Genealogy Chat

Ive had 'housekeepers' when the hubby is still married. My Emily Horstead is shown as a widow working/living in a Rotherhithe pub in 1901 but low and behold, husband Fred is alive and kicking living with his 'housekeeper' in Suffolk and Fred jnr. My GGFx2 also shown as married on 1871 - no sign of wife - but he has a young 'housekeeper' and the youngest child of the household has her first name - Phoebe. In the 1881 housekeeper elevated to wife.

Frances Several pairs of my Lancashire relatives mysteriously married on the IOM. None of them were well off, and I have puzzled over how they managed to get three weeks off work (for residency purposes on IOM) and why they did so! The LDS is beginning to transcribe and film PRs from the IOM and you may find something on there. If not, google Cyndi's list - I seem to remember getting a link to an IOM website (which I have lost in my computer crsh) which was very helpful. Olde Crone

Thanks to everybody who has replied, and especially Brian for his suggestion about the Isle of Man. I'll certainly check it out. Just need to find out how to access Isle of Man records now! Frances

Paul, My g-grandfather married his housekeeper. I'm 100% certain that was her real job when they met. However, they did ''have to get married'' and great-granny conveniently changed her marital status to do so.......the previous year on the census she was still ''housekeeper'' and ''married'', but by the wedding she had miraculously become a widow, without any sign of her first husband kicking the bucket! Merry

On mum's side of my tree there is NOONE unmarried but pretending.....no illegitimate children and not one sniff of anyone walking down the aisle pregnant!!! She has the most goody-goody stock in the world! On dad's side everyone seems to have got married if they could, maybe whilst pregnant or sometimes after one child had been born. Some married even when they shouldn't have!! Such as one husband with two wives on each census (he married both of them!)! On hubby's tree there are a few who pretended to be married when they were not, but this was always because there was a previous spouse still alive somewhere. None of his actually went for the full bigamy with an illegal marriage ceremony. I think the problem is that if you ask, ''did they live together?'' you will get lots of replies about exceptions to the norm. I have thousands on my tree, but the number living together in Victorian times I can count on the fingers of, well.......two hands, maybe! Merry

Olde Crone What a refined way of saying 'this woman is a tart and a liar!'!

Paul, not necessarily a euphemism - it is just possible the man fell in love with his housekeeper and married her and everything was perfectly above board. Were there any children that shouldn't have been?

Frances. You state that it is not likely that they married abroad. However have you thought that quite close to Barrow is Heysham where boats sailed daily to the Isle of Man. They could well have got married there. Just a thought which may be of help to you. Best of luck Brian

Hi, I have a couple, whose first child was born in 1861 (although I'm not sure if he was the father) and their last that I have found so far, in 1888. When I went to look for a marriage for them, to see if the first child would have been his or not, I was amazed to find it listed in 1908, which meant that my garndmother was born BEFORE her GRANDPARENTS got married! They had uncommon names, Edward Chapman Barley and Septiana Anderton, so I don't think it was a mistake. Interestingly enough, they didn't marry in Barton, where they lived, they went accross the Humber to Hull, so it obviously was a bit of a secret! Lynn : - )

I found a couple in their 40's living in the same house together and the woman was listed as 'housekeeper'. I immediately checked the following census and sure enough they were married. What a quaint euphemism.... housekeeper!

Helen I too sit sniggering away to myself at the LDS. Some of these Vicars were priceless, werent they? My favourite at the moment is Joe Bloggs baptised, posthumous son of Arthur Bloggs and his wife Mary Bloggs, born two and one half years after the burial of Arthur Bloggs, may God be praised for his miracles and mysterious ways. LOL! Olde Crone

I've just been looking at some Dudley parish records from 1700s and one of the vicars was the sort who made little comments (I got tutted at for giggling to myself at LDS yesterday!) He wrote things like - Edward sonne of William Jones and his supposed wife Mary Elizabeth dau. to Henry Smith and his pretended wife Ann 3 Aug Thomas Brown and Mary Green were married before me. Thomas did not want it but Mary's father was quite sure it should happen. 10 Aug Edward sonne to above couple born and baptized John, THIRD bastard sonne to Sarah Price So, it's all been happening for centuries..........

Living as man and wife without actually being married was probably quite common, though it would not have been respectable, so I don't suppose many couples would own up to it, so it would be very difficult to provide statistical evidence. But there are examples of famous people who did this - the novelist George Eliot lived with George Lewes and they considered themselves as married. They couldn't marry as GL was already married. His wife had a lover and had borne the lover's children, but since Lewes had accepted them as his, he couldn't get a divorce. nell

Christine's remarks made me think of my childhood in the 50s, spent in Manchester in what can only be described as Genteel Working Class. Whenever anyone new moved into our street, there would be a mad scramble to get into their front parlour, where the local washhouse mafia expected to see their marriage photo. Should this not be on display, then a thorough search of the Back Kitchen would be undertaken and then, the inquisition began, gently at first. So, where have you flitted from? Have you been married long? Oh, three years, so you would have married in Oldham then? St Jude's was it? Oh, yes, right, which Vicar took the service then, my sister in law's brother's auntie goes there - I'll ask her if she knows the Vicar who married you...and so on. Many women were forced into bringing out their 'marriage lines' for inspection if they had no photo, and many more were forced out of the street altogether! Olde Crone

I think it was quite connon. However look for a marriage about 1912 as there was a rush of couples getting married to claim the married rate of old age pensions. I think vicars must have been very busy. There is also a list of couples who eloped to Gretna Green to get married without their parents permission before they were 21. It is also worth checking the overseas section of BMD which I think is on 1837 on line.

I have ancestors who didn't marry until 10 years after their first child. I have ancestors who were married for 12 years before they had any children. I also have ancestors who marry under a different surname than the one you expect! Jeanette x

Frances Pretty common, I'd say, if my experience, and that of many other members, is anything to go by. They always PRETENDED to be married though! Reasons for not marrying were almost always that there was a previous spouse still alive - divorce was only for the very rich, so the choices were limited - commit bigamy (also quite common) or wait for the spouse to die and then marry secretly in a distant Parish or Register Office - look for a marriage up until the time of their deaths. Hope this helps OC

Frances, it was very common. But dont give up hope. I found my GGPx3 marrying nearly 18 years after the birth of their first kiddie. Another couple married after 8 years, just after the death of a son. Someone recently contacted me and said bearing those stories in mind she went back to checking her marriages and did indeed find them marrying I think she said 11 years after the first child. She then went on to find two other marriages, I believe 16 and 6 years years after first child was born. So trawl further forward to see if you can find them. As they come in the familyrelatives.org 'golden period' of 1866-1920 when events are name searchable and you can cover the whole country in one fell swoop, Id think about going to that site to try. There was a kind soul on records offering look ups on there yesterday - check it out.

I don't know how common it was for them to live together and not marry but I have found some and sometimes one of them was already married to someone else and the marriage took place after the first husband or wife died. Could Ellen have been married before and the marriage be in a different name? Heather

Does anyone know how common it was (or not) for a couple to be living together, ie not married, in the second half of the 19th century? My great grandparents John Christopherson and Ellen (Jones) had a large family, their first child being born in Preston, Lancs c.1878. I have tried everything I can think of but can't find any record of their marriage. John came from the Colton area which was then in Lancs (now Cumbria). Ellen came from the Ormskirk area, and from the early 1880's onwards they lived in Barrow. I have looked country-wide just in case they did a bit of travelling, but no joy. It's highly highly unlikely that they went abroad. Anyone have any ideas please?