From: G6JPG@255soft.uk   
      
   On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 at 17:10:14, Peter Johnson   
    wrote (my responses usually follow points   
   raised):   
   >On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 16:52:39 +0000, Roger Mills    
   >wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >>Is it possible that they were all baptised at the same time, and the   
   >>births all then recorded at that time?   
   >   
   >I was about to post, that I don't know about the 17th century but in   
   >the 19th I have seen several cases where several children in the same   
   >family were baptised at the same time. In on instance the eldest was   
   >about 7.   
      
   I have this too, but mainly in the 19th (and I think early 20th); I   
   don't think that branch were particularly religious and/or were very   
   poor (they moved from Norfolk to Northumberland, I presume in search of   
   employment), so had quite a few baptised as a "job lot" - either to save   
   money by bulk buying (!), or because the new environment they found   
   themselves in expected it more. (Or both.)   
      
   I suspect the 16xx births I mentioned are affected by the commonwealth   
   explanation "cecilia" explained; I may look at the end of the parish   
   register in question, though I _do_ have the record.   
      
   (Still doesn't explain the fuzzy patches over the three occurrences of   
   the word "borne" - as if "bapt." had been erased and borne substituted -   
   though!)   
   --   
   J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf   
      
   At the age of 7, Julia Elizabeth Wells could sing notes only dogs could hear.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)