An abundance of twins?

[Susan48]

I've been looking at a couple of my DNA matches who also match with each other to see how we are connected. Both matches are descended from William Cotterell who was baptised Apr 1754 in Easthampstead, Berkshire. His parents were William and Jane. One of my matches has on his Ancestry tree the image of the page from the parish register showing the marriage of William Cotterell to Jeane Boulter on 2 Oct 1745 at Easthampstead. I am descended from Joseph Cotterell who was baptised Jun 1858 in Easthampstead, son of William and Ann.

Looking at the Berkshire Marriage Index on Findmypast, there are three entries for a marriage on 2 Oct 1745 for a William Cotterell in Easthampstead. One shows the bride's name as Jeane Boulter (transcription from the parish register), one as Ann Boulter (transcription by the Berkshire Family History Society), and the third as just Boulter (from the Bishops Transcripts) and none has a link to the original entry in the parish register.

Looking next at the Berkshire Baptisms Index on Findmypast for baptisms surname Cotterell (including variants) with father William between 1845 and 1865 in Easthampstead I found 16 separate baptisms, some with mother's name Jane, and some with mother's name Ann or Anne. The intervals between the baptisms and the distribution of the mother's names would suggest that there were two separate sets of parents. However, all but one of the baptisms has a note on the record transcribed by the Berkshire Family History Society saying "Twin" - although there are no double baptisms, and no burial records to suggest that only one twin of each pair survived. One of my DNA matches has posted an image of a page from the Easthampstead parish register showing two of the baptisms, in April and October 1754, one with mother Jane and one with mother Ann. It’s not clear where the information about twins came from. The baptisms in question are shown below.

William Cotterell bap 28 Sep 1846 to William and Jane. Note: Twin
(buried 20 Jan 1749, son of William)

Ann Cotterell bap 6 Feb 1748 to William and Ann. Note: Twin

Mary Cotterell bap 22 Jul 1748 to William and Jane. Note: Twin

John Cotterell bap 11 May 1750 to William and Jane. Note: Twin

Mary Cotterell bap 20 or 21 Nov 1750 to William and Ann. Note: Twin

Jane Cotterell bap 25 Jan 1751/2 to William and Jane. Note: Twin

Susannah Cotterell bap 4 Oct 1752 to William and Ann. Note: Twin

William Cotterell bap 21 Apr 1754 to William and Jane. Note: Twin

Avice Cotterell bap 19 Oct 1754 to William and Ann. Note: Twin

Benjamin Cotterell bap 27Mar or 25 Apr 1756 to William and Ann. Note: Twin

Thomas Cotterell bap 8 Aug 1756 to William and Jane. Note: Twin

Joseph Cotterell bap 18 Jun 1758 to William and Ann. Note: Twin

Elizabeth Cotterell bap 25 Feb 1759 to William and Jean. Note: Twin

John Cotterell bap 16 Mar 1760 to William and Ann. Note: Twin

Henry Cotterell bap 30 Sep 1761 to William and Jane. Note: Twin

Sarah Cotterell bap 17 Jul 1765 to William and Jane

The amount of DNA I share with my two matches, both descendants of William and Jane’s son William, is 7cM and 31cM over 1 segment. William and Jane are their 4 x great-grandparents. William and Ann are my 4 x great-grandparents.

My questions are, where does the information about twins come from? And do my DNA matches help to clarify the problem?

 

[Helen7]

It does seem that there were two William Cotterells, one married to Ann and one to Jane, baptising children in the period 1745 to 1765. Could Jane and Ann Boulter have been twins, who each married a man named William Cotterell? Maybe the two Williams were cousins?

 

[Susan48]

I agree that it does look as though there were two William Cotterells. The page from the parish register only shows one marriage for William Cotterell on that day so I don't think there were two Williams marrying twins. The shared DNA certainly suggests that both Williams - assuming there were two - were related, but unfortunately I haven't found a convincing alternative marriage between a William and an Ann in the surrounding area. My cousin, with whom I have had lengthy discussions about this problem, has volunteered to contact the Berkshire Family History Society to see if they can throw any light on the Twin notes.

 

[Pauline]

I did a search at FMP on baptisms in Easthampstead for 1750+/- 2 and, looking at a random selection of these, a good proportion of the entries transcribed by the Berkshire FHS had the Twin note, not just the Cotterells. So I would strongly suspect a clerical error when the society were compiling the transcription.

 

[peter]

I did a search at FMP on baptisms in Easthampstead for 1750+/- 2 and, looking at a random selection of these, a good proportion of the entries transcribed by the Berkshire FHS had the Twin note, not just the Cotterells. So I would strongly suspect a clerical error when the society were compiling the transcription.

Or when the data was uploaded to FMP - that's probably more likely.

 

[Pauline]

Or when the data was uploaded to FMP - that's probably more likely.

Yes, could well be - some kind of clerical error or mishap, anyway.

 

[Susan48]

Thank you both Pauline and Peter for a sensible explanation for the Twin notes. I wonder how many other family historians have been misled by such notes?