From: richard@ex-parrot.com   
      
   On 16/11/2019 03:36, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:   
      
   > Yes, I've got one of those (probably-fictitious first spouse with same   
   > surname as mother's maiden name). [Unless it's incest, but (a) would she   
   > admit that even to the registrar (b) I can't find a George in her near   
   > family.]   
      
   I've never thought either of these scenarios were particular likely.  If   
   the surname was fictional, surely they would have chosen a different   
   name of the bride / mother.  There are plenty of common surnames to   
   choose from.  And if it was incest, as you say, they're unlikely to   
   admit it unless it was already so widely known in the area that they   
   couldn't not.   
      
   The two most likely scenarios seem to me to be that the registrar got   
   confused and mistakenly wrote the same surname down twice, despite   
   having been told the correct names.  If the people involved were not   
   comfortably literate, they may not have noticed, or felt comfortable   
   challenging the mistake if they had noticed it.   
      
   The second possibility is that the names are correct, and the couple are   
   either only distantly related or not related at all.  Bear in mind that   
   since Tudor times, even first cousin marriages have been broadly   
   acceptable – certainly they wouldn't be considered incestuous.  By the   
   time you get to third cousins, there's a good chance the couple wouldn't   
   have know of the relationship themselves, so they were effectively   
   unrelated people.   
      
   Richard   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)