Is this unusual?

[AnnieMack]

I've just found an OPR entry which reads:

"Stirling 12th March 1847 the which day Martha Harley and Margaret Duff came before me one of the magistrates of Stirling and having been solemnly examined made take that James son of William Harley and Mary Wilson was born 18th January 1839 and baptised by Dr McKenzie Edinburgh on one of the days in Fenruary following.

Signed Martha Harley and Margaret Duff, witnesses

John Dick, Baillie

Is this common? I haven't seen anything like this before.

Annie

[LesleyB]

Hi Annie

I'd be very tempted to check what had been reported in the Kirk Session minutes regarding this one, just to see if there was some "case" surrounding the birth of the child, perhaps? It kind of looks like there has been some doubt raised that the child had been christened at all and for some reason proof, in the form of two witnesses, was required to confirm that he had been christened in 1839...one wonders if they had recently moved to the area, (The child appears to have been christened in Edinburgh, but the hearing is in Stirling) or there were some rumours flying about or somesuch. The Kirk Session minutes may fill in some of the background.

Certainly not seen that format before.

Best wishes
Lesley

[LesleyB]

and having been solemnly examined made take that James

"made take" does not seem to quite flow...are you sure it is "take"?

[AnnieMack]

Lesley

Had another look at it and it says oath not take!

Time for bed me thinks

Annie