Post by Graeme WallPost by GeoffWhy would someone have a private baptism in 1714?
I am researching the Hastings family in Horning in Norfolk and have not
seen this in any other baptism records.
Sick infant?
I'm looking at a fairly closely-written double page (1765-1766 for
Reedham (also in Norfolk), and only three of the entries are "was Pub.
Bapt.d"; the rest - the vast majority - are "was priv: Nom:". So either
there was some epidemic in Reedham over those two years, or private was
the norm. Or, "priv: Nom:" (the capitalisation and punctuation is
consistent for both formats) doesn't mean what it appears to mean.
(Why "Nom:" - presumably meaning "named" - for the "Priv:" ones, and
"Bapt.d" for the "Pub." ones, I don't know.)
Interestingly and unusually, this particular scribe seems to have
recorded the day of the week - for example, the one I'm interested in:
97 Abraham Son of Abraham Turrell & Mary his
wife was priv. Nom.Monday Decem.br 16.1765
(at least I think he's the one I'm interested in; I have him married
1788-7-13 in Wymondham, which is over 23 miles away and the other side
of Norwich, so Reedham seems very unlikely to be where he was born, but
I can't find any other Abr* T*r*l* in anything like the right date in
Norfolk. If anyone can, please say!)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
Of course, this show - like every other cop show on earth - massively
overstates the prevalence of violent crime: last year, in the whole of the UK,
police fired their weapons just three times. And there were precisely zero
fatalities. - Vincent Graff in RT, 2014/11/8-14