RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: MacGrigor on Friday 01 November 19 17:22 GMT (UK)
-
Hello,
It's just a trend I've noticed. Especially in small farming communities, although twice in towns and once in a city in my line. Pre-1837, I can find christenings for all but a handful of ancestors, but post-1837 there are a few that had their births registered but were never christened. Judging by the time 1840s-1900s, and the location (rural hamlets and villages), I don't think they were likely influenced by the growth of atheism following the publication of Darwin's 'On The Origin of Species'. Their parents, born pre-1837, living in the same small settlements, were always christened at a parish church, and there were no major chapels around. Did parents perhaps not bother because they knew their children already existed on a record? Did they see birth registration as equivalent to a christening?
Adam
-
Different religion, maybe?
Regards
Chas
-
That’s true in some cases. But they all still married in Anglican churches, and were buried in Anglican parishes! It’s a strange one.
-
Pre 1837 the baptism was the only way to have the child officially recognised. After the introduction of Civil Registration in 1837 they could use the birth certificate.
-
That was my line of thinking too! And of course civil registration was introduced to help with wills etc too.
-
Do the Parish Registers you are looking at have any baptisms post 1837?
Often transcriptions stop at that time.
-
Yes :( it’s an odd one.
-
I thought that proof of birth was linked to the provision of Poor Law relief. You had to prove that you belonged to a parish in order to get the (parish-based) payments if you got into difficulties. This would have been an important consideration for your average ag lab and other people of limited means. They had to face the risk of illness or loss of employment at some time in their lives or even old age pauperism. The post-1837 birth certificate showed the place of birth making a baptism unnecessary for civil purposes.
-
That would make sense, but didn’t most people not possess a physical copy of their birth certificate?
-
That would make sense, but didn’t most people not possess a physical copy of their birth certificate?
They did not have a birth certificate before Civil Registration. See my answer no. 3 above. The only official recognition of the child were the parish records so people baptised their children regardless of whether they were interested in religion.
-
No, as in a paper copy. Their births were registered, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they possessed a copy themselves.
-
I'm surprised to hear that. Non Conformist Chapels were proliferating by the 1840's all over the Country. Most can be seen today, even if some have been converted to residences. State registration of BMD's was a legal requirement and the population a few years after 1837 were reminded so. As people had to pay for a certificate on registration, I would have thought they held on to them.
C of E baptisms may have diminished to be replaced by non conformist ones, I don't know. If my wider family was typical, they kept their certificates religiously ;D.
-
I don't think the C of E ever issued Baptismal certificates - not Birth certificates - except possibly from the later 19th C? The entry in the register was the only record. (As has already been said) I have certainly noticed a dropping off of baptisms after 1837, I suspect partly to do with the move into towns, as well as non-conformity.
-
Most certainly did, I have my own and my younger brothers.
-
In my primary school in the 1950's, when I said that I had not been baptised/christened, no other child in my class (about 35 children) could believe me.
Has anyone done a search for baptism rates or some form of hard evidence, or did rates go down and then up and then down?
-
Here is my understanding (which I think covers points made by others)- Pre Civil registration in order to legitimise the birth of your child couples would have their child baptised within the Anglican (CoE) faith although they might be of another religion. Pre-civil reg marriages were most likely held in CoE churches, again for the marriage to be recognised in law. You may have noticed 'married by licence' in some parish registers and being of another faith is one possible reason for being married by licence. Most burials were in the local churchyard as many places had no municipal cemeteries for other religions these were established later. I don't know the dates for this occurrence but I'm sure someone will, and possibly varied from place to place.
I was told once by a 'genealogist' that when civil reg was introduced many of the first people to use the new 'system' were non-conformists in order to alleviate having to marry/baptise their child within the Anglican faith. If you are noticing a pattern for your family I would definitely look at other religions to see if they appear in those parish registers as well. Also remember not everything is online or indeed still exists. Some of these issues might relate to the area you are searching in.
CD
-
Hello,
It's just a trend I've noticed. Especially in small farming communities, although twice in towns and once in a city in my line. Pre-1837, I can find christenings for all but a handful of ancestors, but post-1837 there are a few that had their births registered but were never christened.
The trend you noticed actually started many years before 1937, so you have been fortunate.
The reasons for the decline of Baptisms for as early as the mid 18th century were multiply and various and included the rise of non-conformity, the relaxing of laws against Papists (Catholics) etc.
The advent of Civil Registeration was simply the last nail in the coffin.
Judging by the time 1840s-1900s, and the location (rural hamlets and villages), I don't think they were likely influenced by the growth of atheism following the publication of Darwin's 'On The Origin of Species'. Their parents, born pre-1837, living in the same small settlements, were always christened at a parish church, and there were no major chapels around. Did parents perhaps not bother because they knew their children already existed on a record? Did they see birth registration as equivalent to a christening?
Adam
The Church of England certainly took the opinion that some people thought just that. Witnessed by the publication of leaflets & pamplets such as – 'Registration is not Baptism' and 'The Church Register is not Superseded by the New Register'.
For more information I would suggest downloading and reading R W Ambler's paper -
"Civil Registration and Baptism: Popular perceptions of the 1836 Act for Registering Births, Deaths and Marriages"
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01oke/
Cheers
Guy
-
That would make sense, but didn’t most people not possess a physical copy of their birth certificate?
Why would they? What actual piece of paper issued to your parents when you were born do you still use today when asked to prove your identity?
In NSW, Australia, if you need your NSW birth certificate for Official purposes ....( eg applying for an Australian passport, ) the certified copy of your civil birth registration needs to be the official document issued within twelve months of the date of your current passport application. ANY other earlier certified copy is No longer acceptable ... i.e. The document issued when your birth was registered is no longer valid.
Re CofE baptisms post 1837 E&W civil registrations .... the ceremony of baptism has NO clergy fees (and did not have fees in 1800s either) and the record of the ceremony is entered in the church register. Post 1837, If someone in England or Wales, years later, needed 'proof' they were baptised then they could apply to that church for a document confirming their baptism, but their parents were not automatically handed any document at the time of the ceremony. The concept of issuing a document confirming a church ceremony is restricted to marriage, both parties to sign/make their mark, witnesses sign/mark. But other church ceremonies eg : churchings/christenings/baptisms/burials .... historically, no formal blank pre printed documents issued to clergy for their use until at least several decades after civil registration became a widespread practice throughout the British Empire. One civil purpose for a baptism certificate being issued would be documents sought by 1850s and 1860s Emigration Agents canvassing throughout GB setting up families and singles for immigration to the British Colonies .. so a ready document confirming the persons name, birth place, age, parents, etc would have been useful even if the emigrants were not yet literate...
JM
-
Here is my understanding (which I think covers points made by others)- Pre Civil registration in order to legitimise the birth of your child couples would have their child baptised within the Anglican (CoE) faith although they might be of another religion.
Baptisms or births of my Catholic ancestors were recorded in C. of E. registers when:
1. There were penal laws against Catholics and it was necessary to know how many existed, who they were and where they lived. Restrictions were gradually relaxed from late 18th century. The last Return of Papists for England was in 1780s; it was less detailed than 1767 Return.
2. There was a tax on births. This happened twice during 18th century. The Anglican curate of each parish was responsible for recording birth of every child in his parish, regardless of religious denomination, and for collecting the tax.
The only exception to the above was a long-serving curate who had meticulously recorded births of Catholics in his parish for 4 decades and continued for a few years at start of 19thC. (One of the later births was illegitimate and father was named in baptism register.)
None of my Catholic ancestors were in Anglican baptism registers in any parish after 1810.
-
I see you have ignored my comment about non conformist chapels. The records of baptisms are with the History hubs!!! formerly CRO's. The 19th Century was an increasingly religious century and it lasted into the 20th Century, together with voting Labour when universal suffrage became......universal.
-
I'm surprised to hear that. Non Conformist Chapels were proliferating by the 1840's all over the Country. Most can be seen today, even if some have been converted to residences. State registration of BMD's was a legal requirement and the population a few years after 1837 were reminded so. As people had to pay for a certificate on registration, I would have thought they held on to them.
C of E baptisms may have diminished to be replaced by non conformist ones, I don't know. If my wider family was typical, they kept their certificates religiously ;D.
And
Most certainly did, I have my own and my younger brothers.
And I see you have ignored my comment about non conformist chapels. The records of baptisms are with the History hubs!!! formerly CRO's. The 19th Century was an increasingly religious century and it lasted into the 20th Century, together with voting Labour when universal suffrage became......universal.
Yes, I know of many family history buffs who do search out the originals of 20th century documentation just like you have for you and your siblings, but do you have originals handed to your ancestors back in the decades before civil registration commenced ?
In the British Colonies, civil registration commenced in different years ... so E&W is 1837, so NSW was 1856... other colonies had different starts. In NSW, from commencement of British settlement 1788 there was no formal 'Established' church, so in 1810 the then NSW governor issued a general order requiring clergy, of every denomination to transmit details of all the baptisms, burials and marriage ceremonies they conducted eah quarter through to the NSW chaplains ... so the CofE registers for St Philips, in Sydney has many Roman Catholic, Wesleyan, Presbyterian, Baptist and other denominations throughout those early decades before 1856. :)
Sorry for going off topic to original opening post, but hopefully I have responded to Regorian's concerns.
JM 5 a.m. NSW time.
-
Yes, I have baptism entries, earliest direct male line 20th December 1702 OS. Only reason not earlier because PR's started 1696.
From 1840's Bible Christian Chapel, Soudley, Forest of Dean and into 20th Century. They were not unusual. Always associated with C of E too.
-
:)
Yes, entries in the church registers are excellent but I was striving to ask if you had the actual document that the clergy may have handed to the family at the time of that clergyman performing the religious ceremony. :) it is my understanding that it was not until mid to late 19th century before most denominations began issuing such documentation as a matter of course, but that clergy, when approached in decades prior would consult their registers and write a letter under the aurhority of their seal.
I had read your reply '... if my wider family was typical, they kept their certificates religiously' to mean you had a collection of original certificates issued across generations upon generations back into the 1780s even and which had been passed diwn through those generations..
I have a collection of marriage certs, on one of my lines, through each generation since settling in NSW in the 1790s. These are carefully conserved. They are the document the clergy handed to the bride with everyone's signature. It is my understanding that clergy did not issue baptism certs in NSW until around the 1840s was lack of demand, and as to burial ....
JM
-
Re CofE baptisms post 1837 E&W civil registrations .... the ceremony of baptism has NO clergy fees (and did not have fees in 1800s either) and the record of the ceremony is entered in the church register. Post 1837, If someone in England or Wales, years later, needed 'proof' they were baptised then they could apply to that church for a document confirming their baptism, but their parents were not automatically handed any document at the time of the ceremony. The concept of issuing a document confirming a church ceremony is restricted to marriage, both parties to sign/make their mark, witnesses sign/mark. But other church ceremonies eg : churchings/christenings/baptisms/burials .... historically, no formal blank pre printed documents issued to clergy for their use until at least several decades after civil registration became a widespread practice throughout the British Empire. One civil purpose for a baptism certificate being issued would be documents sought by 1850s and 1860s Emigration Agents canvassing throughout GB setting up families and singles for immigration to the British Colonies .. so a ready document confirming the persons name, birth place, age, parents, etc would have been useful even if the emigrants were not yet literate...
JM
Depends what you mean by "historically, no formal blank pre printed documents issued to clergy for their use until at least several decades after civil registration became a widespread practice throughout the British Empire."
The clergy certainly had access to pre-printed forms they could use to certify births and baptisms before the advent of civil registration for an example of one dated 1818 see- http://anguline.co.uk/cert/birth.html
It is often forgotten one of the reasons for birth, baptism, marriage, death & burial registration and indeed civil registration was for family history purposes to prove ones lineage.
Various examples of pre-printed Marriage certificates may be seen at
http://anguline.co.uk/cert/marriage.html
Cheers
Guy
-
Re CofE baptisms post 1837 E&W civil registrations .... the ceremony of baptism has NO clergy fees (and did not have fees in 1800s either) and the record of the ceremony is entered in the church register. Post 1837, If someone in England or Wales, years later, needed 'proof' they were baptised then they could apply to that church for a document confirming their baptism, but their parents were not automatically handed any document at the time of the ceremony. The concept of issuing a document confirming a church ceremony is restricted to marriage, both parties to sign/make their mark, witnesses sign/mark. But other church ceremonies eg : churchings/christenings/baptisms/burials .... historically, no formal blank pre printed documents issued to clergy for their use until at least several decades after civil registration became a widespread practice throughout the British Empire. One civil purpose for a baptism certificate being issued would be documents sought by 1850s and 1860s Emigration Agents canvassing throughout GB setting up families and singles for immigration to the British Colonies .. so a ready document confirming the persons name, birth place, age, parents, etc would have been useful even if the emigrants were not yet literate...
JM
Depends what you mean by "historically, no formal blank pre printed documents issued to clergy for their use until at least several decades after civil registration became a widespread practice throughout the British Empire."
The clergy certainly had access to pre-printed forms they could use to certify births and baptisms before the advent of civil registration for an example of one dated 1818 see- http://anguline.co.uk/cert/birth.html
It is often forgotten one of the reasons for birth, baptism, marriage, death & burial registration and indeed civil registration was for family history purposes to prove ones lineage.
Various examples of pre-printed Marriage certificates may be seen at
http://anguline.co.uk/cert/marriage.html
Cheers
Guy
Yes, and the need to 'prove' one's lineage for inheritance purposes in NSW in the pre civil registration era i.e. 1788 - 1856 meant that the person needing the document relied on by the Probate court was the Supreme Court's Registrar - a civil appointment. So the Registrar issued certified documents after inspecting church registers or if the event was not one that had been held in the Antipodes, the Registrar received documentation which he then inspected with the view to prove them or otherwise. The records of the Registrar of the NSW Supreme Court were handed over to the NSW BDM when it was established in the mid 1850s and is the foundation set of Early Church Records for they include bdm records for various South Seas locations including : Fiji, New Zealand, Queensland, Victoria, Tasmania, New South Wales and other outposts of the Empire post American Independence and the 1850s Emigration schemes.
Very very unusual to find actual baptism certificates, or burial certificates, issued to families at the time of the particular event but not unusual to find marriage certificates for that 1788-1856 period in NSW admin history.
Of course there are plenty of parish registers extant and these record the bdm events in those British territories because the clergy were required to transmit that info back to the Sydney NSW based Chaplains....
JM ADD ... I have edited to fix up
A couple of spelling mistakes - one finger typing on e reader = spelling mistakes ... sorry ::)
-
I'm wondering if it was economically driven. It was compulsory to register and cost money so perhaps people didn't have the means to also pay the church to baptise their kids.
-
I am sure there was not and still is not any fee applicable for a baptism in the C of E.
I'm wondering if it was economically driven. It was compulsory to register and cost money so perhaps people didn't have the means to also pay the church to baptise their kids.
JM
-
Do the Parish Registers you are looking at have any baptisms post 1837?
Often transcriptions stop at that time.
I think this is the answer to the question ... why did parents stop ....
JM
-
Do the Parish Registers you are looking at have any baptisms post 1837?
Often transcriptions stop at that time.
I think this is the answer to the question ... why did parents stop ....
JM
I would suggest it answers a different question E.G. why can't I find an online Baptism.
Certainly in the UK this is answered by the fact that many transcripts stop with the change of format of parish registers in 1813 when 'Roses Act' came into effect.
It was thought that these new records were easy to read and transcription was no longer required.
This early end point was often repeated by Family History Societies when they became popular from the mid 1970s, possibly because the 1813 Act meant a change to a new register and that register was often still in use in many parishes, meaning it was more difficult to gain access to it for transcription purposes.
Here in the UK Parish Registers still record baptisms, marriages and burials though it is true there has been a big but gradual drop off since the mid 18th century (circa 1740).
It is also recorded that in the years before civil registration there was a surge in registrations in Parish Registers.
We are very lucky these days that a number of companies are digitising original parish registers and making the resultant images available online.
It should however be remembered that many use a false end point of 100 years from present due to the paranoia about privacy rather than the end of registered events.
Cheers
Guy
-
I'd had a similar problem, but had always assumed that for a long time as marriages were performed in the Parish Church - that is, Anglican, and burials would take place in the graveyard attached, because non-conformist chapels were usually not licensed to perform marriages. So although marriages and burials are often available online fairly easily, non-conformist baptismal records, especially from Baptist chapels - which usually took on adult baptisms, when people were judged mature enough to make their own decisions - were not as freely available. And Quakers, as I found, also had their own different ways of recording membership and births to members.
-
There is also the added factor - non-conformists were exactly that, they did not have to conform, they did not have to submit their registers (or copies) to anyone. They could do exactly what they liked with them - burn them, tear them up, keep them, whatever:-\
-
...All to frustrate their ancestor-seeking descendants? Anyone else got ancestors belonging to that sect?
-
...All to frustrate their ancestor-seeking descendants? Anyone else got ancestors belonging to that sect?
I have several lines that disappear into thin air thanks to dissenting baptisms and irregular border marriages :)
-
Yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss! And I've got a Wesleyan Missionary in the family, who went to South Africa in 1819 - but I've trace him and visited some of his Mission Stations ;D ;D
-
I'm wondering if it was economically driven. It was compulsory to register and cost money so perhaps people didn't have the means to also pay the church to baptise their kids.
Registering a birth didn't cost, if done within a set time. Fees were charged for late registrations.
"... every Registrar …. register soon after the Event as conveniently may be done, without Fee or Reward save as herein-after mentioned …"
(1836 Act for the registering of Births, Deaths and Marriages in England)
-
...All to frustrate their ancestor-seeking descendants? Anyone else got ancestors belonging to that sect?
I have several lines that disappear into thin air thanks to dissenting baptisms and irregular border marriages :)
Same here. I have a Nathan Jackson Quilter born c1752 in my tree. I have never been able to find his parents or any known siblings. I ssuspect the dreaded non conformity. Nathan left a will in 1817 but it only mentions children and wife, no siblings, cousins or parents.
-
A charge would have been for a certificate of the birth, not for registering it. Someone pointed out to me, many years back, when I started researching family, that "moveable ages" on censuses, etc, were often because people, especially in large families were not quite sure of their exact date of birth, or even age, and many never had a birth certificate because of cost, although quite legally and licitly born. I did once hear a very elderly man saying something to the effect of: "Well, I know that my dad was younger than our uncle Sammie, but Auntie Nora was older than him, and her Dad was younger than my grandad's youngest brother......" where families stretched over generations that could really foul up tracing exactly who was who, especially when they used only a few first names!