To think very few women would marry their deceased sister’s widower?

[Albless]

My friend was always aware that his grandfather had been married twice, and that the first wife died. His grandmother was the second wife, and his DF was the only child of that second marriage. There were some children from the first marriage.

Some family history research has revealed that his grandfather’s first and second wives were sisters. Two years after the first wife died, the widower married his sister-in-law. The law allowing this to happen was only passed in 1907, about 20 years earlier.

My friend is not particularly interested in family history. But I was really taken aback when he said marrying a dead wife’s sister is probably more common now than it used to be!

I completely disagree - I think very few women would have any interest at all in marrying their brother-in-law if their sister died.

He thinks I’m wrong. I said I’d put it to MN.

AIBU?

For those that asked why it makes me feel sick, actually I see my brother in laws etc as family, along the lines of my own brother. We are a close family, and it would just feel very icky to even consider being intimate with them - really such a horrible thought! In the same way that sleeping with other people, that kind of transference of bodily fluids, intimacy etc is not something I would want to share at any point in my life family!

It is akin to something that crosses just too many lines for me.

I have direct experience of it, as when my BIL died my SIL became quite obsessed with being with my dh, to the point it made him uncomfortable. He is the spitting image of his brother, so it was not surprising, but it was deeply unnerving for all of us. She seemed to think they were one and the same at one point, and dh would pick up where her dh left off (financially, emotionally etc) I have no doubt it was the shock of bereavement but it made dh want distance and fast. It was like she was drawn to him all of the time as a way to still connect with her lost dh.

I find the whole thing weird, and would never consider it myself!!

I have this in my family tree - my great grandmother.
In the days when women relied on men for money or would otherwise be destitute it was a necessity to marry again. There were not many opportunities to meet other men, particularly once they had children. An extended family member would have love for her children and her bereavement in common.

My MIL's mother died when she and her siblings were aged under 10. The 3 children went to live with their mother's sister and her family. The sister was married already, but this was so that the father could continue to go to work. The youngest was only 2 years old.

I can understand that sisters would have a physical resemblance to their deceased sister and also it's a ready made solution to having someone who already loves the children looking after them. I wouldn't fancy it, but really it's quite a practical solution to the problem of children losing their mother. It also gives the previously unmarried sister a home. Obviously these were greater considerations in the past.

Christ, I’d not want to marry my bil and I’d put good money on him not wanting to marry me. Plus my sil would take issue with it..🤣

I can see how decades ago it would be more common, smaller social circles, smaller distances travelled etc, two single people, keeping the family together.

But I find it strange if I’m honest.

Well my friends dad is busy shacking up her aunt (mums sis) since her dm died. It's very distressing for her.

whether or not it all started before the death or after is yet to be known!

A girl I went to school went on to marry her dead sisters fiancé. Found it very odd.

I've two instances in my tree of this. Times were different then.
One was with children the other without. I put it down to childcare and the other that the families were close and people tended to marry those they knew very well or extended family, neighbours etc

Not quite the same but the wife of one of my cousins went out with his younger brother before she decided she preferred the older one and married him.

So they married in 1927? So shortly after WW1? Maybe there were less men available to marry?

This happened with my paternal grandma. Her husband died in WW1, she then married his brother (and had my dad)

Yes to the less men available

I can think of a very high profile case in Scotland nearly 25 years where it happened - woman married her widowed brother-in-law less than 2 years after her sister's (tragic) death.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it. The former in-law that one marries may presumably share some of the characteristics that attracted the widow(er) to their late spouse in the first place?

I don't think I could, but then it depends on your BIL doesn't it?

there were so many norms in the past, that folk would just baulk at now.

When I was doing the ancestry research thing, I realised that it was very common for children to be named after their deceased siblings. I find this pretty unsettling, because these days it would be seen as somehow trying to 'replace' a lost child, but back then it was a mark of respect for the dead child and it was just the done thing.

I'd be prepared to live with my BIL & raise children jointly if necessary (God forbid), but no sex or intimacy. I'm pretty sure this is what happened with my great grandfather.

Sometime after my dad died his brother suggested to my mum that if his wife died, they would marry. If his shoe had been off she would certainly have spat in it!

I think both my BILs would be happier with me, I'm much more fun than their wives

The worst I saw was a man who married his step daughter after his wife died. She had been two years old when her mother had married him.

My aunty on my dad's side married her husband's brother when he died and she had 2 children to bring up. By all accounts her new husband (the only uncle I knew from that side of the family) absolutely worshipped the ground she walked on . Such a lovely man.

Another 'aunty/uncle' (next door neighbours from beind little kids) got married after he rescued her and her children from her abusive husband/his brother. He literally walked in whilst the brother was at work, grabbed her and the kids and took them away with absolutely nothing packed and moved up from down south with them to get away from him. They were roughly mid-70's when we were in single figures so again had to be during the 50's-ish.

Yes, this used to be common I believe. My great grandfather married his sister in law when my great grandmother passed away.

It happened in my family. I found out at the funeral for my great-aunt. She moved in to look after her nieces & nephews after her sister died. Then married the widower.

In my family there was a dsis who died in childbirth during WW2 leaving 2 dcs., another dsis looked after them while their df was abroad. They didn't know their df after the war so he married the sister. They had a long and happy marriage.

My dad's dad married his wife's sister a few years after his wife died.

I've got three instances of this in my family tree - wife dying, then widower marrying her sister. I suspect it had a lot to do with someone close to the children stepping in to raise them. I also have a widowed sister-in-law and brother-in-law marrying, which caused huge disapproval and family fall-out.

One of my family tree examples resulted in 36 children across the two sisters!