How can Richard Chamberlain born in 1595 be the son of two people born in 1600?

Question

Richard Chamberlain (1595-1673) needs a different set of parent than John Chamberlain and Jane Reyner both of whom are said to have been born five years after Richard was.It is true that John and Jane Chamberlain have other sons named Richard who are more likely to be their sons.

I'm going to detach Richard's parents from him, so his profile makes some sense. Maybe, someone else can attach the right parents.

Comments

He still has a specific date and place of birth.  Usually those details need to be removed when the parents are removed, because they come from a baptism, which obviously links with the parents.  If they aren't the parents, the baptism is somebody else's.  One of my pet hates is when people snip off "unsourced" parents and leave the baptism behind.

However, in this case, it seems those details didn't fit with the parents removed.  I guess they're probably a hangover from a different theory about his parentage.

Sometimes, with an immigrant of unknown origin, you have an age at death or when making a deposition, so you have an approximate birth year that definitely relates to the right person.  But it's unusual to have an actual date or place of birth in the American evidence.

---

Just years, are not sufficient,need birth date or Baptism date,and Parish

they were born in.Often you will find many people with same names.I once

had 5 with same name in same parish.Then what.Also knowing religion,most in England were Church of England, Catholic