I have a brick wall for one set of 4th great great grandparents that is not helped by my being unsure of my 4th great grandmother's maiden name. My 3rd great grandfather in that line is William Sunlay born 1800. He was born in Prescot, Lancs and his parents were William Sunley and Mary. William Sunley obtained a marriage license to marry Mary Collingwood on 3rd August, 1799 at St Peter, Liverpool. On the marriage bond, he is listed as a soldier. On 4th August, 1799, William Sanley (soldier and bricklayer) married Mary Coldwell at St Peter by license. I have a copy of the original records of the parish marriage, bond and license. William couldn't write to judge by the fact he signed with a mark so I guess someone made a mistake on the bride's name and a pretty bad one! Any thoughts on whether the license or marriage name for Mary is more likely to be correct? I'm not sure if the misspelling of Sunley as Sanley on the Parish marriage means that is more likely to be wrong?
-
Only registered members can see all the forums - if you've received an invitation to join (it'll be on your My Summary page) please register NOW!
-
It's easier than ever before to check your entries from the 1881 Census - more details here
Bride's name different on license and parish record
- Thread starter PaulLB
- Start date
People didn't worry about spelling in those days, even if they could read and write. It might be worth checking whether Collingwood is one of those names that has an unexpected pronunciation, like Featherstonehaugh or Cholmondeley.
Failing that, it seems more likely that Collingwood would be misheard as Coldwell rather than the other way round. However both surnames seem to be quite rare - Caldwell is much more common than either.
Failing that, it seems more likely that Collingwood would be misheard as Coldwell rather than the other way round. However both surnames seem to be quite rare - Caldwell is much more common than either.
Pauline
LostCousins Megastar
It's not as uncommon as you might think for there to be discrepancies between names on the marriage licence and those in the register, and I have come across this quite a few times. One example, from an 1815 marriage in Sopworth, Wiltshire, includes a note in the register that the bride had been "misnamed on the licence", and here it was her surname that was incorrect, and I suspect it had been misread rather than misheard. In this case the minister would likely have been familiar with her correct surname as the family had been resident in the parish for some time.
On other occasions it has been the bride's forename that was incorrect, but I don't remember finding a discrepancy in the groom's name other than the usual spelling variations.
My guess would be, that if Mary was local then the surname in the register is perhaps more likely to be the correct one, but as Peter says, you need to take account of local pronunciations, bearing in mind that Liverpool was a port and pretty cosmopolitan.
On other occasions it has been the bride's forename that was incorrect, but I don't remember finding a discrepancy in the groom's name other than the usual spelling variations.
My guess would be, that if Mary was local then the surname in the register is perhaps more likely to be the correct one, but as Peter says, you need to take account of local pronunciations, bearing in mind that Liverpool was a port and pretty cosmopolitan.