IGI - Marriage entry puzzle - help in simple terms please

Laura · Post by **Laura** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:04 pm

DavidWW wrote:As the date of the 1863 marriage, - 28th April, - is exactly the same as that of the IGI 1857 record, I can only imagine that 1857 is an error.

David

Aye, but it's not.

I was just about to give up when I decided to check the dates of the marriages and when I zoomed in, I discovered they are different by one day. When I looked more closely at the whole date, I realized Andrew's theory about an 1857 marriage being registered in 1863 was quite correct.

http://talkingscot.com/gallery/displayi ... p?pos=-787
<embedded image removed & placed in the gallery.LesleyB>
Pleae upload all images to the gallery. Thanks!

Post by **emanday** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:13 pm

No that's got me curious. Why would it have taken so long for their marriage to be properly registered?

What proof would they have had to provide to get it done?

Not that I've got any of my lot with such a strange registration - YET, but I am very curious.

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:17 pm

Laura wrote:
DavidWW wrote:As the date of the 1863 marriage, - 28th April, - is exactly the same as that of the IGI 1857 record, I can only imagine that 1857 is an error.

David
Aye, but it's not.

I was just about to give up when I decided to check the dates of the marriages and when I zoomed in, I discovered they are different by one day. When I looked more closely at the whole date, I realized Andrew's theory about an 1857 marriage being registered in 1863 was quite correct.

Well spotted !!

What amazes me it that there is no explantion on the register entry for the 6 years delay in the registration, - the marriage schedule was never asked for?, the marriage schedule wasn't handed back immediately after the wedding?, or the registrar mislaid the schedule ??............

David

Post by **emanday** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:32 pm

Any chance of putting the whole page up?

Laura · Post by **Laura** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:36 pm

deleted duplicate post

Laura · Post by **Laura** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 10:37 pm

Here is the full page of the image of the 1857 CURRIE marriage which was registered in 1863.

http://talkingscot.com/gallery/displayi ... p?pos=-785

Fergie · Post by **Fergie** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 11:07 pm

Thank you all for trying to unravel this.

Did a marriage take place in 1857 or is this a transcription error on the IGI? Is there a marriage entry for 1857 on statutory records? I have looked on Scotlands People but can't find it.

Could it be a possibilty that they did marry in 1857(in the legal sense but not in Church) but didn't tell their parents as they were RC.?

In 1861 census they are shown in the Healy (Haley) household with a couple of the children but as single.

In 1863 they then get married in the RC Church with parents blessing? but nobody knew they had been married before?

Laura · Post by **Laura** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 11:24 pm

Fergie, as AndrewP has stated, the IGI shows the 1857 marriage for CURRIE and HEALEY. The record was an extract which means it was copied from an original record. It is possible that the young couple were married in a non-RC ceremony and later decided to exchange vows in the RC Church. Is it possible that one of them was a convert?

Fergie, if you do a Google for International Genealogical Index you will find lots of information about it.

Post by **emanday** » Sun Oct 01, 2006 11:25 pm

The IGI seem to have transcribed the date that the marriage seems to have taken place - 1857, and completely ignorde the fact that it wasn't registered till 1863.

The image is that of a page from the official SRI Marriage registrations which were written at, or close to, the date of the registration.

I'm still confused that the official page gives no comment on the period between the "actual" marriage and the date it got registered.

Even if it was a Civil marriage (i.e. in a registry office) surely there would have been an entry somewhere, or aren't they transcribed yet? If not, maybe GROS could provide the 1857 marriage details of a civil marriage?

Laura · Post by **Laura** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:09 am

Not all records in the IGI can be found on Scotlandspeople for various reasons. As to why an explanation for the late recording of an event doesn't appear with an entry, I'll leave that to the experts.

I do have an example of an 1855 birth that wasn't recorded until 1856 that has no explanation. The birth was transcribed as 1855 for the IGI, but appears as an 1856 birth on Scotlandspeople because that was when it was registered.

http://talkingscot.com/gallery/displayi ... p?pos=-786
<imbedded image removed & placed in gallery. LesleyB>
Please upload all future images to the gallery - thanks!