Family Historian User Group

I have a couple who have two marriage events, one in Ireland in 1846 and one in South Shields in 1865. They are definitely the same people in both marriages and you can track the family with children around the UK in the 1851 to 1891 census so its is definitely them.

The reason for the marriages is of no relevance (I have my thoughts on this) to how one records the marriages. So do you create a completely new marriage as if it were another spouse in the main record window. This would then give two spouses named Mary. Or do you just enter another marriage event in the facts window.

Grateful for some guidance on this.

I would add a second marriage between the same two people in the Facts tab of the Property box. When you 'Add marriage' you get prompted to record a marriage to an existing spouse or to a new one -- if you choose an existing spouse you don't end up with the spouse duplicated.

Do include a note about why you think they married twice so that if you (or anybody else) goes What? when you review the data later, you can understand why the couple has 2 marriage events.

Thanks Helen,

That is how I've done it, but just wanted to know what other people would do. Of course I will record the reasons etc.

In contrast, consider Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton who married, divorced, then married & divorced again.
That would be better represented with two Family couplings each with one Marriage and one Divorce.
Plus of course their other marriages & divorces, etc.

Yes Mike and can see where your coming from, but it is slightly different to the situation I have. In the Burton/Taylor situation they had two distinct marriage events that start and end so yes show as two different family couplings.

In the case I have it is just one family coupling but they had two ceremonies all being they were 20 years apart but during that time they were living together as a family. I think it might be to do with the Husband being married before and then marrying his new wife as a bigamist. Once his first wife passed he then had the Second ceremony in the registry office to legalise the situation especially for the kids.

Yes, that is why I said "In contrast" so other readers can see the two perspectives.
The solution of two Marriages in one Family record is far better in your case.

Pedant that I am, one could argue that first ‘marriage’ wasn’t a marriage at all, as it was null and void, being as groom was already married

Oh Mike - you have at least saved me from the temptation of being a pedant!
Also slightly tongue in cheek - can you ever have, when being pedantic, a Marriage event followed by an Annulment event? Given that the definition of Annulment is that the Marriage was never "real" in the first place?

Slightly less pedantically - it's issues like this that make me say, in my own head, that the Marriage event is the act of going through a marriage ceremony - whether valid or not. (I say all this as someone whose gg-gf married his gg-gm bigamously, changing his name to match and leaving me with no knowledge of his birth details!)

I agree with Adrian. As long as it is noted that a marriage ceremony is bigamous or null & void or whatever, then the purpose of recording it is to provide evidence that the couple and anyone else attending the ceremony did exist at that time & place and probably had some sort of relationship even if not a legal marriage.