I have seen more than once on this site that in order to have a marriage con-validated, and/ or to receive an annulment, one is required to show proof of their previous civil marriage. I also noted that in one post that for a con-validation of marriage, two witnesses who can attest to previous marriages or lack thereof must also be present. My wife and I were required to have neither, only our Baptismal certificates and two witnesses who knew nothing about our past. Does this mean that the con-validation of our marriage is not valid in the eyes of the Church, or am I being scrupulous?
There’s a difference between what is necessary for a valid sacrament and what is necessary for proper research.
All that’s required for a valid marriage are the intention for the essentials of marriage and being free to marry.
To avoid a situation where someone really isn’t free to marry, the Church asks the priest to go through certain steps to attain a level of certainty. While the priest risks performing an invalid ritual due to someone’s previous marriage, it would not affect someone who was indeed free to enter into marriage.
The reason why they should ask for proof of the civil marriage is that no marriage is supposed to take place that is not also in accordance with civil law.
The validation of your marriage was perfectly valid as long as you two were indeed free to marry each other (i.e. no other previous marriages).