Father Shown in Westminster Baptismal Record

[khyber]

Does anyone know if, in the early 1800s, it is likely that the father and his occupation would be shown in the baptismal record of his child born and baptised after he had died?
Thanks for any help.
Judi

[Ruskie]

Would you like to give the names so we can have a look for the baptism? 

[khyber]

Thanks, I already have a copy of the baptism record. It shows the father's name & occupation.
I am trying to work out if a person who died three months prior to the birth of the child is likely to be the father.
In those circumstances would a father normally be named but shown as deceased? Or named with his occupation?
Thanks.
Judi

[Ruskie]

Oh I see Judi. 

I don't know the answer to your question, however you could look at other baptisms at the same church in the same time frame to see if father's name and occupation is something that this particular vicar chose to record for all baptisms.

Does the death of the father you refer to give an abode? If so does it tally with your family do you know?

[AddictedtoFamilyTree]

I have an example in my tree from 1903 if that helps? My Grandfather's mother married twice. Her first husband died in October 1902 and their second child was born in Feb 1903. Annie was christened in the March and both of her parents are listed, along with her father's occupation, there is no mention that he is deceased, which I personally find a little strange as it does on marriage banns and certificates, but hey ho. I think so long as they were married and there weren't any concerns it would appear that a deceased father would still appear. I know its an example with a later period of time to yours but I hope it helps.

[bitzar]

I think from previous discussion it should read 'posthumous' son/daughter of.

But hey, it is what it is!  My own baptism record doesn't mention my father who died between me being born and being baptised.  It states only my mothers name with maiden name in brackets.

Bitzar.

[Lily M]

I have a 5xGt.grandfather.  He was buried April 1799.  His son was baptised June 1799 - with no mention of father being deceased

[khyber]

Many thanks to everyone who has taken an interest in my topic.

Ruskie – the baptism register has a column for “Quality, Trade or Profession” which was always completed.  I looked on and back a few pages but didn’t see any indication that any father  was deceased.  Also the addresses were different.

The positives for the person I have found are that there appear to be no other children born after 1831, he was not with his wife in the 1841 census  and that it is possible that a deceased father may not be shown as such in baptism records.

The negatives are that he would have been 15 years older than his wife (not impossible though), and that he was shown as living in Angel Court and buried at St Mary-le-Strand in June 1830. The family moved around a bit (father was a cook) but always within Westminster and often in Palmers Village (at at least  3 different addresses) where they were at the time of the youngest child’s baptism May 1831 (born Sept 1830). While there was an Angel Court near there, there was also one in the Strand. 
It is possible that between June 1829, when they were in Spencer’s Row, Palmers Village and May 1831 when they were in Brewer’s Row,  Palmer’s Village, they could have moved to Angel Court, Strand where the father died  and then back to Palmer’s Village before the child was baptised.

I think I will put it down as a possibility that may never be proven!

Thanks again.
Judi

[AddictedtoFamilyTree]

A 15 year age gap wasn't unusual then, or now, so I wouldn't use that fact to use it out. Also if they were renting, moving around within an area wasn't uncommon either. My G.Grandfather must have lived in nearly all of the odd numbered houses on one street and one even number, think they moved every time they had a child, although they were all the same sized terraced properties. Thank goodness for online baptism records as the census is such a tiny snap shot.