Twins Baptised Separately?

[tanyal]

Are twins ever baptised separately?

I have a couple on the IGI: one child is baptised 9 July 1809 and buried 21 June 1810. Ah, I think to myself, I have found one of their children.

But then I notice a baptism of another child (with the same parent's names) on 22 July 1810 and I immediately curse because it appears that there are two sets of parents with the same name baptising children at the same time period and in the same parish.

But then I think: is it possible they were twins and one was baptised before the other (maybe because he was very sickly). A long shot, I know, and not very likely. :(

[Jessbowbag]

Could have been siblings, why twins bap'd so far apart?

Maybe having just lost a child, they thought they ought to ensure all their children were baptised?

maybe a child of the other same name couple & not even related.

A twin seems about the least likely senario

[dicole]

If the first child died, they may have baptised the second child with the same name. That happened several times in my family.

[tanyal]

Oops, typo. :o

The second child was baptised 22 July 1809.

[dicole]

hmm, well my ABear family called ALL their sons John
John Abear named his sons John ABear (1785) and John Newell Abear (1787)
John Abear called his sons John Burton Abear (1814) and John Daniel Abear (1816)
John Burton Abear called his sons John Burton Abear (1858) and John Edmund Abear (1859)

All of them lived to adulthood and married.

[tanyal]

I should have mentioned that the two children had different names: one was John, the other George.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Tanyal

You need to see the original parish register, which may have additional information, such as "privately baptised" - this would indicate the child was sickly and not expected to survive and might even say he was a twin.

However, when an infant died, the Vicar often took the opportunity to round up any children in the family and baptise them, so they may not have been twins at all.



OC

[tanyal]

Tanyal

You need to see the original parish register, which may have additional information, such as "privately baptised" - this would indicate the child was sickly and not expected to survive and might even say he was a twin.

However, when an infant died, the Vicar often took the opportunity to round up any children in the family and baptise them, so they may not have been twins at all.



OC

Good point.

I've got a copy of the transcripts of the parish on microfiche: I'll go to the library next week and check it out.

[Janet in Yorkshire]

i have twins apparently baptised separately - but both were baptised on the same day, in neighbouring parishes. (Mother church & chapelry.)
I'm unsure whether there were two baptisms in two separate villages on the same day, or whether there are two recordings in separate registers of a shared baptism. Don't think I ever will know!

I don't think your infants were twins, if the IGI dates are correct.
As OC has suggested, I would want to see the original entries in the bp register.

Jay

[Little Nell]

I think it very very unlikely they are twins. All the examples of twins I have in my, my husband's and other families I have researched, have all had both twins baptised at the same time.

[Olde Crone Holden]

Janet

That confusion happens a lot in one particular branch of my family...I have the same person baptised in a chapel of ease, a daughter church and a mother church - three different locations all recorded on the same day!

OC

[Janet in Yorkshire]

In my case, I do know there were 2 babies - in each register it states xxxx twin daughter of John B.
Bp of twin Esther is recorded in one register, bp of twin Mary is recorded in the other reg.

Jay

[Uncle John]

Even in modern times, families often present all their children for baptism at one service.

[kylejustin]

my ancestor was a twin, john was ch.30 NOV 1843. twin mary anne was ch.15 AUG 1843. she died though.