Help my last resort my first Abraham de Selomoh Mendes married Hava at Bevis Marks in 1801
then a Abraham De Mendes married Elizabeth Hudson
Event Date 22 Jan 1801 Saint Luke, Old Street,Finsbury,London
Are they one and the same ? or is it purely coincidental
The only other information I have is Abraham had a sister called Harriet which is not a Jewish name and she appears to have lived in Cheshire where in the 19th century a number of Mendes live..
Is it just coincidence and the Cheshire Mendes are and always have been a Christian family or do we have a family of Portuguese coversos who got out in the 1700s and reverted to Judaism then back to Christianith all help appreciated, and a belated Chag Somearch to one and all kevin
Results 1 to 10 of 16
Thread: connundrum two marriages
Hybrid View
-
07-10-2017, 6:57 PM #1
- Join Date
- Dec 2012
- Location
- london
- Posts
- 151
connundrum two marriages
-
07-10-2017, 8:25 PM #2
There is a marriage bond and allegation on the 21 Jan 1801 by Abraham Mendes and Richard ?? being beholden and firmly bound to the Right Reverend Baillie, by the divine permission Bishop of London, the sum of £200. This is for the marriage to Elizabeth Hudson.
Their daughter Matilda de Mendes was baptised in Bowden Cheshire 19 Jul 1822.
ChristinaSometimes paranoia is just having all the facts.
William Burroughs
-
08-10-2017, 9:52 AM #3janboothGuest
The original parish register entry of the marriage of Abraham de MENDES & Elizabeth HUDSON is available to view on Ancestry and states that he was of the parish of St Luke, Finsbury and a bachelor, Elizabeth HUDSON was of the parish of St Andrew by the Wardrobe and was a widow. Don't know whether this will help you at all, but FindmyPast have the actual parish register images for the baptisms of the children of Abraham & Elizabeth at Bowdon, Cheshire, amongst whom are an Emma (born 1802), Harriet (born 1812), Matilda (born 1822), all baptised in 1822 - can't give you full details I'm afraid because of their terms & conditions.
Janet
-
09-10-2017, 12:56 AM #4
- Join Date
- Dec 2012
- Location
- london
- Posts
- 151
Thanks Janet, I did not know she was a widow as to the rest I have that but still did they marry in a synagoue and a church also can you explain what the bond is all about ... thanks again
-
09-10-2017, 2:12 AM #5
Before civil registration began in 1837, most people in England were required by law to be married by banns or license. To request a license they had to provide a written allegation stating the couple’s intent to marry and stating that there were no legal obstacles to the marriage. From 1604 until 1823, the allegation was substantiated by bond. Two witnesses, one of them usually the groom, swore to the bond, which would be forfeited if the information in the allegation proved false and were a legal impediment to the marriage
Marriage allegations and bonds often exist where licenses don’t because, while the license was given to a member of the wedding party to present to the officiant at the ceremony, the allegation stayed with the authority who issued it.
ChristinaSometimes paranoia is just having all the facts.
William Burroughs
-
09-10-2017, 11:37 PM #6
- Join Date
- Dec 2012
- Location
- london
- Posts
- 151
thankyou very much...Christanel
-
09-10-2017, 6:49 AM #7
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Location
- Wakefield, West Yorkshire
- Posts
- 626
The most probable reason for the two ceremonies was down to the law passed in 1753 titled “An Act for the better preventing of clandestine Marriages. (1753)” or simply “Lord Hardwicke’s Act”.
This required all marriages in England be conducted in the Church of England but did not extend to marriages where both parties were Quakers or Jews.
In the case at hand it sounds as if Abraham de MENDES was jewish and Elizabeth HUDSON was C of E; this would require the marriage to be in a C of E church.
In such instances it was not uncommon for a second ceremony in a synagogue to take place to ensure the marriage was valid under their requirements, customs and laws.
It was not until 1837 that this changed again with the introduction of civil marriages
Cheers
GuyAs we have gained from the past, we owe the future a debt, which we pay by sharing today.
-
09-10-2017, 7:16 AM #8
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Posts
- 4,135
Kevin
Guy is correct about the Hardwicke's Marriage Act of 1753 and later Marriage Act of 1823 regarding Jews and Quakers exemptions.
The Abraham and Elizabeth line is traceable as you know but have you identified a second Abraham/Hava line just for confirmation.
Is there a copy of the 1801 ketubah for Abraham/Hava? I note Elizabeth was a widow do you know her maiden name?
The Bevis Marks 1801 Marriage suggests that if Hava is also Elizabeth she would need "conversion"
What do you think?
Phillip
-
11-10-2017, 10:12 PM #9
- Join Date
- Dec 2012
- Location
- london
- Posts
- 151
its still a conundrum because under Jewish Law she would have to have been a convert ie Jewish if they felt for one moment she was not sincere the marriage would not have happened.
Tags for this Thread
Helping you trace your British Family History & British Genealogy.
All times are GMT. The time now is 7:40 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5
Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.
Bookmarks