3 current? Birth query.....

[ladybird]

23/04/1826 Falkirk
JAMES law(ful son of)JOHN CRAIG/JEAN BERRY
Witnesses James Manuel, Thomas Inglis
born 3 current

Hi folks
I have this from the OPR's and was wondering about the "3 current" bit on it?
Does this mean James was the 3rd child or that there were 3 before him?
Or have I got it wrong???

BTW I noticed on another birth on the same page the note "25 current"

Later...hmmm no that can't be right, have just found his older brother, says born 13 current.

[Russell]

Hi Ladybird

Sometimes we are left to guess what the person registering the birth meant. There were no hard and fast rules before 1855 and the introduction of Statutory Registration with its pre-printed forms, which explains why there can be great disparities in what appears.
I would interpret the entry as a child born on the third of the current month but baptised on the date given.
Often the date is for the baptism and there may be no clues to when the child was actualy born. Sometimes you may find several children from the same family being baptise on the same day.
One of our familiy lines obviously moved into an area where there was a active church and the whole family were taken along to be baptised.

I have found families of 14 children but not yet found one with 24

Russell

[ladybird]

Thanks Russell
I would say you're right, it doesn't make sense otherwise.
It's funny that every single OPR I have looked at has had a different format. Seems the ministers had their own way of doing things.
Sylvia

[DavidWW]

23/04/1826 Falkirk
JAMES law(ful son of)JOHN CRAIG/JEAN BERRY
Witnesses James Manuel, Thomas Inglis
born 3 current

Hi folks
I have this from the OPR's and was wondering about the "3 current" bit on it?
Does this mean James was the 3rd child or that there were 3 before him?
Or have I got it wrong???

BTW I noticed on another birth on the same page the note "25 current"

Later...hmmm no that can't be right, have just found his older brother, says born 13 current.

All it means is the 3rd day (or whatever) of the current month, as opposed to "ultimo" for previous month, - aren't there any "ultimos" about ?

David

[DavidWW]

Thanks Russell
I would say you're right, it doesn't make sense otherwise.
It's funny that every single OPR I have looked at has had a different format. Seems the ministers had their own way of doing things.
Sylvia

That's because there was no central guidance given as to the format of the records, so that it was down to each minister or session clerk to do it the way they considered to be "correct".

David

[ladybird]

No "ultimos" but several dates in March.
That'll teach me to read the whole page before I jump up and down
Sylvia

[DavidWW]

No "ultimos" but several dates in March.
That'll teach me to read the whole page before I jump up and down
Sylvia

Just been refreshing my Latin phrases and abbreviations.

Just be thankful that the minister/session clerk didn't use "3 inst." for instante mense = current month; or "23 ult." for ultimo mense = last month.

To complete the set, so to speak, although the sequence of events wouldn't work here , "prox." = proximo mense = next month.

David

[ladybird]

Actually I was really hoping that he was the 3rd child, as it might have nailed down his sister's birth which doesn't seem to have been registered. Though she was born after him I think, 1830-2 - ish

[ladybird]

Hehehehe it's been a few haircuts since I did 3rd form Latin
Amo, amas, amat is about my limit these days...and there's not much call for that in genealogy


On second thoughts maybe the minister might have added it to the marriage certs