Baptismal Sex-Discrimination

[D_Anthony_H]

I am indebted to Professor Nicholas Postgate for his book: "Early Mesopotamia Society and Economy at the Dawn of History", published by Routledge in 1992.  Professor Postgate tells us on page 105 of this book that Babylonian marriage was

essentially a bond between two families and the purpose of marriage is to secure sons to perpetuate the male line

Babylonian law and customs might seem to be irrelevant to early nineteenth century England.  However three of my ancestors are William Tandy and his parents William and Elizabeth Tandy .  They appear in Warwickshire in the 1841 Census.  The younger William is then 13 years old.  His two sisters are also with that family in that Census.  Mary is 15, and Hannah is 11.  There was also an elder brother Thomas who was 16 and had left home.  William and Elizabeth are representative of parents who were guilty of baptismal sex-discrimination.  They baptised both their two boys but baptised neither of their two girls.  It would appear that the birth of each girl was a non-event to William & Elizabeth Tandy and not worth registering by the process of baptism at their Church.  William Tandy was a labourer.  Maybe being lower down the social ladder made the lives and attitudes of the Tandy parents closer to that of the ancient Babylonians.

I hope that this is a comfort to others who like myself have been frustrated to find that the baptisms of distant female ancestors cannot be found.  It is not necessarily lack of diligence by you with your family research, it is not necessarily because of "gaps" in the IGI - it may simply be because you have gone back to a period where the birth of a girl was dismissed as an unfortunate failure.  The Act of Parliament that required all births (from 1 July 1837) to be registered irrespective of whether the child was a girl or a boy was an Act of Parliament that could well be labelled as a prime example of sex-equality legislation.

[KGarrad]

Or maybe you simply haven't found the baptisms of the girls yet?

It is entirely possible that the girls were baptised in the mother's faith/church?
Maybe she was non-conformist? Or even Catholic?

I have certainly heard of families where he sons are baptised in the father's faith/church, and the daughters are baptised in the mother's.

On the other hand, boys were wage earners, and brought something in to the family. Girls were expected to marry into another family?

That's just social history, and we should be wary of trying to apply present-day expectations and thoughts on previous generations.

[andycand]

Hi

I think I have found the baptisms for the 2 girls.

Firstly ages in the 1841 census for the over 15s have been rounded down to the nearest 5 years so Mary could be aged anywhere between 15 and 19. There is a baptism in Radford Semele for a Mary Tandy, 18th August 1822, father William Tandy, mother Mary. It is possible that mary was a first wife for William.

There is also a baptism in Radford Semele for a Susanna Tandy 23rd Feb 1830 father William, mother Elizabeth. I would suggest Susanna is Hannah

Andy

[jc26red]

But are you sure the first names they are using the the same as the ones that the child was christened with?

name: Susanna Tandy  
23 Feb 1830 - RADFORD SEMELE,WARWICK,ENGLAND
Parents William and Elizabeth.

and as Mary was now not regarded as a child on the 1841 her age has been "rounded" down like her parents ages have been.

name: Mary Tandy
18 Aug 1822 - RADFORD SEMELE,WARWICK,ENGLAND

all found on the same film/batch number
C04568-1
microfilm 554781.

They are the only Tandy family on the batch number so the chances of them being a different family is remote

Jenny

ps... Andycand types faster than me 

[D_Anthony_H]

My goodness Andy that was fast.  I accept the Hannah=Susannah.  William Tandy & Elizabeth Wilson were married 20 November 1821 so I do not accept Mary.  However one out of two is excellent from my viewpoint.
David

[stanmapstone]

and as Mary was now not regarded as a child on the 1841 her age has been "rounded" down like her parents ages have been.
Jenny

It is nothing to do with being a child, the instructions were ;
"Write in figures the age of every person, opposite to their names, in one of the columns headed 'Age of Males' or 'Age of Females' according to their sex. For persons aged 15 years and upwards it is sufficient to state within what period of five years their age is, writing down the lowest number of that period: thus, for persons aged 15 and under 20, write 15- for 20 and under 25, write 20- for 25 and under 30 write 25- for 30 and under 35 write 30-, and so on up to the greatest age; but the exact age may be stated if the person prefers it. For persons under 15, write the number of years; for infants under one year the number of months."

Stan

[carol8353]

My goodness Andy that was fast.  I accept the Hannah=Susannah.  William Tandy & Elizabeth Wilson were married 20 November 1821 so I do not accept Mary.  However one out of two is excellent from my viewpoint.
David

David have you not heard of the 'short pregnancies' that used to occur ,and still do  

I'm sure we've all found babies born only a few months after the parents marriage,back then as now  

[D_Anthony_H]

Hannah died 21 October 1916 in Southam, the widow of John Wakefield a farmer who she married 3 April 1857 in Radford Semele.  Since Hannah is my ancestor I am indebted to Andy and equally to Jenny.

[andycand]

Hi

I wouldn't rule out Mary to quickly, Familysearch IGI is only an Index and is subject to errors so it is worth checking the actual Parish Registers to check that names and dates are correct.

There are another couple of possibilities, Mary was conceived before the marriage of William & Elizabeth so she could be Williams daughter with another woman, the wording in the Parish Register would be helpful. Also, the 1841 census does not show relationshiips so Mary may not be the daughter of William & Elizabeth but possibly a relative being raised by them.

Andy