RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: erica236 on Tuesday 07 August 18 16:27 BST (UK)
-
Can anyone decipher this occupation on a baptism record please. I know the person was actually a bricklayer so am not sure what this says!
Also, I am confused! There were actually three baptisms for this child (Thomas Greaves). One on 2nd August 1863, Leeds St Peter, birth given as 4th June 1863. Father Bricklayer.
A second on the same day at Leeds St. Saviour with the unreadable occupation - no birth date.
A third on 26th May 1863, Leeds St Saviour with a P at the side (private baptism?) Father Bricklayer. so this was actually before the birth date according to the St Peter baptism.
All three give the same address and parents but why have three seperate baptisms?
Was it possible to have a baptism before the birth if it was unlikely that the child would survive or could it have just been a mistaken birth entry?
Thank you for your help,
Heather.
-
overlooker
-
I have confusingly found three baptisms for the same child - Thomas Greaves born in 1863 to William and Jane Ann Greaves, Elam Street, Leeds. Father's occupation bricklayer.
The first was on 26th May 1863, Leeds St Saviour with a P at the side (private baptism?)
The second was on 2nd August 1863, Leeds St Peter. The birth date was shown as 4th June 1863 which was after the date of the first baptism.
The third was on the same day (2nd August) but at Leeds St. Saviour. Father's occupation was given as overlooker, rather than bricklayer, and no birth date was given but the address and parents were the same. The same curate performed both the baptisms at St. Saviour's.
The birth index gives his birth as April/May/June.
Even if the birth date given by St. Peter's is incorrect, why would a child have three baptisms?
Thank you for your help,
Heather.
-
Thank you,
Would he have "overlooked" the building work if he was a bricklayer?
I have reposted the rest of this post in the common room in the hope of making sense of the baptisms.
Heather.
-
For background info only
Marriages Sept 1862
Benson Jane Ann Leeds 9b 353
Greaves William Leeds 9b 353
Thomas Greaves was born June qtr 1863 Leeds mmn Benson
-
I agree with Shaun that the occupation is Overlooker.
However I have never heard of a private baptism BEFORE a child was born. Usually a very sickly child, not expected to survive was baptised very quickly after birth, at home -- but then, if they survived they were accepted into the church later.
I notice that there is a whole batch of Private baptisms entered with the one for Thomas Greaves --- maybe the minister had simply collected them all together and inserted them in the Register all at the same time -- maybe?
As regards the birth date -- do you have the actual birth certificate? That is the only way I think you will know whether the birth date shown in the register was incorrect.
Just why there were 2 separate church baptisms, I don't know unless one church was a chapel of ease for the other - and they were entered in both (doesn't explain the different dates though).
Possibly the parents changed their place of worship and wanted the child baptised in their new church.
-
You need the birth certificate to see if the June birth date is correct or an error
I suspect St. Peter was the mother church and St. Saviour a Chapelry, double entries would not be unusual if that is the case.
Amendment.
Google reveals St. Saviour is a Chapelry.
-
1st baptism on 26th May marked P was a private baptism. It was probably carried out at home. Likely reason would be fear that baby might not live long.
The two August baptism entries were probably 2 records for a later baptism in church, if you're certain it was the same child. This baptism would likely be a conditional baptism, i.e. in case of any doubts about 1st one in May. There would have been godparents and extra bits to ceremony not used at the emergency baptism. One of the churches would have been the parish church, the other a church in the same parish. The curate or clerk would send copies of register entries to the parish church. Look into the history of the 2 churches to find out which was the parish church.
Were they Church of England?
Reasons for discrepancy in d.o.b. might be that a) exact date had been forgotten so they made one up/mis-calculated; or b) birth date had been registered as 4th June so parents decided to stick to that date.
-
Duplicate thread
topics merged
-
I and someone else have answered on the other thread.
Would it be an idea to merge both threads to avoid duplication?
-
My first thought was two infants, the first of whom died just before the second one died, but gro website suggests only one.
Next thought was late registration - I think parents had to pay more or were fined if a birth wasn't registered within a certain period of time, so birth date on cert might be later than the actual event. Happened with my grandfather, the whole family knew when his birthday was but birth cert said a couple of weeks later.
But you are looking at baps.
I wonder if parents had sickly child bap privately within hours/days of birth but by the time they got round to doing it "properly" they'd lost track of when the child was actually born. They probably didn't keep a diary or have a kitchen calendar for reference even if they could read.
The birth reg was Q2 (well within limit if born late May or June) so I can't see they'd have deliberately given a later birth date by the time the child was bap in church. I think a mistake.
Have you seen actual PR in all three cases? Sometimes BTs tell a slightly different story. Poor lighting, scratchy pen, transcription errors aren't anything new!
Jane :-)
-
Next thought was late registration - I think parents had to pay more or were fined if a birth wasn't registered within a certain period of time, so birth date on cert might be later than the actual event. Happened with my grandfather, the whole family knew when his birthday was but birth cert said a couple of weeks later.
But you are looking at baps.
I wonder if parents had sickly child bap privately within hours/days of birth but by the time they got round to doing it "properly" they'd lost track of when the child was actually born. They probably didn't keep a diary or have a kitchen calendar for reference even if they could read.
The birth reg was Q2 (well within limit if born late May or June) so I can't see they'd have deliberately given a later birth date by the time the child was bap in church. I think a mistake.
Have you seen actual PR in all three cases? Sometimes BTs tell a slightly different story. Poor lighting, scratchy pen, transcription errors aren't anything new!
Jane :-)
These are the same opinions as I was about to post on the other thread.
-
St Peter's is the parish church.
-
Overlooker as occupation may have been a mistake. Have you looked at other baptisms on same pages of both registers to see if another child's father was an overlooker or a bricklayer? They may have been mixed up and wrong occupations entered.
Whoever was writing up register may have been transcribing someone else's handwriting and mistook bricklayer for overlooker.
-
Thanks Jen, I've replied on the other thread.
-
Overlooker was a term commonly used in the textile industry. I have an overlooker ancestor. Calling a bricklayer an overlooker would be confusing. I think a bricklayer would always be called a bricklayer. If he was a foreman bricklayer he was still a bricklayer. Exception might be if a bricklayer with his own business became so successful and employed so many other bricklayers and allied trades that he never had to lay his hands on a brick again. One of my stonemasons was calling himself a contractor around this time, when bricks were taking over from stone.
-
St Saviours was founded by members of the Oxford Movement, sometimes termed as "Tractarianism".
The Movement was the start of modern Anglo-Catholicism.
This might explain the necessity for a baptism in a "standard" Anglican church, in addition to the Anglo-Catholic baptism?
-
I have posted on the other thread re St. Saviours being an Anglo-Catholic church, founded by The Oxford Movement.
Being essentially a sect with the Anglican community, maybe a second "standard" baptism was considered necessary?
-
St Saviours was founded by members of the Oxford Movement, sometimes termed as "Tractarianism".
The Movement was the start of modern Anglo-Catholicism.
This might explain the necessity for a baptism in a "standard" Anglican church, in addition to the Anglo-Catholic baptism?
Interesting.
It was same curate though.
(This is a duplicate thread. I can't keep up.)
-
This is all really interesting, lots of food for thought, but still confusing!
If the two baptisms were actually the same why two different occupations given?
If the private baptism was at home would it still be registered under the church?
I will send for a birth certificate which should at least give me the correct birth date.
Sorry about the two postings - does anyone know how I can merge them?
Thank you,
Heather.
-
I have two 'Ralph' baby ancestors who were baptised at the same Church - late 1800s. Unfortunately, the first one had an accidental death and there was an inquest. This explains why there were two of same named child in my case. I think my 2 x Grt Grandmother was determined to name one of her son's after her blacksmith Father who was called Ralph Marshall.
-
I have just merged the two topics for you, please only post once to avoid confusion.
Regards
Sarah
-
To answer one of your questions on the other thread.
Private baptisms at home or elsewhere are recorded in the parish records as normal. You often find what appears to be another later baptism in the same records, this is usually after another ceremony when the child is received into the church.
-
To answer one of your questions on the other thread.
Private baptisms at home or elsewhere are recorded in the parish records as normal. You often find what appears to be another later baptism in the same records, this is usually after another ceremony when the child is received into the church.
A few years ago, I discussed the subject of Christenings and Baptisms with a C of E cleric, when attending a family Christening.
She told me that there are 2 parts to a "usual" Christening - the Christening (i.e. the naming of the child) and the Baptism (the receiving of the child into the Church).
Occasionally the 2 parts are performed separately - think of adult baptisms ;D
I had to ask, as my own daughters have never been christened :D
-
So, probably, Thomas was baptised quickly at home after the birth but he survived so was christened again by the same curate in St Saviours a few weeks later. Then he must have been baptised in the family's usual church of St Peter on the same day.
Birth date and occupation possibly incorrectly recorded.
Thank you again for all your helpful replies.
Heather.
-
It would have been only one baptism in St. Saviour, it is not unusual to find an event that took place in a Chapelry to be record in both the Chapelry and the mother Church. I have events that are recorded in St. George, they are also recorded in the Mother Church St. Leonard, but they only took place in St. George.
-
I could not find any record of St Saviour being a chapelry of St Peter?
St Saviour was founded by The Oxford Movement as a separate church and, because of their Anglo-Catholic beliefs, had many run-ins with the Bishop ;D
-
I went by this.
https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/Leeds_St_Peter,_Yorkshire_Genealogy
-
I went by this.
https://www.familysearch.org/wiki/en/Leeds_St_Peter,_Yorkshire_Genealogy
Nice one! ;D
I went by the History of St Saviour's:
https://archive.org/details/a633625900granuoft
or
https://archive.org/stream/a633625900granuoft/a633625900granuoft_djvu.txt
-
I thought that the ceremony was performed by a different curate at St Peter's but looking at the record again I found the attached words at the side. It looks like it might say Off ... which might imply the record had been taken from St Saviours?
H.
-
I thought that the ceremony was performed by a different curate at St Peter's but looking at the record again I found the attached words at the side. It looks like it might say Off ... which might imply the record had been taken from St Saviours?
H.
The snip shows R L Page Off(iciating) Min(ister).
-
So it was two different ministers at two different churches on the same day?
I seem to be going round in circles! ???
-
I don't see the problem? :-\
St. Saviour, as I said was an English Catholic church - part of the Anglican community, but they believed in such things as Confession, etc.
St. Peter was a standard Anglican church - or "normal".
The 2 baptism rites would have been different?
Maybe the father came from the one tradition, and the mother from the other?
-
I agree with KGarrad --- I have seen a baptism of a child at both a C of E Church and a Non-Conformist Chapel. The parents clearly compromised in that case and possibly did in the case of your ancestor.
I really wouldn't be concerned about it -- it's much better than not finding a baptism at all --- which is the usual frustration for searchers.
-
So it was two different ministers at two different churches on the same day?
I seem to be going round in circles! ???
I'm used to this scenario with my English R.C. ancestors in 18th & early 19th centuries, for baptisms and weddings. They seemed to do a lot of scurrying between chapel and parish church to comply with law and their own religion. Baptisms of children of one of these couples fills a page on Ancestry because each child appears to have had 2 baptisms. In their case only baptisms at the R.C. chapel were actually baptisms, the apparent C. of E. ones were just entries in the register for official purposes. Earlier generations of these families may have had 2 baptisms for compliance sake.
A famous incident in my ancestors' parish took place later in 19thC when the Catholic tenants "kidnapped" the corpse of their Catholic squire and took him to the Catholic chapel for a funeral, against the wishes of his Anglican widow. They returned him to his Hall in time for the official funeral cortege to take him to the parish church for C.of E. funeral and interment in the family vault.
I agree with Pennines, 2 ceremonies and double records are much better than one. I've found them to be an advantage because each register entry had information the other didn't. I was able to build a better picture of the families.
A couple of points to bear in mind for Thomas are high infant mortality and burials in churchyards. Parents may still have been afraid of losing him. Did St. Peter and St. Saviour's churches have graveyards?
Another famous burial case was that of a woman who died as a result of childbirth along with her baby. Family naturally wanted them buried together in the churchyard. The curate refused to bury the baby because it hadn't been baptised. A court case and much newspaper coverage ensued.
-
The problem is that there are no Catholics in my family. Jane Ann was baptised in St. Denis, York, and was married in St George, Leeds - both C of E churches.
Thomas lived to the age of 29, and was buried in an Anglican cemetery, as was his mother. Of his two younger siblings, one was baptised in St Saviour and one in St Peter, so maybe just wherever was available at the time.
I think I will just have to let it go!
I was initially trying to find Thomas's father, William Greaves when I came across the baptisms. He seems to have disappeared after 1874 when the youngst son was born and although his mother, Jane Ann, called herself "widow" in 1881, she was in the workhouse as "married" in 1891 and buried in 1897 as "wife of William" I can't find a death for William during this time. Thomas's sister, Eliza Ann Greaves was my grandad's mother, so quite close, which is why I want to get my facts straight.
But that is a different story that I will now have to get back to researching!
-
Please note - I did not mention Roman Catholics ;D
St Saviours was an Anglo-Catholic church (aka English Catholic).
This was a sect within the Church of England.
So, they were an Anglican Church, but believed in certain elements of a Catholic denomination (such as confession).
They were a maverick section of the Church of England.
Read the links I gave previously, or search for "The Oxford Movement" and "Tractarionism".
-
The problem is that there are no Catholics in my family.
Following this thread with interest, can I just back up what KG says - the 'Anglo-Catholic' church was and still is a part and parcel of the Anglican Church. It's what we would call 'High Church'.
An example of an Anglo Catholic Church in London https://www.allsaintsmargaretstreet.org.uk/
They were a maverick section of the Church of England.
My husband was brought up in a very 'High' Anglican Church. I will tell him it was 'maverick' and wait for him to start dancing with rage ;D ;D
-
I was initially trying to find Thomas's father, William Greaves when I came across the baptisms. He seems to have disappeared after 1874 when the youngst son was born and although his mother, Jane Ann, called herself "widow" in 1881, she was in the workhouse as "married" in 1891 and buried in 1897 as "wife of William" I can't find a death for William during this time.
What's William's dob and his last known address?
-
William Greaves born 13th Feb. 1841, Leeds.
Last known address in 1874: 22 Gresham Street, Leeds - bricklayer
1881 address for wife and children; 10 Cromwell Street, Leeds.
Thank you.