As I have listened once again and studied up once again on paedobaptistic arguments, the area of history, at least, seems to call into question the paedobaptist view. David Wright, who is professor of Patristic and Reformed Christianity at the University of Edinburgh (and, I might add, a paedobaptist), warns us against the dangers of trying to use the historical record as one of the proofs for infant baptism. I will let my readers click on the link to read his excellent article:
Also, two articles on the Triablogue website I thought were helpful in this regard as well:
Please read the articles, but they make the point that infant baptism was not the common practice of the church until well into the sixth century, and did not even show up until the second century (although it may had been around in small spurts before Tertullian).
The case is also made that modern historical scholarship is admitting (even admitted by paedobaptists) that credobaptism seems to have been the apostolic practice.
The articles certainly help shed some light on the question at hand.