Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Resolved - Twins registered at different times

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

woodpecker

woodpecker Report 3 Jan 2010 17:45

Has anyone come across twins registered in different qtrs? My g.granfather was baptised 09/02/1876 at the same time as a sister whose birth appears to be registered in Dec 1875, there is no birth for him at the same time but there is a possible one in Sep 1875. His age on the 1881 census is 5 and on the 1891 he is 15, 1901 he is 24 and 1911 he is 36, his death in 1952 has him as 76. His sister does not appear on the census forms so I'm guessing she died young, I don't think she was older than him because the family had another daughter with the same name who died in 1875.
I know I'm going to have to buy the certificate but I was hoping the baptism would help me find the right birth index, now I'm even more confused!

Jill 2011 (aka Warrior Princess of Cilla!)

Jill 2011 (aka Warrior Princess of Cilla!) Report 3 Jan 2010 17:54

It seems really odd to register her and not him ...

Have you thought of:

a) One of the children being the child of one of the daughters of the marriage and brought up as a child of the marriage?

b) A second marriage for the parents - one had a boy, one had a girl - it seems very unlikely as they were obviously so young at the time but still might be worth investigating.

c) Was she maybe a niece or other relative that the family had taken in?

It just seems so odd ...

Jill

woodpecker

woodpecker Report 3 Jan 2010 18:04

Thanks Jill, I can rule out a & b, oldest child was only 10 in 1875 and they went on to have children together until 1886.
I'll look into possible nieces though, I hadn't thought of that.
Annette

woodpecker

woodpecker Report 3 Jan 2010 18:23

Many thanks again Jill,
I've just looked for possible nieces and found one that could be her, she is with her parents on the census forms but has the same middle initial, it's possible that the parent's names were entered incorrectly if they had a joint baptism, I've come across some obvious inaccuracies in some parish registers.
Annette

Click ADD REPLY button - not this link!

Click ADD REPLY button - not this link! Report 3 Jan 2010 18:52

Would you care to list actual names so it's easier to understand? I can't get my head around it without the specifics.

Rose

woodpecker

woodpecker Report 3 Jan 2010 19:02

I think this is resolved now, thanks Rose for your interest.