradition" followed into the 20th Century

My grannie and grandpa married in March 1902 and the first wain was born in July 1902