GENBRIT-L Archives
Archiver > GENBRIT > 2005-04 > 1112371717
From: Eve McLaughlin <>
Subject: Re: OT but currently pertinent
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 17:08:37 +0100
References: <68.528511b7.2f7c89a1@aol.com><24d22f544d%Graeme@greywall.demon.co.uk> <d2gra0$krb$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk><g9R+5VB+6HTCFwd+@varneys.demon.co.uk> <1a24cf.814d06@fmlynet.org><d2jfah$cs1$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk> <3b514kF6fp398U1@individual.net><d2jo6b$fjd$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>
In article <d2jo6b$fjd$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, Robert Burns <madbadrob@
robburns.wanadoo.co.uk> writes
>And the difference is what exactly.
not a lot in practice - the name is immaterial.
> In modern terms to have a marriage
>annulled one must not have consummated it. Henry VIII had consummated the
>marriage by having
Mary I - and quite a lot of other non surviving infants. This was his
problem - he was not very good at reproduction, even of bastards.
--
Eve McLaughlin
Author of the McLaughlin Guides for family historians
Secretary Bucks Genealogical Society
This thread:
| Re: OT but currently pertinent by Eve McLaughlin <> |