Baptism of Wife

[Sussex Maid]

Hello

Information I have
Marriage 1697 - Slaugham parish 'both of Nuthurst'
Baptism of first 6 children - Nuthurst parish
Baptism of Wife 1709 - Keymer parish
Baptism of next 5 children - Hartfield parish

Is anyone able to offer a possible reason why the wife would find it necessary to be baptised?
Would a declaration of baptism be required before marriage?

I accept that families moved around for work (tracing this family has taken me to four different record offices!), but being baptised as such a time in her life has confused me.

Any thoughts appreciated
Thank you

[Olde Crone Holden]

Probably to do with settlement rights.

If she could not prove where she was originally baptised (or wasn't, or didn't know) then baptism would ensure her settlement right in the parish of either her husband or her father.

I would have a look to see if any settlement/removal orders still exist for this family.

OC

[Sussex Maid]

OC
Thank you for your reply, will check out if there are any settlement orders

[Phoenix]

Surely marriage would supercede any previous settlement for a wife? As the baptism is in a different parish, it sounds more as if there was an officious clergyman, or she was ill and suddenly worried that she had never been baptised.

[Christine in Herts]

Anything useful on this site?

Sussex Record Society - Home Page

I presume you've already made use of the SFHG, if not joined it?
Sussex Family History Group Home Page

Christine

[Sussex Maid]

Phoenix - had wondered whether there might have been an illness, the date of her baptism is 5 months after the baptism of the sixth child.
Christine - thank you for the website, have not come across that one - will give it a try

[Little Nell]

I'm still puzzled as to why my gt gt gt grandmother, Hannah Crossley Matthews, was baptised on the same day as her son, my gt gt grandfather Emmets Matthews.

She doesn't appear to have been baptised before, but she had already married and had one child before she was baptised.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Phoenix

A wife could settle where her husband settled. If he cleared off, or died, she would be sent back to her own parish and her children would be sent back to wherever they were baptised.

But I agree, sounds like an officious clergyman!

OC

[Phoenix]

Look what I've found!

Women Writers and the Early Modern ... - Google Book Search

My understanding has always been that a woman took her husband's place of settlement. Which has been the case for the periods I've looked at as very few of the early documents survive. But the original legislation had not said that. According to this book, it was only in 1697 that marriage and dependents started to be considered. Interesting reading.