General Chat

OH YEH


ANCESTRY PLEASE
BAPTISUM 1861
BORN 1869..................................??????????????/

I've had this Dizzi,could have been a child baptised who then died and the next child was given same name?

xx

Good answer, Rose! ;)

Very common.

Dizzi, try looking for a death of the child baptised in 1861, at FreeBMD?


Another tip that somebody told me a while ago: if a baptism is "private", it usually means that the child wasn't expected to survive, so was baptised at home as soon as possible. Just in case that helps.

Dizzi if you want me to have a look at it on Ancestry that's no problem.

ITS A MISS TRANSCRIBED
BAPTISUM RECORD FOR 1861 BUT SAYS BORN 1869
ON THE LINK
A WHOLE PAGE FOR 1869 IS DOWN AS 1861
ON ONE CENSUS MUM LOUISA IS LONNI
BUT QUITE CLEAR LOUISA
I KNOW ITS A HARD JOB BUT SO FRUSTRATING,
WHEN SEARCHING

beware some ar baptised twice ~ some as adults into a different church!

My gr-grfather was baptised in a batch with his youngest siblings. An older brother was baptised as an adult shortly before dying of tuberculosis. (It might have been one of those second baptisms, in the CofE.)

The thing here is baptisms supposedly 8 years *before* birth. ;)

Ancestry's (and others') mistranscriptions of difficult to read things is to some extent understandable. Systemic and stupid mistakes like this, not so much so.

There's one census year when Ancestry has every record in Limehouse showing as LINCHOUSE. That isn't like mistranscribing somebody's place of birth. That's the actual "civil parish" name for everybody there.

Here we are -- 20,567 people in 1881 living in "Linchouse". (Ah, but 11,715 in Limehouse. Depended on the district maybe.) Appalling. I did once point this out to them ...

the 1911 Census full of holes too but is it all down to transcription?

Hi ladies,I have been looking at Baptism records all afternoon, and come across at least two completely different instances of babies baptised and buried on the same day.

Would this be a mistake,or do they baptise dead babies??

I don't know about baptising dead babies but I found a note about midwives. My favourite book "Ancestral Trails" by Mark Herber:

Nurses: "... Since midwives might have to baptise a child, they were licensed by the church from medieval times until the 18th century ... "

It's possible then that the child was born early morning, baptised by the midwife (and recorded in the parish register by the priest) and buried the same day. I have heard that newborn/stillbirth children were sometimes put into the next coffin for the next burial and not necessarily given their own coffin so maybe something like that had happened ...

Jill

Parish registers can be entered incorrectly.

One I've seen also gave the dob before the bap. The vicar probably entered the dob in the wrong column (he wasn't the usual Vicar)

If someone is transcribing, they *have* to put what they see, even if it must be wrong.

just a note about baptism following on from Jill re midwives,

"in extremis, i.e., when the one being baptized is in immediate danger of death. Then anyone may baptize, provided, in the view of the Eastern Orthodox Church, the person who does the baptizing is a member of that Church, or, in the view of the Catholic Church, that the person, even if not baptized, intends to do what the Church does in administering the rite. "