"Separated" as marital status in 1836 marriage banns.

[Dundee]

I was asking about the marital status being described (by Ancestry?) as "Separated". Surely this cannot be correct - it's a modern concept. I think Heywood's explanation is right - someone has interpreted 'sp' as 'Separated' rather than as 'spinster'. But what a silly mistake.     

I think you need to know that a lot of these records, especially in the earlier days of Ancestry, were outsourced to private companies for transcription by people who have zero genealogical knowledge and some did not have English as a first language.

Debra 

[heywood]

The record I saw did not show ‘separated’ just ‘Sp.’

[Melbell]

Thanks for your answer Dundee. I quite agree.

The record I saw did not show ‘separated’ just ‘Sp.’

The Ancestry listing referring to Separated is wrongly linked to the PR transcript.

The main thing is, that as Heywood has already pointed out, 'separated' has been substituted for 'sp'. And as I said before, what a silly mistake!

Melbell
 

[heywood]

I see it now 

[jonwarrn]

Supposedly, Banns were read in Guestling church in 28 December 1836 for George Jenkins and Hannah Sinden

Still disappointing that George and Hannah don't actually appear to be in the Guestling banns register!
The latest possible date for the third reading would have been on Sunday 25th December 1836

[venelow]

While it is obvious from the details discussed in this thread that "sp" should be interpreted as short for Spinster it is not correct to say that Separation in marriage is a modern concept.

I have a couple in one of my trees who gained a Legal Separation from an Ecclesiastical Court which was possible to do but very costly. The catch was that neither party could re-marry as long as both were alive.

The wife wrote in her Will dated 1703 that she had a Legal Separation from the Church. She then proceeded to leave goods and money acquired through her linen business (which included the rental of child-bed linen) to her son from her first marriage and her daughter from her second. She left money to two younger sons.

A search on the Internet finds numerous references regarding Ecclesiastical Separation including this one which also mentions that sometimes Separations were made privately and did not involve the Church Court at all.

https://news.smu.ca/news/2022/2/14/uncovering-new-twists-in-the-legal-history-of-marriage-and-divorce-in-englandnbspnbspnbsp

Venelow
Canada

[Melbell]

Thanks for pointing this out Venelow, and for the link to the website.
 
Grateful 
Melbell