Marriage in the Middle of the Last Century

published in The Faris Newsletter, Issue #32 November 2002, p. 23   

At the end of the fourth decade of the 20th century, marriages were mainly arranged by matchmaking. The role of the matchmaker was undertaken by a female relative, a neighbor, or even a stranger. The matchmaker was responsible for bringing together the two families concerned, informing them about the “situation,” meaning the financial requirements. At a festival, celebration, or a relative’s house, the parents or close relatives would meet. If they agreed to the terms, the groom and the bride would go to this meeting: there they would finalize the arrangement.

Engagement usually followed shortly after. On the designated Sunday, after church, the betrothal ceremony took place. There was a feast with meat, plenty of wine, and the celebration included dancing, many jokes, and well-wishes.

Then, the wedding preparations followed. The bride and groom’s clothes had to be bought, sweets prepared, and rings purchased. The economic conditions of the time did not allow for the purchase of other jewelry as gifts for the bride. In the meantime, they took care of adding anything missing from the dowry, such as pillows, wool blankets, quilts, and embroidery or woven cloths.

When everything was ready on both the bride’s and groom’s sides, the wedding date was set. Weddings always took place on Sundays, never on Saturdays, as Sunday was dedicated to God, and the couple was not allowed to be together on Saturday night.

Παραδοσική γαμίλια πομπή στην Αταλάντη – Traditional wedding procession in Atalanti
Photo credit: el.wikipedia, accessed May 26, 2024

The relatives, the “psiki” (the celebration procession) accompanied the bride and the groom to the church on decorated horses. However, many people stayed at home and did not attend the ceremony, to help prepare for the feast that would follow. The meat for the feast was prepared from Saturday. Usually, the wedding table included meat with potatoes in the oven or pot roasted. The meat was roasted in large pans. The pasta was boiled in tin-plated pots. Once the pasta was cooked and sprinkled with cheese, it was placed on platters from which everyone ate in turn with the same fork. The celebration included dancing and singing many songs a cappella, as the economic situation of the time did not allow for hiring musicians. They danced syrtos, tsamikos, as well as the Charleston and foxtrot. The celebration was filled with jokes and well-wishes for the couple. In the meantime, a man would serve wine from a bottle, and everyone drank from the same glass. The celebration lasted until dawn. There were also many sweets, usually kourabiedes but also koulouria, baked in the oven and decorated. The bride would throw the koulouria into the air for the unmarried women to catch. It was believed that whoever caught a koulouri would marry soon.

After the party, the newlyweds went to the groom’s house or stayed a few days at a hotel in Sparta or sometimes in Tripoli. Then they went to the in-laws’ house, where relatives gathered to verify the bride’s “honor.” They cheered and fired shots in joy.

If the bride was not a virgin, she was either sent away or additional dowry was demanded if the groom agreed.

A decade later, the improvement in economic conditions led to a differentiation, but not in the essence, of marriage customs. Once the betrothal was fixed, the dowry agreement was sometimes written at the bride’s house and paid with her money. At the engagement, the bride received not only the ring but also additional jewelry, if possible. The groom and the bride were accompanied by professional musicians, who were hired by both sides, and they remained for the celebration, as noted by the couple Vasiliki and Yiannis Poulakos from Mousga*. The groom’s procession had 98 horses. Guests no longer brought only animals to the newlyweds but also household items – glassware, plates, glasses.

The better economic situation, however, did not eliminate superstitions and preserved beautiful and interesting wedding customs of previous decades. The bride had to go to the fountain to fetch water, accompanied by a small child whose both parents were alive and who had to throw silver coins to the fountain. This custom is probably related to fertility and childbearing. The bride went to the church, having the church key and a black-handled knife at her waist to protect her from spells. When she would go to the groom’s house, she had to lie down with a small boy to have healthy children. At the entrance door, she had to eat honey given by her mother-in-law for a sweet life. Also, they poured honey on the door three times, and the couple entered the house covered with a handkerchief.

A song that was sung when the bride was about to be get married:

“Come away, bride, come away from your parents’
Where are you going, little bride, to your in-laws
Stand like a cypress, root like a tree
Bloom like an apple tree, bear fruit,
Make nine sons and one daughter.”

Testimonies:
Eugenia Konidi, 87 years old. She finished elementary school and 2 classes of Greek school. She married on 22/10/1939.
Vasiliki Ioan. Poulakou. Born on 20/7/1922. She finished elementary school. She married on 21/8/1949.

The Dowry Agreement

In the name of the Father and the Son and Saint Prokopios Amen. I, Georgios Ath. Rigakos from Gorani, give my daughter for marriage, Vasiliki Georg. Rigakos to Ioannis Pan. Poulakos from Mousga, endowing her with the following items:

1400 okas of oil (one thousand four hundred) – {Clothing Items}.
1) 15 heavy clothes.2) 3 kilims
3) 2 woolen wraps
4) 2 woolen blankets
5) 1 oilcloth
6) 3 quilts
7) 1 duvet
8) 1 mattress.

* Their wedding was the last in the area where guests arrived riding horses and mules.


I (Carol Kostakos Petranek) am honored to receive permission from the Katsoulakos family to translate and share articles from The Faris. Translation verification and corrections have been made by GreekAncestry.net. This is the fifteenth article of the ongoing series. Previous articles can be viewed here.

Two Marriages, or One?

What are the chances that there are two men named Ioannis Konstantinos Laliotis living in Magoula, both of whom married women named Georgitsa Giannakopooulos (father Paraskevas) living in Theologos? Although this seems improbable, the documents should answer the question. But in this case, it wasn’t that easy.

Let’s dig in.

In the Metropolis of Sparta Marriage Index Books, we find that a marriage license was issued on June 28,1898: Entry #237, Ioannis K. Laliotis of Magoula, Sparta; his first marriage (A) & Georgitsa Par. N. Giannakopoulos of Theologos, Sellasia; her first marriage (A).

Metropolis of Sparta Marriage Index Book 1894-1899; Page: 150; Year:1898, Entries: 234-246
Available on MyHeritage at this link.

There is additional documentation in the form of the priest’s letter to the bishop, requesting permission for the marriage. In this document, we see the groom was age 22 and the bride was age 19.

1898 Priest’s letter requesting permission for marriage; same URL as above

In books where both the license date and the marriage date are given, there is usually just a one or two day difference between the date the license was issued and the date of the marriage. In this case, there is no marriage date given. Possible reasons: (1) early books do not have a column for a marriage date to be written; (2) the bishop’s letter agreeing to the marriage, and the priest’s response giving the date of the ceremony have not survived; (3) the marriage never took place. In this last scenario, it is quite unusual for a license to be issued and a marriage not to occur.

Let’s look at the second set of documents. In the Metropolis of Sparta Marriage Index Books, we find that a marriage license was issued on April 20, 1900; Entry #105, Ioannis Laliotis of Magoula, Sparta, (no father given); his first marriage (A) & Georgitsa Par. Giannakopoulou of Theologos, Sellasia; her first marriage (A).

Metropolis of Sparta, Marriage Index Book: Sparta, Oct. 1899-Sept. 1907;  Year: 1900, Entries: 85-108
Available on MyHeritage at this link.

There is additional documentation in the form of the priest’s letter to the bishop, requesting permission for the marriage. In this document, we see the groom was age 25 and the bride was age 22. HOWEVER, there is an indexing error in this record on MyHeritage: Giannakopoulou was transcribed as Giannopoulou.

Priest’s letter dated April 16, 1900, requesting permission for marriage; same URL as above

Looking at the “bare bones” information in these documents, we can easily discern that:

  • The 1898 index book entry gives Ioannis’ father’s initial (K), and a fuller description of Georgitsa’s father as Par. N. The 1900 index book entry does not give Ioannis’ father’s initial or the initial “N” for Georgitsa’s father. And, Giannakopoulou was transcribed incorrectly as Giannopoulou. Without their father’s names or initials, and with the transcription error, these could easily be two different couples.
  • The 1898 index book entry shows this is the first marriage for both the groom and the bride.
  • The 1898 priest’s letter gives the groom’s age as 22 and the bride’s age as 19.
  • The 1900 index book entry shows this is the first marriage for both the groom and the bride.
  • The 1900 priest’s letter gives the groom’s age as 25 and the bride’s age as 22.

Thus far, it appears that these are, indeed, two different couples. BUT, my suspicions were raised because the difference in ages corresponds to the difference in the two license dates; and I know the demographics of the families in these villages.

  • I have the Town Registers for both villages. In Magoula, there is only one Laliotis family and only one Ioannis, born 1876, who is the son of Konstantinos.
  • In Theologos, there are many Giannakopoulos families; however, there is only one Paraskevas Nikolaos Giannakopoulos and only one Georgitsa Par. N.
  • The Sparta Town Register, Family #245, recorded the family of Ioannis and Georgitsa, and provided the marriage date of April 20, 1900  in Theologos. There is no other Laliotis-Giannakopoulos family named.

So, how could there possibly be two marriages?

I believed the answer lay in the priest’s letters. I cannot read old Greek script so I asked Gregory Kontos of GreekAncestry.net to review them. He said that the the priest’s letter dated 1900 contains unusual language: “this will be the first (or the second) marriage for the couple.” That’s strange wording! Although a license was issued in 1898, that marriage did not occur. Greg gave possible scenarios such as: an issue with the dowry, or possible migration if the groom left the area temporarily, with the marriage postponed until he returned in 1900. Anything could have happened to delay the nuptials.

Analyzing this situation led me to several conclusions:

  1. A marriage license does not equate to a marriage occurring.
  2. The documents associated with the marriages are important! If you cannot read them, ask Greg at Greek Ancestry, or find someone who can decipher the handwriting.
  3. Even though I can’t read all the words in the handwritten document, I must study it anyway. When I saw the bride’s name indexed as “Giannopoulou,” I looked for the name in the document to verify the transcription. To me, it looked like “Giannakopoulou.” I was right!
  4. I must find, and correlate, any and all possible records that exist for a family. A Male Register records how many men of the same name lived in the village, and their years of birth. A Town Register provides the names of the father, mother, and children. If I have a marriage license, is the couple found in the Town Register? This depends on the timeframe of the marriage, as Town Registers were created in the mid-1950s in Sparta; however, there are many fathers and mothers born in the late 1800s that are listed.
  5. You have to know your village and its families. I knew there was only one Laliotis in Magoula, and that raised “red flags” when I found two licenses for Ioannis Konstantinos.

Expect the unexpected! That’s the challenge of research–especially in Greece.

Marriage at the Beginning of the Last Century

by Nicholas Bourazelis, Colonel (retired)
Published in The Faris Newsletter, October 2020, issue 27, page 17

No marriage was made for love, it was made through matchmaking and mediated by a woman, the well-known matchmaker.  Along with the parents of those who were to be married, the symbetheri (parents-in-law) as they were called, arranged all the details, the dowry to be given, etc. When the agreement was finally reached, it was drawn up and signed by the parties concerned. The father of the groom paid the matchmaker, and the work of the matchmaker was over.

A peasant bride, in splendid gold adorned costume, at the annual religious feast, Mandra, near Eleusis, Greece. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C.

When night fell, two or three shots used to be fired at the groom’s house. This custom was intended to inform the villagers that the match, which they had suspected, had come to a happy end. Engagement ceremonies followed in a short time without any particular formality. They simply exchanged the rings.

Finally, the wedding took place. However, since one of the betrotheds did not come from the same village, the relatives of the groom usually went to the other village to pick up the bride. A convoy of men wearing fustanellas was then formed. All the guests rode on mules and horses. In psyki, as the procession was called, they did not use donkeys. The animals’ bodies were covered with white mandani (blankets), the kilimia (woven blankets). The procession began with songs. As the first wedding song, it was customary to sing: “Let my eyes see, let my eyes see how my love is doing.” With songs, joking and cheerful conversation, they came to the bride’s village.

In front of the village church the bride-to-be and her father were waiting. When the bridegroom arrived, the prospective bride’s father would kiss him and hand over his daughter. The priest would then take the couple and bring them to the middle of the church where the ceremony would take place. During the “Isaiah dance,” the guests showered the newlyweds with rice, flower petals and confections. The atmosphere was joyful and happy. The sacrament was over and the newlyweds received the embraces of those present with the wish: May your life be lucky and happy.

The company then, with the bride on a decorated horse, was on its way back. The singing by men and women continued all the way to the groom’s house. There the bride was welcomed and the dance began, which was started by her, while everyone sang together: “My fortunate bride, may you live, may you grow old, may you live to be a hundred years old and more.” The feast continued with rich food and drinking until the early hours of the morning. That is how the marriage ended.

What happens today? Time has changed a lot. Life goes on with all the changes. This is not a concern, as long as the couple has mutual love. Otherwise, divorce follows with all the consequences. Mutual love leads to a peaceful old age.


I am honored to receive permission from the Katsoulakos family to translate and share articles from The Faris. Translation verification and corrections have been made by GreekAncestry.net. This is the third article of the ongoing series. Previous articles can be viewed here.

From Sparta to Chicago: A Case Study of Families Intertwined

by: Georgia Stryker Keilman and Carol Kostakos Petranek

Greeks, like most ethnic groups, engaged in “chain migration” upon leaving their homelands. A man or a family would follow others who left their village and settle near—or even with—them in their new country. By associating at church, work, or in Greek organizations, immigrant families would form tightly knit groups, celebrating namedays, holidays and other traditions together. An important component of these immigrant communities was to bring young couples together to form new families. Whether by formal matchmaking or simple introductions, it was ensured that the next generation was able to meet and marry compatriots.

Georgia Stryker Keilman’s immigrant grandmother, Georgia Bebetsos and her three brothers, Sam, James and Tom were all living at 355 Chicago Avenue (Source: 1920 Census). This address was located just outside of the old “Greek Delta” area of Chicago where thousands of Greek immigrants settled. While recently reviewing the record again Georgia realized that she knew of marriages between members of some of the families living in the buildings at 353 and 355 Chicago Avenue.

Families in 1920 census; color-coded to show intermarriages

Was there a previous connection between these families? 

The families were from various villages in the Sparta area and one from the Arcadia Region.

               Bebetsos – Theologos
               Magoulias – Loggastra
               Dounias – Soustiani
               Pleotis – Arcadia Region

Georgia noticed that the 1920 Census documented that all the men in these families were working in the restaurant business; 1 assistant manager of a restaurant, 4 waiters, and 1 cook.

Could that be the connection?

Georgia researched the World War I Draft Registration forms or Naturalization applications to identify where they worked in 1917.

NameHome AddressEmployer
George P. Dounias?Charles Pappas, 344 W. Chicago Ave
John Magoulias344 W. Chicago Aven/a – assume same as above
James Bebetsos744 W. Division StChas. Papas, 744 W. Division St
Thomas Bebetsos2510 Blue Island AveCharles Pappas, 2510 Blue Island Ave
George Magoulias161 Hill StreetMitchell Bros, 316 W. Division St
Angelo Pleotis859 Sedgwick CtHotel Green Mills Garden, Broadway & Lawrence

Notice that the first 4 people shown in the chart are associated with an employer named Charles Pappas. Also, they list their residence as the same address as their employment.  We are assuming that they lived in rooms above the restaurant.

For example, in the 1920 Census, Charles Pappas was living at 744 W. Division Street.  His occupation was proprietor of a restaurant.  He was living with his wife and son, two brothers who were working as waiters and two roomers who were working as a waiter and a dishwasher.  It is most likely that the restaurant was on the ground floor with apartments above.

Also note that the 344 W. Chicago Avenue address referenced in the above chart is about 1 block from the apartments at 353 and 355 W. Chicago Avenue. If the men referenced in the 1920 Census at this address were working for Charles Pappas at the 344 W. Chicago Avenue address, they could have walked to work.

 Although the 353-355 W. Chicago Ave. apartments were demolished, some buildings from that era are still standing across the street. Below is a photo which shows that many of the buildings in this area had a “store front” on the bottom floor and apartments above.  The idea that the waiters, etc. could be living above the restaurant is a reasonable conclusion.

359 West Chicago Avenue, 2022 Google map

Naturally, questions arose:
• How did these people from neighboring villages end up in the same building?
• What are the connections? Or, who instigated the connections?
• The men who lived in the same buildings worked in restaurants. How did they know each other? What was Charles Pappas’ connection to them?
• How did these couples, living in the same building, become introduced and get married?
• How did so many apartments become available at the same time to provide housing for all these people?

We can hypothesize answers based on our understanding of the Greek immigrant community:  chain migration; connections through the church and associations; matchmaking; business owners hiring fellow compatriots. But the details, which add to the richness of the human story, remain unknown. How important it is to get our family stories documented by those who know the specific facts!

In our 21st century society, it may seem like an anomaly to have this level of intertwining among unrelated people. But as we study the village records of our families, it is readily apparent that such connections were not only common, but were the very fabric of village life. Our ancestors were simply duplicating these intricate, woven relationships in their new lands.

A Signature, An Ancestor

Letter of Consent to Marriage of Giannoula P. Zarafonitis and Dimitrios Nikolaos Zacharakis, April 18, 1869 in Sklavochori (now Amykles), Lakonia, Greece

This letter granting permission for the marriage of my second great-grandparents, Giannoula Zarafonitis and Dimitrios N. Zacharakis, was signed by Giannoula’s father, Panagiotis G. Zarafonitis. By adding the “G” in his signature, Panagiotis (my third great-grandfather born 1821) provided the first initial of his father which took my lineage back one more generation to my fourth great-grandfather! In this area of Sparta and for my family, the initial “G” would most likely indicate the name of Georgios.

P. G. Zarafonitis

I am thrilled that this document –so meaningful to me–is one that I digitized with my own hands. During the summers of 2019, 2018 and 2017, I volunteered to work with Gregory Kontos of GreekAncestry.net to preserve, through the digitization process, marriage books and documents at the Metropolis of Sparta for the years 1835-1935.

It is incredibly emotional for me to see the signature of my third great-grandfather, Panagiotis, and to know that through my work, his handwriting and mark of mortality has been saved and is now viewable by his descendants. And I am especially grateful to him for choosing to include that most important initial of G.

Translation of marriage letter*:

Metropolis of Sparta and Monemvasia
Marrriage #89
The consent of the parents and other relatives of the future groom and bride, Dimitriou Zacharakis of the village, Theologos of Dimos Sellasias, and Giannoula daughter of Panagiotou Zarafonitou of the Dimos Sparta and village of Sklavochori, affirming that there is no kinship between the future couple nor any other impediment for them to join in matrimony, both for the first time, with the signature of two guarantors and two witnesses.

In Sklavochori on 18 April 1869

Signatures, left side:
Relatives of the groom:
N. Papastratis
Priest, S. Dimitropoulos
For the bride:
P. G. Zarafonitis

Signatures, right side:
Guarantors:
P. Anagnostakos
P. Iliopoulos
Witnesses:
M. Michalalopoulos
Ioannis Chatzikos

________
*Translation by Gregory Kontos, GreekAncestry.net