OPR Marriage help please

[LottieD]

I have found two entries on SP for John Anderson and Alison Mackie''s marriage on 5th August 1805.  One in Canongate and one in Prestonpans.  I'm sure they are the same people but why two entries? 

Canongate

John Anderson writer and Alison Mackie daughter of William Mackie late seaman gave up their names for marriage Thomas Cockburn
5th

Prestonpans

This day john Anderson and Alison Mackie producd a Certificate of their marriage solemnised at Edinburgh by the Rev .. Thomas 5th August 1805

Thanks for reading, any help will be appreciated

[jaybelnz]

Probably will be bans.  They had to be read in both the bride and the grooms parishes before the marriage could be solemnised.

Sometimes the marriage would follow directly after the second reading, and in that parish, either the groom's or that of the bride!

[ruthhelen]

In my experience, the second - and often later - entry would be the bride's parish - although that tended to depend on how far apart the two parishes were Sometimes same day, sometimes days or weeks apart. Things were a lot more straight forward when bride and groom were from the same parish...

[trish1120]

Its strange as Familysearch has the Marriage taking place 5 August 1805
Canongate, Edinburgh, Midlothian.
Brides Father WILLIAM Mackie

FreeREG also has this;
7 Sept 1806, Prestonpans Parish Church, Prestonpans, East Lothian
John ANDERSON/Alison MACKIE
Bachelor/Spinster
Notes; Produced a certificate of their marriage solemnized at Edinburgh 05 Aug 1805 by the Rev Mr Thomson.
(still using old FreeREG site)

[LottieD]

Thanks folks.

Trish, I noticed this on the original document, it has both dates.  At first I thought the 1806 date was for the record above but then noticed there was one below it too.  Here's a clip of the entry with a bit of the one above and below.  I think the marriage took place in 1805 but was entered here in 1806 as each entry has the date above it.

[trish1120]

I'm not sure either.

Hopefully someone with more experience with Scottish Records can help here?

Trish

[Ruskie]

Rather than being a marriage it appears to be some other document which shows proof that they were married, or could it be that the first was an irregular marriage and they married a second time, or married in a different parish for some reason?

I'm sure someone will know the answer to this.

[ruthhelen]

I think you're likely right Ruskie - my guess would be an irregular marriage:

http://www.gla.ac.uk/schools/socialpolitical/research/economicsocialhistory/historymedicine/scottishwayofbirthanddeath/marriage/

As for the production of the marriage certificate - it could have been required by the kirk elders in order for the couple to have their children baptised as legitimate in that parish, perhaps?

I've seen instances where a couple who have had an irregular marriage have been forced to declare it to the congregation and pay a fine or penance to the poor fund or such like, but that's normally noted in the parish register. As the article says, such marriages were generally frowned upon by the kirk...

Ruth

[Ruskie]

As for the production of the marriage certificate - it could have been required by the kirk elders in order for the couple to have their children baptised as legitimate in that parish, perhaps?
Ruth

This seems logical.
The document doesn't say that the couple (re)married on 7 Sept 1806. This is the date they showed their marriage certificate to prove that they had been married in Edinburgh in 1805. 

No mention of a fine though. I wonder why? Might there have been some doubt as to the validity of the marriage and once they provided their marriage certificate it was deemed to be all above board?