I have the same situation with one of my ancestors, baptised in 1749 and 1770...it's definitely the same man. I think it's possible that the first baptism was a private one, if he was a sickly baby and the second was a public baptism, so perhaps this is an explanation for your man, although that does seem an incredible lapse of time. Could they be related but not the same individual? Incidentally, the sickly baby lived to 104! HTH Kim, Hull, East Yorkshire > > I have found a strange situation with one of my ancestors. I have a > baptism for St Mary's church in Twickenham for > > Thomas Ashley GARLICK baptized May 6, 1756 son of Thomas and Jane GARLICK > Twickenham, then I have just found another baptizim for Thomas Ashley > GARLICK baptized Jan 14, 1825 son of Thomas and Jane GARLICK St George's > Bloomsbury. > > I do know that Thomas and Jane GARLICK (nee) Shuckburgh, did have a son > Thomas Ashley in Twickenham and then the family moved to Bloomsbury were > two more daughters were born. > > Does anyone know how this is possible.