Hi Graham, Trawling through parish records, I have found many instances of multiple baptism. Earlier this evening, at my local LDSFHC, I was going through a microfilm for Eastry Parish Church, Kent. In the early 1800's there are several multiple baptisms, as many as four children at once. They all seem to follow the same pattern: the new baby being baptised along with two or three older children at the same time. One lesson to be learned from this though, is that you cannot assume a year of birth from a baptism record! Dorothy Smart, Altrincham, Cheshire. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary Varley" <m@mvarley.freeserve.co.uk> To: <ENG-EAST-YORKS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:04 PM Subject: Fw: [ERY] SPINK and HUDSON > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Graham Metcalf" <grahmetc@hotmail.com> > > > > I have discovered a connection to my family which has several unusual features, and > wonder if there is any other explanation than the obvious. ............except that > Margaret and Ann appear to have been Christened on the same day > in 1798 at North Newbald, along with another sister, Elizabeth. Also, a few years > earlier, their two brothers, Thomas and Isaac appear to have also been christened on the > same day in 1793! I wonder if the parents, William and Jane Hudson delayed their > christenings so they could have several done together?........ > > Hi, Graham, > > If the family were non-conformists (e.g. Methodists) they may not > have had their children christened in the Church soon after birth. However. If the > family fell on hard times they would probably have had to rely on poor relief to help > them out. Poor relief was doled out by the Church and it was often a requisite that > recipients had to be C. of E. and their children baptised in the C. > of E. That could account for the multi-baptisms. > > > > Mary > > > > ______________________________

Just to follow on that for those that don't know. There is a website for 'late baps' i.e. 4yr olds to adult. http://www.lifeworkpotential.com/genealogy/latebaps/ This happened to me in my research. Three at once, and I still do not know where the family had disappeared to early 1800's. Perhaps decided to save up the offspring until they returned to their home town several years later. Yvonne Leck Teesside getsmart wrote: > Hi Graham, > > Trawling through parish records, I have found many instances of multiple > baptism. Earlier this evening, at my local LDSFHC, I was going through a > microfilm for Eastry Parish Church, Kent. In the early 1800's there are > several multiple baptisms, as many as four children at once. They all seem > to follow the same pattern: the new baby being baptised along with two or > three older children at the same time. > > One lesson to be learned from this though, is that you cannot assume a year > of birth from a baptism record! > > Dorothy Smart, > > Altrincham, Cheshire. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mary Varley" <m@mvarley.freeserve.co.uk> > To: <ENG-EAST-YORKS-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:04 PM > Subject: Fw: [ERY] SPINK and HUDSON > > > >>>----- Original Message ----- >>>From: "Graham Metcalf" <grahmetc@hotmail.com> >> >>>>I have discovered a connection to my family which has several unusual >>> > features, and > >>wonder if there is any other explanation than the obvious. > > ............except that > >>Margaret and Ann appear to have been Christened on the same day >> in 1798 at North Newbald, along with another sister, Elizabeth. Also, a > > few years > >>earlier, their two brothers, Thomas and Isaac appear to have also been > > christened on the > >>same day in 1793! I wonder if the parents, William and Jane Hudson delayed > > their > >>christenings so they could have several done together?........ >> >>Hi, Graham, >> >>If the family were non-conformists (e.g. Methodists) they may not >>have had their children christened in the Church soon after birth. > > However. If the > >>family fell on hard times they would probably have had to rely on poor > > relief to help > >>them out. Poor relief was doled out by the Church and it was often a > > requisite that > >>recipients had to be C. of E. and their children baptised in the C. >>of E. That could account for the multi-baptisms. >> >>>Mary >>> >> >>______________________________ > > > > ==== ENG-EAST-YORKS Mailing List ==== > To contact the List Admin send mail to , > ENG-EAST-YORKS-admin@rootsweb.com > > ============================== > To join Ancestry.com and access our 1.2 billion online genealogy records, go to: > http://www.ancestry.com/rd/redir.asp?targetid=571&sourceid=1237 > >

Dorothy wrote:> > One lesson to be learned from this though, is that you cannot assume a year > > of birth from a baptism record! However, it is also true that sometimes records lists birthdates as baptisms - I had a whole list of family members for whom the records listed the dates as baptisms, when in fact it was their birthdates! Only getting the birth certficates may clear this up!! Kerry in rainy Oregon

Hello, Apparently this was done for economy, with the clergyman charging less per child for a "job lot". It may also be worth remembering that parents with baptistic beliefs (that is, those who, like Baptists, believe baptism to be a sign which should follow personal belief) would not have had their babies baptised. It is sometimes said that such people believe in "adult baptism", but that is not true; rather, they hold to believers' baptism, which means there is no set minimum age, except inasmuch as the "candidate" has to be old enough to express (and hopefully understand) belief in Jesus Christ. As with multiple baptisms, records of believers' baptism are no guide as to date of birth. Incidentally, going back to the matter of economy, I think I am right in saying that sometimes people chose to be married on Christmas Day because some clergymen would waive their fees on that day. David Lamb (Paignton, Devon, UK) ----- Original Message ----- From: "getsmart" <getsmart@beeb.net> To: <ENG-EAST-YORKS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 10:23 PM Subject: [ERY] Multiple baptisms. > Hi Graham, > > Trawling through parish records, I have found many instances of multiple > baptism. Earlier this evening, at my local LDSFHC, I was going through a > microfilm for Eastry Parish Church, Kent. In the early 1800's there are > several multiple baptisms, as many as four children at once. They all seem > to follow the same pattern: the new baby being baptised along with two or > three older children at the same time. > > One lesson to be learned from this though, is that you cannot assume a year > of birth from a baptism record! > > Dorothy Smart, > > Altrincham, Cheshire. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mary Varley" <m@mvarley.freeserve.co.uk> > To: <ENG-EAST-YORKS-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:04 PM > Subject: Fw: [ERY] SPINK and HUDSON > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Graham Metcalf" <grahmetc@hotmail.com> > > > > > > I have discovered a connection to my family which has several unusual > features, and > > wonder if there is any other explanation than the obvious. > ............except that > > Margaret and Ann appear to have been Christened on the same day > > in 1798 at North Newbald, along with another sister, Elizabeth. Also, a > few years > > earlier, their two brothers, Thomas and Isaac appear to have also been > christened on the > > same day in 1793! I wonder if the parents, William and Jane Hudson delayed > their > > christenings so they could have several done together?........ > > > > Hi, Graham, > > > > If the family were non-conformists (e.g. Methodists) they may not > > have had their children christened in the Church soon after birth. > However. If the > > family fell on hard times they would probably have had to rely on poor > relief to help > > them out. Poor relief was doled out by the Church and it was often a > requisite that > > recipients had to be C. of E. and their children baptised in the C. > > of E. That could account for the multi-baptisms. > > > > > > Mary > > > > > > > ______________________________ > > ______________________________

True. . . .Nor that they refer to multiple births!! I always have this problem with a fellow family historian, who insists that "twins run in the family". The mother of the so-called "twins" had 6 illegitimate children and 4 of those were baptised in two lots, so he assumes they were twins. I think she just wasn't very eager to get to the church to show off her most recent "mistakes"! I think the first one baptised was actually closer to 4 years old at the time of baptism, if his age at death is anything to go by (as it probably is not, but there's another can of worms. . .). Diane ----- Original Message ----- From: "getsmart" <getsmart@beeb.net> To: <ENG-EAST-YORKS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Thursday, February 13, 2003 10:23 PM Subject: [ERY] Multiple baptisms. > Hi Graham, > > Trawling through parish records, I have found many instances of multiple > baptism. Earlier this evening, at my local LDSFHC, I was going through a > microfilm for Eastry Parish Church, Kent. In the early 1800's there are > several multiple baptisms, as many as four children at once. They all seem > to follow the same pattern: the new baby being baptised along with two or > three older children at the same time. > > One lesson to be learned from this though, is that you cannot assume a year > of birth from a baptism record! > > Dorothy Smart, > > Altrincham, Cheshire. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mary Varley" <m@mvarley.freeserve.co.uk> > To: <ENG-EAST-YORKS-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:04 PM > Subject: Fw: [ERY] SPINK and HUDSON > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Graham Metcalf" <grahmetc@hotmail.com> > > > > > > I have discovered a connection to my family which has several unusual > features, and > > wonder if there is any other explanation than the obvious. > ............except that > > Margaret and Ann appear to have been Christened on the same day > > in 1798 at North Newbald, along with another sister, Elizabeth. Also, a > few years > > earlier, their two brothers, Thomas and Isaac appear to have also been > christened on the > > same day in 1793! I wonder if the parents, William and Jane Hudson delayed > their > > christenings so they could have several done together?........ > > > > Hi, Graham, > > > > If the family were non-conformists (e.g. Methodists) they may not > > have had their children christened in the Church soon after birth. > However. If the > > family fell on hard times they would probably have had to rely on poor > relief to help > > them out. Poor relief was doled out by the Church and it was often a > requisite that > > recipients had to be C. of E. and their children baptised in the C. > > of E. That could account for the multi-baptisms. > > > > > > Mary > > > > > > > ______________________________ > > ______________________________