Author Topic: Second pair of eyes on baptism please  (Read 419 times)

Offline Stanwix England

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,126
  • Hopeless scatterbrain
    • View Profile
Second pair of eyes on baptism please
« on: Sunday 11 April 21 23:17 BST (UK) »
Hi everyone,

I'm looking for a second pair of eyes to look at this and confirm if my suspicions are correct.

I've been trying to find the baptism of an ancestor, John Willingham for a while, but the details I found for the baptism didn't make sense. Up until today, I think I'd only ever seen a transcribed record, not the original because of the pay wall.

However, having looked at it, I think that transcription is wrong and that's what has been confusing me.

Basically, I know that John Willingham was born in Ottringham, Yorkshire, sometime around 1800.

The only person I can find going by that name is noted in transcriptions across various sites as being baptised on 24th August (or sometimes it says 9th) 1800. Father John Willingham, mother Francis Willingham. Although in some transcriptions Francis's name is omitted.

I couldn't make sense of this because the only John Willingham (the elder) I could find was married to a Sarah Capes and having children with her around the time he supposedly had a child with Francis. Which is not impossible I suppose but it seemed unlikely.

I couldn't find any evidence of a marriage between a Francis and a John Willingham that would fit the dates.

Today I've found the original image and I think that it actually says

"John Ill son of Francis Willingham August 24"

I am assuming this means John is the illegitimate son of a Francis Willingham. I don't think there is a father named John, unless 'Ill' stands for something else.

Supporting evidence for this is that there are two female Francis Willinghams who get married in Ottringham in 1800 and 1801 respectively, so there were at least two women of child bearing age of that name in that area at the time.

Anyway, I would just be very grateful if someone else can look at this and see if they agree about what it says. Thank you.
;D Doing my best, but frequently wrong ;D
:-* My thanks to everyone who helps me, you are all marvellous :-*

Offline Bookbox

  • RootsChat Marquessate
  • *******
  • Posts: 7,896
  • Census information Crown Copyright, from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
    • View Profile
Re: Second pair of eyes on baptism please
« Reply #1 on: Sunday 11 April 21 23:30 BST (UK) »
Today I've found the original image and I think that it actually says

"John Ill son of Francis Willingham August 24"

Looking at the full page of the register to compare the way other entries are arranged, I would agree in principle with your reading.

The child is John, he was illegitimate, and the mother’s name is written Franciss (long s + short s). Ill or ill is used for illegitimate elsewhere on the page.

Offline Stanwix England

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,126
  • Hopeless scatterbrain
    • View Profile
Re: Second pair of eyes on baptism please
« Reply #2 on: Sunday 11 April 21 23:32 BST (UK) »
Thank you, I appreciate that.
;D Doing my best, but frequently wrong ;D
:-* My thanks to everyone who helps me, you are all marvellous :-*

Offline Bee

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,914
    • View Profile
Re: Second pair of eyes on baptism please
« Reply #3 on: Sunday 11 April 21 23:37 BST (UK) »
The clip you posted is from the original parish register.

The Bishop's register has John ill (I read that as illegitimate) son of Frances Willingham bapt 24/8/1800. 

Interesting that the entry immediately above is for John son of John Williingham bapt 24/8/1800

Dinsdale, Ellis, Gee, Goldsmith,Green,Hawks,Holmes,  Lacey, Longhorn, Pickersgill, Quantrill,Tuthill, Tuttle & Walker,  in E & W Yorks, Lincs, Norfolk & Suffolk. Census information is Crown Copyright from www.nationalarchives.gov.uk


Offline Stanwix England

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,126
  • Hopeless scatterbrain
    • View Profile
Re: Second pair of eyes on baptism please
« Reply #4 on: Monday 12 April 21 00:37 BST (UK) »
Thank you for pointing that out. I hadn't noticed that.

That complicates matters a bit as I've got no way of knowing which is my John. I think one of the John's must die as a child or youngish, maybe that will offer me some clarity.

I think that John the elder and Francis are from the same family, so I'm at least in the right area!

I can imagine that they might take their sons to be baptised on the same day, especially poor Francis. It can't have been easy to have an illegitimate child in 1800. I know it was more common than is popularly understood, but I'm just reading a book about that era and it includes extracts from a Vicars diary and he is horrible to women who have illegitimate children.
;D Doing my best, but frequently wrong ;D
:-* My thanks to everyone who helps me, you are all marvellous :-*

Offline Stanwix England

  • RootsChat Aristocrat
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,126
  • Hopeless scatterbrain
    • View Profile
Re: Second pair of eyes on baptism please
« Reply #5 on: Monday 12 April 21 01:14 BST (UK) »
Update, sadly I've managed to find a death record for the illegitimate John. He died in 1801, death is recorded under his mothers name. He was only 1.

I'm really grateful for your help, this has enabled me to figure out what was going wrong in my tree!
;D Doing my best, but frequently wrong ;D
:-* My thanks to everyone who helps me, you are all marvellous :-*