Confusing birth and baptism details. Yorkshire England 1700's

Question

Would it be unusual for a person to be born in 1755 but not get baptized until 1796 and still use their maiden name? Mary Green born in Yorkshire, England in 1755. She was married in 1780 and became Mary Marsden. She was baptized in 1791 as Mary Green. Thank you for any advice.

Green-49175

Answer 1

It's unusual to have that many years difference. I've seen adult baptisms but generally they were people who had never married and/or were conversions from another faith. How old is the Mary Green being baptised? Very often the vicar made a note in the register of the age and to find this you will need to look at the original document. This will help you identify whether or not she is the same person.

Comments

Thank you for your assistance.

Answer 2

Well spotted. This seems a straightforward case of two different people being conflated. There's no good reason for concluding that the Mary Green who was supposedly baptized as an adult in 1796 [without an image I even doubt this record, why would they have a precise date of birth for a 40 year old?] with the Mary Green who married Richard Marsden in 1780.

I would suggest splitting this profile into two different people and adding a note.

Edit: Hmm ... OK I've now completely reversed my position, sorry. The details on her daughter Mary Ann's baptism are compelling but I just feel that they are the same person, despite the use of her maiden name, as unlikely as it appears.

There'll probably be some strange religious reason why she was baptised under her birth name after 40 years.

Can anyone find an image of the 1796 baptism they could share?

Comments

There's an image of it on Ancestry, that's definitely what it says.

Born June 20th 1755.

---

Here is the free-to-view link to the image - https://www.ancestry.co.uk/sharing/4570320?mark=7b22746f6b656e223a22366c5148552f487a56716c6568777766642f52445a626f723073727a332b4d6353704b73475655717535303d222c22746f6b656e5f76657273696f6e223a225632227d.

---

Perhaps she needed her birth certified for some reason?

---

It doesn't actually say she was baptised as Mary Green, though.  

The wording is "Mary D^r of Joseph & Mary Green, who was born June the 20^th 1755" — so there is a presumption her last name is still Green, but if she was married by then, it wasn't.  The record is identifying her parentage, not necessarily who she was "now".

---

I agree with Melanie. The wording indicates parentage, not her current name.

---

Thank you for your assistance.

---

Thank you for your help

---

Appreciate your help

---

I wanted to thank each person that provided info. Instead it looks like I was a broken record 

---

I wanted to thank each person that provided info. Instead it looks like I was a broken record.

-

No, you don't.  You look like someone saying thanks.  

---

We can all see what you intended with your thanks :) And we all appreciate it!