Could there be more?

[sezzle]

I recently visited our library which houses the archives for weddings that took place at Manchester cathedral in the 1800s

I found the record I want and got a copy for 50p
my problem is it reaaaaaally doesnt tell me anything
I have the couples names, and the date they were married and thats it really, the witnesses were on every record for that month in the cathedral (talk about wedding crashers lol) so they dont help

The lady on the desk wasnt much help either, i know that prior to 1837 some details werent on the marriage certificates but she tried to tell me otherwise and to order a copy from the registry office (the registry office only has records post 1837 though)

So would there be other information lurking about anywhere, the wedding was in 1827.

thanks

[LittleSpark]

Unfortunately if you were hoping for father's names on certificate, the marriage was too early.
I've also found 'early' marriages where the same witnesses appear on most certificates.
Since you've got a copy of the record then I'd imagine that's all the information you will find - unless someone else knows different.

Sheila

[Jan1954]

Hi sezzle,

If you have a read of this, it will explain all you need to know about what was and what was not recorded.

[sezzle]

thanks for that, i thought that would be the case but the librarien was admiment that there would be more so i thought it was worth asking before i spent more money on a record i got for 50p lol

[Zen Rabbit]

A point worth noting is that sometimes people still managed to get married outside of their parish from 1754 onwards without having to fork out for a licence, and despite the requirement that they marry in their own parish. People initially were very wary of banns and didn't want their private business to be known in their local but also not everyone could afford to pay for a marriage licence. These people used various methods of subterfuge to get their banns read in another (adjoining) parish. Sometimes by claiming that one or both parties had recently moved there. John Ward in "The history of the borough of Stoke-upon-Trent" 1843 complains about the fall off of marriages in Burslem due to "the very reprehensible practice, of young men getting the banns of matrimony published in distant country churches (through the equally reprehensible lack of vigilance in the clergy of those churches,) and so getting married where they are not known....."

[sezzle]

thanks Zen thats quite intresting, im finding the whole history of marriage and the cathedral really intreaging.

I do think however my couple were from this parish as they lived their whole married lives there

[Mike Fry]

I recently visited our library which houses the archives for weddings that took place at Manchester cathedral in the 1800s

I found the record I want and got a copy for 50p
my problem is it reaaaaaally doesnt tell me anything
I have the couples names, and the date they were married and thats it really, the witnesses were on every record for that month in the cathedral (talk about wedding crashers lol) so they dont help

The lady on the desk wasnt much help either, i know that prior to 1837 some details werent on the marriage certificates but she tried to tell me otherwise and to order a copy from the registry office (the registry office only has records post 1837 though)

So would there be other information lurking about anywhere, the wedding was in 1827.

thanks

As others have said, pre-1837 you would be very lucky to find any more information than you already have. In fact, pre-1754 you won't even find any witnesses. Very early marriages sometimes even omitted the bride's surname! Between those dates (and after 1837 as well) you will find the same names cropping up as witnesses over and over. Think literacy, and you'll come to the conclusion that the witnesses were probably semi-officials in the Cathedral and could read and write.

Occasionally, you will find that the bride and/or groom could do a little more than just make their mark.

And it's no good hunting out the Banns book or the Marriage Allegations in the case of a license, because they're not going to give you much more information than you already have.

[Coromandel]

Before 1837 you have to work harder to find clues to who belongs to whom. One strategy you could try is to see if your bride and groom turn up as witnesses to other people's weddings at the same venue. This works best for people who could sign their names, as then you can compare signatures.

If you're very lucky there may be a newspaper announcement of the marriage telling you more about the bride and groom.

[Zen Rabbit]

Thinking outside the box other avenues worth pursuing are baptisms if you know who the children are. Occasionally, especially with non-conformist baptisms, they can divulge more information than a marriage. A lot of the Methodist baptisms from the late 1700's onwards (when they were fist allowed to perform baptisms) include such detail as how many previous children were born and not only the wife's maiden name but often the name of her father and his residence.

[Peter Goodey]

And it's no good hunting out the Banns book or the Marriage Allegations in the case of a license, because they're not going to give you much more information than you already have.

I beg to differ. It's always worth getting the allegation & bond in the case of marriage by licence. Presumably this marriage wasn't by licence as the questioner hasn't mentioned it.