Hi Nivard, Thanks very much for your reply! Originally I had George’s birth as 1874 from Ancestry myself, but got confused when I found the bapt record for him in 1878 with the same birth date as Wesley of 26 Nov 1877. It’s got a little more confusing as a very kind lister (who I will be replying to offlist shortly) has sent me some very interesting burials, including: James Poole, 1878, aged 10 months. That adds up nicely! George Poole, 1879, aged 9. (??? 9? That gives a birth year of approx 1870, if it should have been 9 months he’d have been too young. Different George?) Wesley Poole, 1879, aged 1. Again, this adds up nicely even though his bapt record doesn’t appear on Ancestry! And, just a couple of years prior to the 2nd marriage I have for Wesley, his wife’s burial Sarah Poole, 1897, aged 50. With the birth and baptism record I have for Sarah, this again adds up very nicely! So, the baptism of James, should it actually read the 26 not 20 as per Geo and Wesley? I can understand a 6 and 0 being confused more so than a 1 and 7, 3 and 5, or 3 and 8, which I’ve seen a fair bit of in the past. But why bapt him in a different church 4 days before Geo and Wesley? Does ancestry for some reason have George’s birth year as 1874 in error? It’s easy done, seen it before on an ancestry’s London marriage record with my Nixey’s that you may or may not recall, oddly enough, in the 1870s. Could James, George and Wesley have been triplets? If the burial of George should be 9mo rather than 9yr, it would make more sense, even if his age was a little out. Again I’ve seen this on a family burial in Sussex where the age of 19mo was transcribed as 19yr. It’s so easilly done. Very many thanks for your input Nivard, it’s appreciated as always! Best wishes, Jon