Dutch-Colonies-L Archives

Archiver > Dutch-Colonies > 2002-12 > 1039031710


From:
Subject: Re: [D-Col] Re: NA/NY RDC marriage records and practices
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 14:55:10 EST


In a message dated 12/4/2002 12:10:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
writes:

> Later, beginning in the fall of 1673 the date of the first banns is on the
> left
> and the marriage date is on the right. Still later, the marriages with
> banns
> are intermixed with marriages with licenses. I've only recently noticed
> that
> these two types are interleaved on a batch basis. That is, there will be a
>
> batch with banns and then a batch with licenses. So, the individual
> marriages
> are not strictly in order of date.
>

Howard,
Excellent synthesis of previous discussions here; thank you. Your points are
all very well made. I have a couple of comments (when do I not?), though.

I believe the references to "married with a license" (getrouwt met een
licentie) refers not so much to where the ceremony was performed or by whom,
as the use of the license as a substitute for the traditional "uitroepinge"
or proclamation of the banns in church.


> As to marriages being perfomed in different places, etc. -- sometimes in
> the above book, it says that the marriage was performed elsewhere.
> (They were supposed to post the banns in the places where they each
> lived.) There is at least one special situation where the documentation
> is not immediately obvious as to what happened where. That is the
> case of the marriages perfomed by Selyns at Stuyvesant's Bowery
> when Selyns was minister at Brooklyn (his first tour in NN). Some
> people from Harlem came down and worshipped at the Bowery
> (closer than going all the way to NA) as they did not have a minister
> at Harlem. Some marriages of these people had the banns recorded
> in the NA book, the marriage performed at the Bowery and the
> marriage itself recorded in the Brooklyn marriage records by
> Selyns after he got back home. I wrote about this in:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/ifetch2?/u1/textindices/D/Dutch-Colonies+2000+35458147585+F
>
> One example is the marriage of Jan Montagne [Jr] with banns recorded in NA
> on 11 May 1663 and marriage recorded in the Brooklyn records on
> 10 June 1663. This was probably performed at the Bowery.
>

One sees somewhat the same kind of thing with the Flatbush records: quite a
number of events from the other Dutch villages were recorded in the Flatbush
RDC books, presumably because the dominee was riding a circuit.


>
> As to the time from the first banns to the marriage --
> I don't have a citation, but I'm pretty sure the banns had to be announced
> 3 times. Also, it is my impression that young couples on their first
> marriage
> (and where we have both dates) many times married that same Sunday as
> the 3rd banns. So, for example the first banns might be the 7th, the
> second
> the 14th, the third on the 21st and the marriage also on the 21st.
>
>
I believe that is correct. The three proclamations of banns was a
long-standing Christian tradition (i.e., not just Reformed, not just
Protestant). The proclamations were usually done on Sundays since that was
when there was a substantial audience. And once the third proclamation had
been made without immediate objection, the wedding could proceed in
accordance with local custom and the wishes of the couple.


I don't remember the time involved, but I've seen regulations requiring them
to
>
> marry within a certain time.
>
>

I seem to recall reading something in the colonial records, I think, to the
effect that the pastor had to crack down on this at some point, as there were
apparently too many young men willing to talk the talk, but not ready to walk
the walk. That led to breaches of promise, and hard feelings all around.

Thanks again, Howard, for fearlessly leaping into the fray.

Ted Snediker

This thread: