Buried days before baptism? Surely not?

[Deux Chevaux]

Got a bit of a strange one here. I'm sure there are many of you who have come across this sort of thing before, but it's a slight head-scratcher.

I've been perusing the parish records of Saxthorpe in Norfolk and come across a baptism of James Pegg, son of Richard and Diana (I believe her maiden name is Armyger/Armiger), on May 13th, 1753. But on the next page, a James Pegg, son of Richard and Diana is buried on May 6th, 1753.

The only explanation is TWO couples named Richard and Diana Pegg, each with a son named James! And BOTH in the same tiny VILLAGE!!  Or the vicar got his dates wrong. 

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939X-DY97-K9?i=40&wc=M62T-ZPN%3A160239801%2C160937401%2C160281502%2C160239804&cc=1824688

[Deux Chevaux]

Got a bit of a strange one here. I'm sure there are many of you who have come across this sort of thing before, but it's a slight head-scratcher.

I've been perusing the parish records of Saxthorpe in Norfolk and come across a baptism of James Pegg, son of Richard and Diana (I believe her maiden name is Armyger/Armiger), on May 13th, 1753. But on the next page, a James Pegg, son of Richard and Diana is buried on May 6th, 1753.

The only explanation is TWO couples named Richard and Diana Pegg, each with a son named James! And BOTH in the same tiny VILLAGE!!  Or the vicar got his dates wrong. 

https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:939X-DY97-K9?i=40&wc=M62T-ZPN%3A160239801%2C160937401%2C160281502%2C160239804&cc=1824688

It has just dawned on me that the James baptised on the 13th was named after the one buried on the 6th!  D'oh! Think I've been stuck indoors a bit too long today. I need to get some fresh air. 

[Deux Chevaux]

Just discovered the baptism of a James Pegg, parents Richard and Diana, on November 17th 1752. That's sorted then. 

Apart from the timescale between November and May. Definitely well under nine months. 

[ReadyDale]

Just discovered the baptism of a James Pegg, parents Richard and Diana, on November 17th 1752. That's sorted then. 

Apart from the timescale between November and May. Definitely well under nine months. 

The November date is for a baptism, the birth could have been many months (or even years) beforehand. 

[Chilternbirder]

Just discovered the baptism of a James Pegg, parents Richard and Diana, on November 17th 1752. That's sorted then. 

Apart from the timescale between November and May. Definitely well under nine months. 

The November date is for a baptism, the birth could have been many months (or even years) beforehand. 

I have found names reused after infant deaths in my tree, while not a regular occurrence it isn't rare enough to excite comment. It can be very confusing, especially if you only find part of the chain of births and deaths.

[coombs]

When I originally saw it was an Archdeacon Transcript, I did think, "Aah they may not be as accurate as the originals", but then you explained further about the earlier baptism.

The first James Pegg must have been baptised at a few months old, and the 2nd one was a few days old, if his older brother was buried on the 6th, and the 2nd James was baptised on the 13th. So Diana must have been heavily pregnant when she buried her son, then gave birth again, maybe just days later and named the baby after his brother, and quickly had him baptised.

[Deux Chevaux]

The November date is for a baptism, the birth could have been many months (or even years) beforehand. 
[/quote]

Ah, interesting. I was thinking the church would be very keen to get a newborn baptised ASAP, and certainly within a month. I didn't think it could have been months or even years.

[Brentor boy]

I have a case where a couple buried a son named Henry on the same day as they baptised another son in the name of Henry. And they were definitely two separate individuals.

[macwil]

The November date is for a baptism, the birth could have been many months (or even years) beforehand. 

Ah, interesting. I was thinking the church would be very keen to get a newborn baptised ASAP, and certainly within a month. I didn't think it could have been months or even years.

I have a great uncle baptised the same day as his brother and sister, they were 10yrs, 4yrs and 6 wks respectively.
Very few of my baptisms were done less than a month after birth, usually such early baptisms were quickly followed by a burial.
I have seen a baptism a few weeks before a man got married!