Protocol for possible Wife

dhj · Post by **dhj** » 06 Mar 2012 17:00

I have a few records where there is conflicting evidence relating to somebodys' wife. One source says it is 'x' another says' it is 'y'. Until I discover which one is correct (which might be never) I want to record the conflict. Can anybody tell what is the normal protocol for doing this, please?

ID:5991

Post by **tatewise** » 06 Mar 2012 21:58

I am not sure there is accepted protocol - it is largely a personal choice.

Primarily, it depends on whether you want to have one wife record with two conflicting identities, or two wife records each with one identity.

In the former case the one wife would probably have two Names, and there would be two Marriage Events, each supported by there own Source Citations.

In the latter case the husband would probably appear to be bigamous with two wives and two Marriage Events, again each with supporting Source Citations.
This approach would make it easier to remove the mistaken wife, if that ever gets proven.

gerrynuk · Post by **gerrynuk** » 06 Mar 2012 22:35

tatewise said:
I am not sure there is accepted protocol - it is largely a personal choice.

I agree. My inclination would be to create an unnamed spouse ('Unknown /Spouse of .../') and to add a local note that the spouse's name is the subject of dispute (or further research, or whatever) and could be either of ... or ...

That way, if and when the spouse's name is determined then it would just be a question of changing her/his Name and deleting (or amending) the local note. Any children would still be correctly linked.

You don't give any details but is there a possibility that the individual married both females in the space of a few months, perhaps - either because the first wife died very soon after the first marriage or there was a second, bigamous marriage?

dhj · Post by **dhj** » 07 Mar 2012 08:31

Many thanks for the responses. It is complicated by the fact that there is probably no real prospect of finding out the truth as this is back in the 11th century. I am (allegedly) related to a lady who has a generally recognised father but there is doubt about her mother, with two possibles named. It's not clear who is correct so I wanted to mark the discrepancy in some way.

Thanks again

Family Historian User Group