Totally illegible to me!

annabel

annabel

Puts the Heart into Hertfordshire
Here is something written in the margin of a marriage in 1890 in Clerkenwell. Roseina Jane Frost to Charles Fricker, although I thought it should be James Arthur Fricker. Can anyone read any of it?. I think he has written around the words (packing case) maker and (Brick) Lane which went over the margins
Margin notes.png
 
I have tried to look at it on Ancestry, where I can enlarge it but I cannot seem to get onto the site at the moment. Will try again later.
 
MollyMay said:
I have tried to look at it on Ancestry, where I can enlarge it but I cannot seem to get onto the site at the moment. Will try again later.
Click to expand...
I cannot access it. Apparently the server is down.

It's running again. :)

Oh dear, another edit. I cannot access my tree.:(
 
Know anyone on 'the Genealogist'? I thought I could make out the word 'baptised' so perhaps one or both were baptised at time or before their marriage, & accepted into the Church?
 
Had another shot- Irfanviewer.
after baptism/ed,- ' as in at 9th apologie and (lane) of ? ? the church ?
In the names of James Arthur Fricker is the name...& James Fricker the...
.'sorry can't get anymore. Looks like the Vicars name comesin along here.
I thought is was referring to the reign of King James ? & the last entry for that month or such.

Appears the Vicar made a mistake & apologised for such without scratching all over the main page.
 
Add a bit:
In the presence of James Arthur Fricker & Rosina Jane Fricker the...????posssibly Groom and??
April 20 1899?
Well that was fun. Can some one improve at all please?
 
I think my brain is fried. :oops:

I tried enlarging the image on 'paint', but can't unscramble any more than Wendy above. :(

(Annabel, I'd say Joseph Frost's occupation is definitely 'bricklayer', though.)
 
I've had a look on Ancestry now that it's back up again.

I can only make out fragments of it, but enough to get the gist that several years later the marriage entry was amended in the presence of the couple who had married in 1890.

'In entry no 178 in col 2 for Charles read James(?) Arthur(?) and in ?? of the signature(??) ....'.

Then several words I can't read, not helped by 'maker' and 'Bricklayer' running into the margin.

Then (as Wendy has already noted) 'In the presence of James Arthur Fricker & Rosina Jane Fricker', more illegible bits, and the date April 20 1899.

Somewhere in there must be the name or initials of the clergyman making the amendment in the register: perhaps looking to see who was there in 1899 would help in deciphering the name.

It looks like the page isn't lying flat, and so perhaps the right-hand side is out of focus. You may have to get a copy from LMA to find out exactly what the marginal note says.
 
Huncamunca said:
Somewhere in there must be the name or initials of the clergyman making the amendment in the register: perhaps looking to see who was there in 1899 would help in deciphering the name.
Click to expand...

In 1899 the marriages were being conducted by one J.H. Lewthwaite. Possibly two of the mystery words in the margin of the 1890 marriage are 'Lewthwaite' and 'Vicar' (what I'd like to be Lewthwaite is about level with where it says 'Banns by me') but that might be a case of me seeing what I want to see.
 
Thank you everyone. I guess he put in the name of the groom wrong. So it was the right marriage after all
 
annabel said:
Thank you everyone. I guess he put in the name of the groom wrong. So it was the right marriage after all
Click to expand...

Did the groom sign his name or make his mark? (Ancestry's down again :( so I can't look at the marriage register again to check.)

If he was illiterate then he wouldn't be able to check what had been written in the register. However, if he signed his name as Charles Fricker then it's harder to see how any error crept in: perhaps for some reason he was going by that name at the time of the marriage?

P.S. It was a similar marginal note that helped me prove that one of my ancestors was a bigamist! His daughter originally married under her father's alias (adopted to disguise his bigamy), but many years later went back to the church and had an amendment made in the register which gave his real name.
 
However, if he signed his name as Charles Fricker then it's harder to see how any error crept in: perhaps for some reason he was going by that name at the time of the marriage?

A 2nd g-grand uncle was recorded on the parish register of his daughter's marriage as 'James' instead of 'George'. It took a long time digging around and sending for the daughter's birth cert to establish that the entry on the parish record was wrong; there wasn't any James - but as you point out, they'd all signed the register, so why didn't they spot the error? :confused: Perhaps if the clerk just pointed to a spot on the page and said, "Sign there," they did so. I did also notice that the father of the bride on a previous entry on the same page, married the same day, was called James, so perhaps the name was in the clerk's head as he recorded the second marriage.
 
Huncamunca said:
Did the groom sign his name or make his mark?
Click to expand...

He signed his name! I don't know where the Charles comes from, except it was the name of their son born later. I was fairly certain of this being right because of the dad being a packing case maker, which seems relatively unusual. So this is a really strange thing
 
Would anyone be able to find them in 1891 under any names to see if he was Charles at that point? I have them in 1901 with the right names, after the amendment was made
 
annabel said:
He signed his name! I don't know where the Charles comes from, except it was the name of their son born later. I was fairly certain of this being right because of the dad being a packing case maker, which seems relatively unusual. So this is a really strange thing
Click to expand...

If he signed himself Charles, that is rather odd. :confused:
 
I have at times found in an older Vicar (etc) errors are made. Lot
s on their minds & possibly a nervous Groom or Bride forgets or misnames Fathers name (if he knew it or cert.) especially if he was deceased. One of my lot went from Edward to Edwin frequently, another named his elder brother instead of his Father.
I also read of(while searching) a Lass who applied for & was granted a name change in Baptism register in her adult years. Way back on another forum.
 
annabel said:
Would anyone be able to find them in 1891 under any names to see if he was Charles at that point? I have them in 1901 with the right names, after the amendment was made
Click to expand...

Are they the James and Rosina 'Tricker' living in two rooms at 15 Staff St, Hoxton (RG 12/247, f.125, p.30)?

He's a hawker ('coster' added in another hand), aged 23 and born St Luke's, London; she's 20 and born Dalston. They have a boarder, Ernest Mitchell.
 
Thank you, that seems like them. James was married as a seller in the street, and baptised children as a costermonger. No clues as to Charles, but I think I can be certain the marriage is otherwise right
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top