Mary Tyler (Week 10 - MFMMM)

[Merry]

Name - "official" name and what they were known as

Mary Tyler

Date and place of birth

3rd June 1794 at North Newington, Oxfordshire

Names of parents

Joseph Tyler and Ann, née Walford

Date and place of baptism - if applicable

Not baptised - family were Quakers

Details of each of his or her marriages - if any

10th Dec 1819 at Banbury Quaker Meeting House, Banbury, Oxfordshire to Job Smith (farmer and grocer)

Occupation(s) - if any

None

Addresses where they lived (including county if in UK) - and please list which censuses you have or haven't found him/her on (if s/he lived in census times!).

1820 onwards at Witney, Oxfordshire
1841 census: High Street, Witney, Oxfordshire

Date, place and cause of death

26th May 1841 at High Street, Witney, Oxfordshire of consumption

Date and place of burial.

Date? at the Friends' Burial Ground, Witney, Oxfordshire

Details of will / administration of their estate - if applicable

None

Memorial inscription - if any

MARY SMITH
DIED 5TH MONTH 26 1841
AGED 46 YEARS

Thought you might like to see a Quaker marriage cert - This one has 40 witnesses! (everyone who was at the wedding) All the people who signed in the righthand column are relatives of the bride and groom:

Merry isn't that a wonderful document. Was it recognised legally?

[lozaras]

"I take my friend Job Smith to be my husband promising, through divine assistance, to be unto him a loving and faithful wife..."

What a wonderful thing to have!

I love the wording above, and that it looks as if they decided on what sort of wife/husband they promised to be by filling in the gaps in the pre-prepared text.

[Merry]

lol Sarah! Your comment made me thinlk of other possible alternative wordings! I must look at the other ones I have to see if they read differently - I think I only have four in total though.

Julie, the version above was what was given to the married couple and this doc is not the legally binding version. The legal version held in the Quaker official records would have been similar (the general wording varied over the years) but significantly shorter and without all the witnesses (just the recognised two when that was what the law required) and , yes, Quaker marriages are legally binding, though I'm not 100% sure when the Government actually made that law - presumably some time after the Quakers started performing their ceremonies which was in the 1650s (The Society of Friends was formed 1653), but the earliest Quaker marriage in my tree is just before 1700. Quakers were given the right to conduct their own marriages alongside the C of E because they proved they kept accurate records of their membership and events.


Since civil registration began in 1837 in Eng/Wales if you buy I copy of a Quaker marriage cert from the reg office/GRO it will have the same format as any other marriage cert and that is the legally binding document, but even today the bride and groom will be given a non-legal document to keep with all the witnesses signed (the legal copy being the standard style) with similar wording to the above certificate.

[Merry]

Regarding Mary Tyler - when I was going through a box of stuff I'd inherited years ago and had looked at many times before, I found a lock of her hair which I'd not come acrss before (In an envelope with her name on it, I think written by her dau, my gg-grandmother). As she died in 1841 I think this is my oldest hairy relic lol She had pretty hair - between strawberry blonde and a light red auburn. You don't find that info on census records unfortunately!!

[ElizabethHerts]

Originally Posted by Merry

Regarding Mary Tyler - when I was going through a box of stuff I'd inherited years ago and had looked at many times before, I found a lock of her hair which I'd not come acrss before (In an envelope with her name on it, I think written by her dau, my gg-grandmother). As she died in 1841 I think this is my oldest hairy relic lol She had pretty hair - between strawberry blonde and a light red auburn. You don't find that info on census records unfortunately!!

Merry, do you think the lock of hair could have faded over the years (after death)?

OH's mother, now 94, had red hair, quite auburn. As she got older, rather than going grey it went paler to a strawberry blonde colour.

[Merry]

Merry, do you think the lock of hair could have faded over the years (after death)?

I don't know really. It has been in the dark all the time. I also have the hair of her daughter and son-in-law. One of them appears to be absolutely white and the other black. I am not 100% certain which is which (they are together in an envelope marked 'Mama and Papa' written by their daughter), but the point being one is virtually black, so that has probably held it's colour. Maybe it depends on the individuals hair? My mum had her very long hair cut off when she was 21. She still has the offcut in a box in her dressing table drawer (she is now 86) and it is dark auburn, but her hair was black until she was around 60, so that cut hair has faded.

I have to say I do find all this hair rather macabre! I presume each lock was cut after death, but I don't know that for sure. I also have a little stub of baby hair cut from a cousin on the day of his birth in the 1860s. My family are definitely hoarders! lol

[Sabrina]

My family are definitely hoarders!

They certainly were! Rather nice though!

I have to admit to being a hoarder too - I have even kept my kids baby teeth! The ones that didn't go down the sink or lost in the street between cracks in the paving slabs!

[Merry]

Originally Posted by Sabrina

I have to admit to being a hoarder too - I have even kept my kids baby teeth! The ones that didn't go down the sink or lost in the street between cracks in the paving slabs!

Oh, I've done that! lol My mum used to have mine, but I've not seen them for years - do you think she has chucked them?

[Sabrina]

do you think she has chucked them?

Probably just sent them to the real tooth fairy for safe keeping!