Baptized twice

[Charney Jo]

Hi

I am sorry if this has been discussed before - I don't manage to get on here very much any more.

I have been researching one of the wives of my direct descendants - Jane Eleanor Symonds. She was born in Haggerstone, London in 1825; her parents were John and Eleanor. I have been looking at the LMA records on Ancestry and she was baptized twice - both times at St Leonards Shoreditch, once in 1825 and again in 1827. It is definately the same person as both list her date of birth.

Why would she have been baptized twice - does anyone have any idea?

I should add, neither baptisms coincided with siblings baptisms...

Many thanks in advance.

Jo

[Charney Jo]

Hi Bob

I did think that but she was born on 19 July and not baptised (the first time!) until 10 August. I would have expected her to have been baptised closer to the birth date but perhaps she became ill after a few weeks?
And her father was only a 'Cow Keeper' so I wouldn't expect that he had lots of money to get her baptised again.

Whatever, I am glad to say that she lived to be 81.

Thanks again

Jo

[Little Nell]

I don't know the answer - and I don't know why my great x 3 grandmother Hannah was baptised the same day as her second son, my gt x 2 grandfather Emmets. Hannah had been married and had her first son baptised without bothering, so not sure why she felt the need to be baptised when her 2nd son was born.

[Christine in Herts]

Is the second record definitely an actual baptism?

The usual explanation of something like that (where the dates are so close that you'd have expected them to have remembered) would have been a private baptism (at home - often because of fear of non-survival) and then the receiving into Church afterwards. Having said that - the gap's rather large... unless they'd forgotten to get the second ceremony organised at the normal time, for some reason

Christine

[Guy]

I would have suggested the first infant died and a second named the same as the first, but you note the birthdate is included on both.

Other suggestions
Was the register re-transcribed, this sometimes happens and can introduce mistakes?
Is it simply a database error or does the original register contain both baptisms?
Was there a change of incumbent, some had strong views about "good" baptisms?
Already been mentioned by others was the first a private baptism and the second a received into the church (long gap but does happen)?
Cheers
Guy