I know they happened & I know it was often done so that 2 or more children could be baptised together, but is there any particular reason why parents should have waited until the children were 7/8 years old ? (1810/20). I've got a couple with 2 sons, both of whom seem to have been born before their parents were married (so I'm assuming the father was the father as cited on the later baptisms). One son was baptised 2 years after the marriage, when he would have been 7/8 & the other son was baptised 4 years after the marriage, when he also was 7 or 8. The father then died, so I can't tell if the pattern would have continued. As the 2 sons were baptised separately, although they were both alive at the time of the oldest son's baptism, it can't have been to save money & the baptisms were at the same church, so it doesn't look as if the family had moved.
Obviously, there could have been any kind of reasons, but I was wondering if there was anything in particular......maybe the boys could have been sent out to "work" by helping in a household/farm etc at that age & the family concerned may have insisted that they had been baptised beforehand ?
Obviously, there could have been any kind of reasons, but I was wondering if there was anything in particular......maybe the boys could have been sent out to "work" by helping in a household/farm etc at that age & the family concerned may have insisted that they had been baptised beforehand ?
Comment