Genealogy Chat

There is a website which lists some late baptisms at http://www(.)lifeworkpotential(.)com/genealogy/latebaps/ Also - are you sure the baptism you are referring to is definately him and not a son, nephew, cousin etc? If you got this from the IGI then I think you definitely need to check the original records to be sure. Maybe he WAS christened as a baby, but not where you expect and this is not him at all .... Good Luck! Maz. XX

Thanks for suggestion - suppose it could be, but all his (known) older siblings were christened as babies. It's possible his parents might have converted just before he was born (he seems to be the youngest child). If he was finding it awkward not being christened - ie people knew he wasn't - it seems odd he didn't rectify the situation more publicly in his home town (Farnham or Aldershot at the time) rather than his parents' home village of Goring in Oxfordhire. Doing it quietly suggests people didn't know and he just wanted to rectify the situation in case it did come out. . . Were there any minor public offices etc he would have been excluded from at this time if not baptised into the CofE? He was a Publican and this all happened in 1837.

All my ancestors were non conformist and didn't have their children christened making research difficult. They only used the estab. church to get married and buried as this was the law. Is it possible that your relative was brought up this way, but found in adult life that he was among people who had all been christened, ie when he married? He may have decided then to be received into the church, and I think they would have been glad to oblige.

Someone who I think is one of my ancestors was christened in 1837 as an adult - if he is who I think he is he would have been c23 at the time & have been married, just lost a baby son & had a second baby on the way. . All his known siblings were christened as babies. His adult baptism took place in his parents' home parish rather than where he lived. . Any suggestions how this scenario might have arisen? Could it be that he was in fact christened as a baby but it wasn't recorded and it became an issue when he was sorting out funeral arrangements for his son? (but why hadn't it emerged when he got married?). Is it likely that he got christened in his birthplace rather than current home because everyone at home thought he was properly christened? Also, how universal was it for people to be confirmed in the 1830's, and at what age? Suppose he could have been christened as a prelude to confirmation - but that still doesn't explain why he wasn't "done" as a baby. . . . Any thoughts?