Why does marraige record show both parties having the same last name?
My relative, Emma Klinger (21) married Wilhelm Klinger (28) in 1906. https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HT-6SLW-911?i=219&cc=2466357&personaUrl=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AQKJ4-KN5S I find this very odd. Is this because the Klinger name was very common in Poland or because they were related but not that closely?
If that isn't strange enough, Emma L. Klinger (17) married William E. Klinger (17) in 1898. https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:33SQ-G58D-Q5TD?cc=1589502&personaUrl=%2Fark%3A%2F61903%2F1%3A1%3AVFMH-TGM
Is there some long lost rules about marrying your relative that has changed from todays rules? Is this common or rare in genealogy records?
Best Answer
-
I had a look at surname distribution maps of Germany and Poland, and there's several thousand Klingers in what is now Germany, and several hundred in Poland. (see: https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/Surname_Distribution_Maps) So it's not a particularly common name, and I'd say these couples are more likely than not to be related.
It is estimated that more than 10% of marriages are between 1st or 2nd cousins. While some cultures disapprove (e.g. 24 US States ban 1st cousin marriage and in medieval times Catholics were in theory prohibited from marrying their 7th cousin), most permit it and it is legal in most western countries. In my own family tree, there's one 1st cousin marriage and several second cousin marriages. In rural areas, especially for religious minorities, the number of potential spouses was small and marrying a cousin was often unavoidable.
0
Answers
-
I noticed that on the first couple in the above post it is stated that they are not related although I know that they may not have been aware or they just wanted to avoid ridicule.
0