Genealogy Chat

Hi sorry if this is a bit long but need advise.Here Go.
I have my mum in my tree her parents died when she was young so she only had her parents details.
(mum) Molly E R Porter b. 1933 Edmonton Parents Ivy I Rawlinson&Thomas Porter Birth cert got.
Found a marriage for parents cert got and everything adds up.

Thomas & ivy married 1931 edmonton. Ivy dad listed as george Henry Rawlinson. I have got Ivy birth cert listed edmonton dad is same mother Mary Ann crossman.

Found George b.abt 1879 and Mary b.abt 1880 in 1901 census in wood green middx.
also found George in 1891 census showing b.abt 1880.

But then I order a marriage cert for George & Mary could only find one which match both names in hornsey.

The cert shows they were both married at 21 in dec 1897 which would make them born 1876. I can not find a george Rawlinson born in this year or one before or after.

Then I spoke with someone who has george born in 1880 which would link.
So the question is would you just think he lie about his age ? and why would he.

Thanks for getting this far and reading hope you can advise me.
Sue

Hi Sue,

People did lie about their ages, especially if there was a big age gap. No idea why but I've got one where he was 6 years out!!!!

Anything's possible! Good luck.

Janice

Hi Sue,

Yes, people did sometimes lie about their age, but in your case it seems a bit unlikely because if the marriage age is wrong and his birth in 1890 is correct he would only have been about 7 when he was married.
I would say that birth certificates are normally the most accurate record, so if you can find the correct one for him that may discount the marriage one.
The census records can sometimes be out by anything up to 10 years, although I have found that you can get a fairly accurate idea of someone's age by looking at a few together and seeing what the majority of them say.
In your case I would work from the birth of Ivy or any earlier siblings and try to find a marriage in the 5 years prior to their birth.
You can also estimate how old George would be when Ivy was born to give you a realistic idea.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Susan

sorry Susan birth age typed wrong should have read 1880.
have changed it now.

In the 1901 census show georges first child born 1898 a year after the marriage.

Sue

Age 21 sometimes meant that they were of full age, i.e. 21 or over, so don't take it verbatum that this was their actual age.

If they were actually under 21, and therefore needed parental approval, they might have been a bit economical with the truth. No one checked, as long as they looked old enough. It was also sometimes difficult to persuade parents to give approval, especially if they were illiterate.

Census records could be notoriously inaccurate, it depended on who provided the information, and how accurate the enumerator was in completing them.

As Janice says, anything is possible.

My grandmother took 5 years of her age each time she married which made tracing her birth rather difficult!! Luckily she only married twice. She even told relatives the incorrect country of birth.

Re census records we have found a number of our relatives with the birth details of the husband and wife transposed, which can make searching a problem

Agree that anything is possible

mt Great grandmother was born 1880 (have the cert) my great Grandad was born 1890 (have the cert) when they married in 1911 she is down as 27 and he as 25! no idea why

There was a 19 year age gap between my grandmother and grandfather. When they married he said he was 39 (he was 42) and she said she was 28 (she was 23). This made the difference look to be only 11 years.

In your case I would think it more likely that they either couldn't or didn't want to get parental consent, so just said they were 21.

They weren't the first to lie and they won't be the last.

Kath. x

Thanks for all your replys. At least I know this happens a lot and can put them in to my tree.

Sue