RootsChat.Com
Old Photographs, Recognition, Handwriting Deciphering => Handwriting Deciphering & Recognition => Topic started by: kokomo on Saturday 03 May 25 15:09 BST (UK)
-
Hi everybody!
I came across this marriage record of a great great etc grandpa of mine James Drummond, Scotland, who got married on April 16 but where was he from and the surname of his wife could be Clow?
Thanks
-
What year was this? The Caledonian Mercury 2nd September 1761 has a list of Trustees for something or other in PErthshire which includes:
James Drummond; Croftnappock; Crieff
-
The place is: Crostnappock or Croftnappock
The wife's surname is: Clow
However this book appears to discuss this family in detail:
https://deriv.nls.uk/dcn23/9484/94849717.23.pdf
Found on page 63 but other references exist for the place.
-
The year is 1749
Thanks for the extra info. I will take a closer look at that book! :o :o :o :o :o
After Clow it says "Blackford" perhaps? ???
-
Blackfoord
-
Several newspaper items indicate that Croftnappock was an area in the SE of Crieff, and close to Pittenzie House. I have found the latter on old maps, but not Croftnappock. However, here on a later map is a Croftnappock Nursery in exactly the right place.
https://maps.nls.uk/view/82899138#zoom=5.0&lat=9043&lon=4467&layers=BT (https://maps.nls.uk/view/82899138#zoom=5.0&lat=9043&lon=4467&layers=BT)
-
Hi everybody!
I came across this marriage record of a great great etc grandpa of mine James Drummond, Scotland, who got married on April 16 but where was he from and the surname of his wife could be Clow?
Thanks
As others have said the place is Croftnappock and the bride's surname in Clow.
I looked at Scotland's People and they have 2 records listed in the OPRs , 1 in the parish of Crieff (so the groom's abode) and the other in the Parish of Blackford 2 days later.
I think you would need to look at 'both' of these to be sure you get as much available info as possible I suspect the one you posted may have been a proclamation (of intention to marry/ Banns)
Boo
-
Thanks. It is curious to have two marriages so close to each other involving the same persons :o
-
Thanks. It is curious to have two marriages so close to each other involving the same persons :o
Not two marriages, Banns would have been read in both parishes, they'd marry in one.
Boo
-
Oh, you think so? That they put banns in those two places with a difference of two days?
I was looking at the map and Blackfoord and Crieff are separated by 13 miles.
However, I was reading on the Red Book of Scotland above posted and it says that James & Mary (couple I) got married on the 16th of April at Crieff (where James had estate). If that were the case, why post another bann two days later for a couple already married? Additionally, this Mary is from Duchally in northern Scotland.
I believe that on the 18th another couple, let's call it couple II, of James & Mary (of Blackford) wedded at Blackford.
Thus, I am prone to believe that the one I might be looking for is couple II, thus the marriage certificate I originally posted would be incorrect :-\
-
Oh, you think so? That they put banns in those two places with a difference of two days?
I was looking at the map and Blackfoord and Crieff are separated by 13 miles.
However, I was reading on the Red Book of Scotland above posted and it says that James & Mary (couple I) got married on the 16th of April at Crieff (where James had estate). If that were the case, why post another bann two days later for a couple already married? Additionally, this Mary is from Duchally in northern Scotland.
I believe that on the 18th another couple, let's call it couple II, of James & Mary (of Blackford) wedded at Blackford.
Thus, I am prone to believe that the one I might be looking for is couple II, thus the marriage certificate I originally posted would be incorrect :-\
I got curious . . .
You posted the entry made in the Grooms Parish Register (Crieff) and its NOT a marriage, its the Proclamation ofBanns being called in the Parish where he lived so that if anyone knew of a reason they shoudn't marry they could say so.
and I've just looked at the entry for the Bride's Parish, it too says Banns were Proclaimed on 16th in HER home Parish (Blackford) - which confirms that people in both parishes had a chance to object if they neded to.
Presumably no one objected and the marriage took place in the Bride's Parish
the entry reads:
James Drummond in Crieff and Mary Clow - lawful daughter of David Clow of Dochall , proclaimed 16th Apr , married April 18th.
So by looking at both entries as I suggested, you get to know the actual date of the marriage and, in this case, the name of the Bride's father
Boo
-
So, to see if I follow your line of reasoning: there was only one couple that married on April 18th at Blackfoord, the bride's hometown but had banns posted two days prior on Blackfoord and Crieff, correct?}
The father of the bride was David Clow from that document, right?
However, there appears to have been another marriage on the 16th of April of another James Drummond who married a different Mary Clow but daughter of James Clow from Duchally
Do you agree?
-
deleted
-
The Red Book has been compiled from various sources, potentially allowing errors to creep in. In this case it references the OPR Blackford as the source of the marriage information. That OPR states the bride's father is David Clow, so it seems that the information was not copied correctly.
-
Thanks for clarifying!
-
So, to see if I follow your line of reasoning: there was only one couple that married on April 18th at Blackfoord, the bride's hometown but had banns posted two days prior on Blackfoord and Crieff, correct?}
The father of the bride was David Clow from that document, right?
However, there appears to have been another marriage on the 16th of April of another James Drummond who married a different Mary Clow but daughter of James Clow from Duchally
Do you agree?
No. sorry, this is a final attempt to help you understand why.
1 SP have very informative help pages at
https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/help-and-support/guides/church-registers#understanding_contents_church_registers
[Banns and Marriages]
The proclamation of banns was the notice of contract of marriage, read out in the church before the marriage took place. Couples or their 'cautioners' (sponsors) were often required to pay a 'caution' (pronounced 'kay-shun') or security to prove the seriousness of their intentions. Forthcoming marriages were supposed to be proclaimed on three successive Sundays, however, in practice, all three proclamations could be made on the same day on payment of a fee. If the bride and groom lived in different parishes, the impending marriage was proclaimed in both parishes, although not necessarily on the same days, therefore the dates in each register may be different. You may also find that one register may show the proclamation date and the other the date of the marriage itself.
2 The snippet you originally posted,
ref on SP
DRUMMOND JAMES, spouse MARY CLOW/ date 16/04/1749 Parish No 342 Ref 10/176, Parish Crieff
I am assuming you have the entire image page. Look at the heading at the top and it clearly says
Register of Proclamations in the Parish of Crieff since Nov 1748. These are only Proclamations (intent to marry/Banns), NOT a record of a Marriage ceremony taking place and the Proclamation was made on 16th Apr
Whoever compiled the info for that Red Book took that entry, in error, as the Marriage taking place in Crieff on 16th Apr 1749, but the marriage itself was not entered in the Crieff Register as it took place in the bride's home Parish of Blackford. Its highly likely that both parties paid to only have the Proclamations made/recorded once (see SP notes above)
3 The record of Marriage I referred to
ref on SP
DRUMMOND JAMES, spouse MARY CLOW/ date 18/04/1749 Parish No 333 Ref 10/255, Parish Blackford
Again you need to look at the entire page image to see its headed Proclamations and Marriages 1749
and that says it was proclaimed Apr 16th pmo (primo -the first time) and the 2nd and 3rd time have no dates making it highly likely that the fee had been paid to have all 3 made on the same day in this parish and then it says married 18th.
The only fly in the ointment was it says her father was David Clow and the Red Book says James Clow.
There is obviously an error in either the OPR or the Redbook but which one has the error is unclear
There is a will for James Clow of Dochally on SP but that James Clow was Mary's brother - who 'was' a Professor at Glasgow
SP Ref
CLOW James, date 28/5/1799 description 'Of Duchally, Professor of Philosophy in the University of Glasgow, Testament, Testamentor and Inventory , Glasgow Commissary Court CC9/7/77
Boo
-
Wow, thanks so much for your patience and dedication. It means a lot to me the effort put in place to find out more first and afterwards making a clear explanation. I honestly did not know much about the Banns process; I thought it was made to "check" that the bride (or groom) was not already married mostly, not a way to collect money for the church (referring to the payment of a fee).
I will assume, in light of all the information hereby furnished, that we are dealing with the same person and there is an issue with the father's of the bride name. Now I see it clear.
Again, I appreciate all your patience in explaining and clarifying.
Best
-
Pleased it now makes sense. The option of paying a fee would likely only apply to better off parishioners, the everyday folk probably couldn't afford it (though I am unsure how much it would be)
I did look at the Kirk Sessions minutes and accounts for both parishes for 1749 in case there was a mention of a fee being paid but can't see one.
If you haven't already done so I would recommend that you get both the images from SP to check out what I have said for yourself - though I believe I have read them both correctly, I am as capable as anyone else of making errors.
Boo