Date
1 - 9 of 9
UK Marriage Authorisation Interpretation Questions and Translation Request #unitedkingdom
|
Aaron Slotnik
Hello,
I've just received a UK marriage authorisation that I am seeking assistance interpreting from others who have more experience with these documents. A few questions:
If anyone else has additional thoughts on the Hebrew translations or would like to review the document, I've posted it to ViewMate at the following address: https://www.jewishgen.org/viewmate/responselist.asp?key=91214 Thanks in advance for your assistance. Regards, Aaron Slotnik Chicago, IL USA
|
|
|
|
Hi Aaron,
In my experience the names on the Marriage Authorisation are the names that appear on the Ketubah.
This form is issued by the Chief Rabbi’s office as a result of a meeting between the bride and groom and the Chief Rabbi’s registrar. In this instance Aydim - Witness were produced to attest to the status of both parties to the marriage that they are Halachically Jewish. This process of attending the Chief Rabbi’s office is still being undertaken today for those marriages performed under the auspices of the United Synagogue.
This form is then sent to the Rabbi performing the marriage. Certainly in the late 19th early 20th century when the majority of Jews in the country were not members of shuls, this may have been the only record that the Rabbi had of the appropriate details prior to him completing the Ketubah. That said, that does not mean he may not have spotted an error and changed the details in the Ketubah prior to the wedding ceremony.
The special remark is telling us that this couple had a civil ceremony first at a Register Office (RO) on January 7th, 1902 and were having a chupah on February 16, 1902 at what was the East London (EL) Synagogue at 52 Rectory Square, Stepney Green, London, E1.
This link will take you to a history of the East London Synagogue -
I was trying to identify a United Synagogue shul that existed in London in 1902 beginning with the initials RO. It was the special remark that told me that RO meant register office. This would tell the officiating Rabbi, who would double up as the civil registrar for marriages at his shul, that this couple at least did not need to sign the marriage register after the chupah.
The listing of the the names of the bridegroom’s brothers is all to do with yibbum. Yibbum obligates the brothers of a deceased husband who dies without children to marry the surviving sister-in-law so as to have a child with her. Such a child would be treated as a child of the deceased brother. Many brothers-in-law either were already married or did not wish to fulfil this obligation. In such situations the widow would release her brother-in-law through the ceremony of chalitza. What the significance of the brother being present is, I do not know. It may be an issue of Halacha (Jewish law) and someone better versed than me can answer that.
I hope this helps.
Richard Gilbert
Bushey Heath, Hertfordshire
|
|
|
|
Derek Stavrou
Hello Aaron
Thanks for raising the subject of US Marriage Authorisations, particularly since it prompted Richard Gilbert's very helpful reply. May I take advantage of this opportunity to raise a supplementary question about US marriage authorisations? My great-uncle Lewis LEVY married Dorothy NEWTON (otherwise NATHAN) at Whitechapel Register Office in 1912; his younger brother Alfred (my maternal grandfather) married Rachel MOSS at Hackney Register Office in 1913. Both couples had children in the following years. And both couples went on to have religious marriages at the East London Synagogue: Lewis in May 1917, five years after their civil marriage, and Alfred in November 1915, two years after the civil ceremony. My question is why would these long-married couples apply for religious authorisations so long after their civil marriages? Could it be connected to the conscription legislation in Britain during the Great War? (Both brothers were subsequently conscripted). With thanks for any ideas anyone may have Derek Stavrou Kfar Sava, Israel
|
|
|
|
Michael Sharp
Even in the 1950s not all synagogues in the UK were licensed to perform marriages - hence the need to attend a registry office for a civil ceremony either before or after the chuppah
-- Michael Sharp Manchester UK michael.sharp@...
|
|
|
|
David Harrison
On this question of Authorization. Not only do we have our Ketubah, but I have my Mother's and her Mother's (My grandmother). I would also note that I have my Grandfather's Apprentice Indentures which specify that he should not work on The Sabbath, but
could on Sundays and he had to be allowed off on the specific Major Festivals, but that is another story.
David Harrison
Birmingham, England
From: main@... <main@...> on behalf of Richard Gilbert via groups.jewishgen.org <richvic=btinternet.com@...>
Sent: 22 February 2021 18:19 To: main@... <main@...> Subject: [JewishGen.org] UK Marriage Authorisation Interpretation Questions and Translation Request #unitedkingdom Hi Aaron,
In my experience the names on the Marriage Authorisation are the names that appear on the Ketubah.
This form is issued by the Chief Rabbi’s office as a result of a meeting between the bride and groom and the Chief Rabbi’s registrar. In this instance Aydim - Witness were produced to attest to the status of both parties to the marriage that they are
Halachically Jewish. This process of attending the Chief Rabbi’s office is still being undertaken today for those marriages performed under the auspices of the United Synagogue.
This form is then sent to the Rabbi performing the marriage. Certainly in the late 19th early 20th century when the majority of Jews in the country were not members of shuls, this may have been the only record that the Rabbi had of the appropriate details
prior to him completing the Ketubah. That said, that does not mean he may not have spotted an error and changed the details in the Ketubah prior to the wedding ceremony.
The special remark is telling us that this couple had a civil ceremony first at a Register Office (RO) on January 7th, 1902 and were having a chupah on February 16, 1902 at what was the East London (EL) Synagogue at 52 Rectory Square, Stepney Green, London,
E1.
This link will take you to a history of the East London Synagogue -
I was trying to identify a United Synagogue shul that existed in London in 1902 beginning with the initials RO. It was the special remark that told me that RO meant register office. This would tell the officiating Rabbi, who would double up as the civil
registrar for marriages at his shul, that this couple at least did not need to sign the marriage register after the chupah.
The listing of the the names of the bridegroom’s brothers is all to do with yibbum. Yibbum obligates the brothers of a deceased husband who dies without children to marry the surviving sister-in-law so as to have a child with her. Such a child would
be treated as a child of the deceased brother. Many brothers-in-law either were already married or did not wish to fulfil this obligation. In such situations the widow would release her brother-in-law through the ceremony of chalitza. What the significance
of the brother being present is, I do not know. It may be an issue of Halacha (Jewish law) and someone better versed than me can answer that.
I hope this helps.
Richard Gilbert
Bushey Heath, Hertfordshire
|
|
|
|
David Harrison
Might there have been a need for a conversion course before the Synagogue wedding? I married my first wife in a Registry Office, some time later, she started a conversion course but needed to have a significant break on becoming pregnant until much later,
then after meeting the Beth Din we then had our Chuppah. Conversion Courses have always taken at least a year to allow the people to attend the full cycle of festival services with the cycle of cooking and cleaning etc It was more usual to have the conversion
before the wedding, which (according to my reading of such things, could 150 years ago require staying away from the potential partner in another kosher home for the year.
David Harrison
Birmingham, England
From: main@... <main@...> on behalf of Michael Sharp <michael.sharp@...>
Sent: 23 February 2021 17:01 To: main@... <main@...> Subject: Re: [JewishGen.org] UK Marriage Authorisation Interpretation Questions and Translation Request #unitedkingdom Even in the 1950s not all synagogues in the UK were licensed to perform marriages - hence the need to attend a registry office for a civil ceremony either before or after the chuppah
-- Michael Sharp Manchester UK michael.sharp@...
|
|
|
|
Sally Bruckheimer
"Thanks for raising the subject of US Marriage Authorisations". I don't think you are talking about US Marriage Authorizations - there is no such thing. In the US, each state has its own rules, and we have Marriages Licenses, not Authorizations.
Sally Bruckheimer Princeton, NJ
|
|
|
|
Sent from Mail for Windows 10 It seems that somewhere there has been a mix-up between US (United States) and US (United Synagogue). The latter does issue Authorisations for Marriage in United Kingdom.
Regards Martyn Woolf London NW3
|
|
|
|
David Harrison
This is a question of crossed lines. I think that Authorizations relate to Orthodox Jewish Weddings in Britain under their Beth Din and are not a part of Civil Marriages. Usually existing membership of a Synagogue is required and that may have needed to have
been proved with the Ketubah for the parent of the person being married. But for a non-member the Ketubah would have been needed by officers of the Chief Rabbi if it were possible or then maybe a meeting with questions on the reality of the Jewish ancestry
of the person . Certainly, pre-WW1 the United Synagogue only had one Rabbi (as the Chief) all other people who now would be Rabbis were Reverends and that person might only give the D'vah Torah (or sermon) whilst the Chozen led the majority of the service
as is still often the style in many places.
David Harrison
Birmingham, England
From: main@... <main@...> on behalf of Sally Bruckheimer via groups.jewishgen.org <sallybruc=yahoo.com@...>
Sent: 23 February 2021 20:53 To: main@... <main@...> Subject: Re: [JewishGen.org] UK Marriage Authorisation Interpretation Questions and Translation Request #unitedkingdom "Thanks for raising the subject of US Marriage Authorisations". I don't think you are talking about US Marriage Authorizations - there is no such thing. In the US, each state has its own rules, and we have Marriages Licenses, not Authorizations.
Sally Bruckheimer Princeton, NJ
|
|
|