Page 1 of 1

Marriage -Church - Illegitimate children

PostPosted: Tue May 01, 2007 2:40 pm
by terstan
I need some clarification and understanding on this situation.

Information from "English Settlers of Barbados", shows 8 children being baptised in St. Peter Parish in 1780-90s with the notation illegitimate, parents Samuel Knight and Prudence Hurst. (One daughter, Christian Knight, born 1792, married William Griffith Armstrong, was my gggggrandmother.) Was there a "church" reason for this determination? I'm not being critical, just trying to understand the historical aspect of this information.)

Thanks for any insight.

Terry

Marriage -Church - Illegitimate children

PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2007 2:27 pm
by yvonne emanuel
More than likely it was for inheritance rights and the distribution of the fathers assets.

PostPosted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:51 pm
by bimjim
Baptism in those days was not necessarily performed within months of birth, as we do nowadays for every child. One of my forebears baptised herself with her first child, so she was at or above around 17 years of age by then.

With the illigetimacy factor placed in there, it could well be that the parents decided to get married, and in so doing made it possible to baptise their children... I'm not sure that the clergy of the day would permit illegitimate children to be baptised while their parents were still unmarried - clergy had far more influence over daily life then than now.

So eight children being baptised at the same time might not be such an unusual event, but my first question would be whether the parents married just before that event.