On 11 Sep 2011 at 14:09, Jean Wood wrote: > Adding to Ruth's comments, there are many variations in family habits > as far as baptism is concerned: > > I have one line where the new baby was regularly baptised within 10 > days-4 weeks after birth, but in one family of 4, the first baby > followed this pattern. The second child was born at the same time as > there were a couple of family deaths and a marrige, so he did not get > baptised until the third was born and those two were baptised > together. > > We cannot find the baptism for the 4th child but in 1818, 14 months > after her birth, there is a special handwritten birth certificate for > the baby wih an unrelated man (possibly a doctor) and her grandmother > who were witnesses as "present at her birth!" I have never seen > another like this from that time. > > In another family, five of the family were all baptised on the same > day 15 January 1828. My 2x greatgrandmother was 3; the oldest child > was 12 and the youngest 5 weeks - all had their birth dates written in > the margin.> Multiple baptisms of several children on the same day were extremely common. I have one (in Gloucestershire, not Nottinghamshire) where two brothers each baptised two children - the four youngsters being first cousins - at the same independent chapel on the same day in 1833. Their later given ages in censuses suggest they were of differing ages up to about five. I've also got another one in Yorkshire where several were baptised together in the 1820s but it was apparent from later censuses that one, my gt-gt-grandfather, was about 10 when baptism took place. So many newcomers to family history seem to have remarkably fixed ideas about baptism. They should shed them quickly, otherwise they will end up being totally misled! There were, and are, absolutely no hard and fast rules about christening. Yes, some families were rigid about baptising children within a few weeks of birth, others were much less so and had several done as a "job lot". I've even seen messages from beginners who seem to think that because three children were baptised together at the same church on the same day, then they must have been triplets!!! Another point to bear in mind is that some families were vague about their religion and swapped in and out of the Anglican church and Nonconformist chapels quite regularly. They might have baptised some of their children in the CofE and others at a Methodist chapel, or some other Nonconformist denomination. And what about Baptists who didn't believe in infant baptism and baptised children when they were old enough to understand it? Moreover, there were couples who never had their children baptised at all. It wasn't compulsory! As Jean says, there were many variations in baptism and there were no hard and fast rules. You must look at ALL possibilities. I am always advising beginners and newcomers to genealogy to cast off their mindset of today and examine the facts about their ancestors from the documented records. Just because you think your family have always been CofE, Roman Catholics, Nonconformists, or whatever, it does NOT mean that they always were! They may well have changed from what they are today. I recall one classic message in which someone said "My ancestors were always Salvation Army"! And before the Salvation Army was founded? She had no answer to that because she hadn't thought of it! We can only ever examine the evidence it, interpret it as best we can and remind ourselves that we cannot know what was going on in the minds and lives of our ancestors. Best always to keep an open mind. -- Roy Stockdill Genealogical researcher, writer & lecturer Newbies' Guide to Genealogy & Family History: www.genuki.org.uk/gs/Newbie.html "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about." OSCAR WILDE