Help Needed With A Will Term

[Omega]

In a will from 1827 a man mentions his daughters as being ENTERMERED with a man, does this mean married?

Your help will be appreciated

Thank you

Deirdre

[jeeb]

Hi Deirdre,
I do not think this word actually exists but I think it is unlikely it means married in the context it has been used.
As it has been used in a will I'm wondering if it could be taken from the noun 'Termer' which means one who holds lands for a period of time or for life.

Jeremy

[Copper]

I think that it ia phonetic spelling of inter married. ie Married.

[arthurk]

I was going to agree with Copper (= "intermarried") but then I noticed that Omega wrote "his daughters as being ENTERMERED with a man". If all the daughters were entermered with the same man, it wouldn't be marriage, would it?

Arthur

[Omega]

In re-reading the will he refers to his daughter Elizabeth by her married name and "And my daughter Christina now entermared with James Sutten I bequeath the sum of fifty dollars" Later he mentions other daughters with their maiden names and refers to them as entermered to.... I'm being to suspect it was formally engaged rather than married.

Deirdre

[Mutley]

Does that mean it is similar to other archaic words like betrothed or espoused?
I looked them up but no mention of entermered. If you take the syllables individually there are several words, enter, term, mere, termer and add a couple of other letters like g=merge you get all sorts. But cannot be married if maiden names are mentioned.
Puzzling??

[Omega]

I was tihinking it might be something like a betrothal where the woman was sent to live with the mans family until the offical marriage but I have never heard the word before and it isn't in any of the modern or Oxford dictionaries and google gives no clues I am truely stumped here. Thank you everyone for your interest and ideas. Will keep searching if it truely is a word which it must be as it is in a will it has to be recorded somewhere, surely.

Deirdre

[Omega]

Breaking it down enter = to go into
mere = only, not more than, nothing but.

Could this mean they don't have a legal way of marring because of location and the father would give the daughter to the other man as a wife without actual marriage lines being read....more of a contract?

Deirdre

[Mutley]

Sussed it!!! Living in Sin = Enter the mire!!! |laugh1|

[Omega]

You have a wicked sence of humor Mutley.lol.

Didn't they once call that common law wife, I am going to google that terma and see what I come up with.

Deirdre

[Mutley]

I try....
You have probably spotted this while searching but just in case not, I found it on another forum from 2005, the lady did not get a result either. Her family were German and Mormons. She said "I looked it up in the Oxford English Dictionary and the answer was written in old Englished and sounded like to interfer or not to interfer--didn't make any sense."
Has anyone got a copy of that dictionary that could do a look up for you? |book2|

[Mythology]

From the reference to "dollars" I presume that this is not an English will, so it could be something that I know nothing about, being unfamiliar with the way the language might have developed in other countries.

However, with that proviso, I'm with Copper and Arthur on this - I have a number of wills where "intermarried" is used rather than "married" and, were this an English will, I would certainly start looking for the marriage *before* the will was made, not afterwards, feeling quite confident that it would turn out to be nothing more than a dodgy spelling.

[Omega]

I have only just found an Historical Society near us on the mainland and am waiting for my membership so I don't know if they can look up anything for me until the membership is final but I will try our little library here on the Island as I only have the kids old dictionaries from when they went to school and they are Collins Australian English Dictionary at home here now. Plod on soldier I've got a bone and I cant let go till I get an answer. It's a terrible habit I have, very hard to live with.

Deirdre

[Omega]

From the reference to "dollars" I presume that this is not an English will, so it could be something that I know nothing about, being unfamiliar with the way the language might have developed in other countries.

However, with that proviso, I'm with Copper and Arthur on this - I have a number of wills where "intermarried" is used rather than "married" and, were this an English will, I would certainly start looking for the marriage *before* the will was made, not afterwards, feeling quite confident that it would turn out to be nothing more than a dodgy spelling.

Thank you Mythology,

I didn't even think other than english so yes the dollars refer to an old American will and spelling would definately be a factor. So thinking on those lines ENTER MARRIAGE or ENTERING MARRIAGE ie ENGAGED do you think?

The mind boggles.

Found a site in Canada with a form for common law wife application and they had a contact email so I have put the question to them and now I am waiting to hear back. Will be interesting to find an answer to this one.

Thank you for your interest.

Deirdre

[Peter Goodey]

From the Oxford English Dictionary:-

intermarry, v.

intr. To contract matrimony, to enter into marriage; to marry. a. Said of a couple; hence of one person (with another). Now only in legal phraseology, in which it is the ordinary word for the intransitive use.

1650 Bury Wills (Camden) 224 My desire is that she shall not entermarry with any, but live singly.

1721 St. German's Doctor & Stud. 70 One of the men entermarrieth with the woman, and alieneth the land.

1823 Act 4 Geo. IV, c. 76 §22 If any Persons..shall knowingly and wilfully intermarry without due Publication of Banns, or License..obtained.

Note that entermarry is shown as an alternative spelling for intermarry and the usage "intermarry with".

[Omega]

Wow Peter

Thank you that is terrific. It should help in explanation of the term completely.

Thank you for the time you spent looking it up for me and the interest you have shown.

If I have followed correctly it is a non legal marrage. I haven't got that the wrong end up have I?

Deirdre

Read your message again and now go with getting married the illegal bit I picked up on was the Banns have to be read. So they are marring out side Church Law?

[Peter Goodey]

the illegal bit I picked up on was the Banns have to be read. So they are marring out side Church Law?
No, that's just an example of the usage of the word. Ignore the context of the example. Intermarried (or entermarried) with a man simply means married to a man.

[Omega]

Ok Peter

Thanks for that Peter as usual I am over analysing things.

Greatfully

Deirdre

[Mutley]

[/QUOTE] Omega's Post 5 says
"Later he mentions other daughters with their maiden names and refers to them as entermered to......"

So...... Why did the father use the maiden names of some daughters and the married name of Elizabeth? :confused:

I just luv them bones Deirdre

[Omega]

Hi Mutley

I have a headache.

I keep coming back to engagement or married by contract.

Realising though as I roam through the past with my rellies everytime you try to be logical about issues of there time as opposed to our time there are a lot of questions that are just not going to find an answer prorata with our time. Does this make sense to you.

We are lucky to have an education available to everyone. We are lucky to have ease of travel and communication. And readily available research centres where we can get information. I don't think we can fully understand what caused certain decisions by parents for there daughters in particular in those times. In thinking along those lines if a member of the church was not available would they just hand their daughters to a man as his wife without sanctification and take it as binding. Aaaah! my headache is getting worse.lol

Deirdre

[Mythology]

Without having the whole text, I wouldn't like to guess whether there is a logical reason by present day standards, but it would be no surprise if there were not, and I wouldn't tear my hair out over it.

Our ancestors did not live in an age when everything was neatly pigeonholed. They did not have the problem of FTM Blonde Edition throwing a wobbly if everything wasn't spot on. You only have to think of the amount of dud ages and dud birthplaces on census returns to realise that large numbers of people were vague, inconsistent, or plain inaccurate. They were no different when they made their wills.

(continues)

[Mythology]

I have one where the place name given for the beneficiary, his nephew, does not even exist, and never did exist - he has used the name of the local "big house" instead of the village. I have another where a "niece" is merely the daughter of a business partner, not actually related at all. Possibly the best though (which I have quoted before, but I think it will bear repetition) is this, from the will of my 3x great-grandma's brother, James Beard Talbot, made in 1880:

"To my dear loving daughter Mary Ann the wife of my son George Agars Talbot my pony harness and chaise and my mourning ring in remembrance of her unceasing kindness to me."

Now, if you take that at face value, George married his sister!

(continues)

[Mythology]

Mary Ann is, of course, not really James's daughter - she's Mary Ann Weblin. Furthermore, George and Mary Ann were not even married. George shows her as his wife on the 1881 census, but you will find no marriage - because she is the sister of George's previous wife, Harriet Weblin, so, under the law as it was at that time, they could not marry.

Accuracy?

Forget it! :D

[Omega]

I don't think they had the word accuracy in there vocabulary back then. Although it certainly makes our brains work and makes this family history all the more interesting. Until a couple of days ago I new none of this, I don't know what I will do with it now I've got it, but I have sure enjoyed debating it.

Thanks again for your interest Mythology.

Deirdre

[Mutley]

[QUOTE=Omega] I've got a bone and I cant let go till I get an answer.

Looks like someone's pinched me bone ;)

[ChristineR]

.... In thinking along those lines if a member of the church was not available would they just hand their daughters to a man as his wife without sanctification and take it as binding. Aaaah! my headache is getting worse.lol

Deirdre
I heard that they did that sort of thing in old Scotland in the Highlands - just had to say to themselves, righteo we are now man and wife, and they were, as soon as they consummated the union. A common law marriage I think they were called.

:) ChristineR
Australia

[Omega]

Hi Christine

I've heard of that and in the 1800s USA they would have to have done it to as the moved west leaving civilization behind. There would not have been preachers (per se) to perform a ceremony for quiet a while, until a form of civilization caught up.

Deirdre

[Omega]

[QUOTE=Omega] I've got a bone and I cant let go till I get an answer.

Looks like someone's pinched me bone ;)


Keep digging Mutley you'll find it. lol

Deirdre

[Mutley]

Quick reply, just a little question while I dig,
How do we know they consummated the union they could have been telling the same porky pies as the rest of our rellies??? |blush|

[Omega]

Hi Mutley

Having breakfast over here.

Guess there-in lies our delemer!

Deirdre