Frustrated! Why can't people keep track of/tell the truth about their ages!

Alicat

My head is wrecked! A lot of relatives seem unable to keep track of their own ages and/or are big fibbers! I understand it's very common and it wasn't their intention to frustrate their future great great granddaughter but still

The latest problem I have is with my g-g-grandfather. On the 1911 census he states that he is 53 and his wife is 52. Then on the 1901 census he states that both himself and his wife are both 40. So already a minor difference in the years. Both are definitely one and the same family as the kids are correct.

Then I found a baptism cert on rootsIreland.ie which seems to fit. The date is for March 1858 which fits with the 1911 census age of 53. Then today I found a possible marriage cert for his parents which is for July 1859, which would fit with the 1901 census. So my options are:

• The child was born out of wedlock (surely unusual for RCs?)
• The birth cert is not the one I'm looking for, even though I have found no other options that come even close
• The marriage cert is not the one I'm looking for, even though I have found no other options that come even close
• A date has been mistranscribed somewhere
• I'm going mad

Tell me other people are having just as much trouble!

shanew

Some families seem to be terrible at keeping track of their ages, I've a couple of line that end up over 15 years out for some of the family on the 1911 census. And they didn't even manage to over estimate their ages to get the pension! I've found they remembered childrens ages ok though..

One thing to remember if you can find a marriage in parish records is that not all records survive and not all areas and parishes are included on the RootsIreland or other websites either.. so it's possible the marriage you are looking for either has no record or is not online yet.

Births did occur outside marriage..

Which county(ies)/parishes do they come from ?


Shane

Alicat

shanew wrote: »

Some families seem to be terrible at keeping track of their ages, I've a couple of line that end up over 15 years out for some of the family on the 1911 census. And they didn't even manage to over estimate their ages to get the pension! I've found they remembered childrens ages ok though..

One thing to remember if you can find a marriage in parish records is that not all records survive and not all areas and parishes are included on the RootsIreland or other websites either.. so it's possible the marriage you are looking for either has no record or is not online yet.

Births did occur outside marriage..

Which county(ies)/parishes do they come from ?


Shane

Yeah the kids all seem to be fine, it's always the parents.

These ones are from Dublin, and over the years, different generations/lines of this family move between St. Paul's, St. Michan's and even St Audeons. I am wary of what I have found as I don't want to make a mistake and I know there could be records out there that I'm missing as they haven't been digitised yet. Particularly with rootsIreland, I know that they don't have a lot of Dublin City done. It's just so frustrating as the names are not that common (I see very few with similar names) and the years are all so close.

I plan on making my first trip into the National Library next week. Maybe I might find something worthwhile there, with the parish records.

pinkypinky

A lot of Dublin city parishes are on www.irishgenealogy.ie now and the remainder will be there by the end of this year. Have you got the person's marriage cert to be sure you have the right father, etc? Try approaching it from a sibling angle, i.e. work out their respect birth years so that you have a definite timeframe for the parents' marriage.

Alicat

Yeah I have. I found the possible marriage cert on that irishgenealogy.ie page. The groom's name is the same as the father's name on the birth cert, only that the first name and middle name are switched around; Thomas Michael and Michael Thomas. The bride's middle name is on the marriage cert and is the name she gave to one of her daughters. All of which is not concrete evidence but does make sense.

I have found lots (if not all) of the children's baptism certs, all with the same parents, and Thomas is definitely the first one of them. The next child is in 1860. That's what is so frustrating, a year or two off and it's throwing serious doubts on the accuracy of it all. But maybe the child was born out of wedlock.

CDfm

This is amusing.

There probably is a rational explanatiion for the difference being that they did not have the same birthdays and the census took place on different dates.

Now the census were taken at different dates and that could account for it.

The census were also taken by the local constable and if a woman were older than her husband well she may not have wanted that known.Its the same today.

I read a news article today about a guy who found out when he was 26 that Alex Higgins was his Dad and he is now 40 expecting a child of his own.

My great grandfather was married twice and his first wife died in childbirth. So illegitimacy is not the only reason.

shanew

I think we are talking about a bigger difference than a year or two - so different census dates would not account for that. In most cases the census forms were filled in by the head of household. The enumerator only did this if the family were illiterate.

1901 census - 31 March (Sunday)

1911 census - 2nd April (Sunday)


Shane

pinkypinky

Alicat wrote: »

That's what is so frustrating, a year or two off and it's throwing serious doubts on the accuracy of it all. But maybe the child was born out of wedlock.

In that case, definitely go look at the microfilms in the NLI. Sometimes the priest has made a note like "illegitimate" or in one case in my family "married XYZ in St. Francis' church" later on.

CDfm

shanew wrote: »

I think we are talking about a bigger difference than a year or two - so different census dates would not account for that. In most cases the census forms were filled in by the head of household. The enumerator only did this if the family were illiterate.

People are careless or tell little lies. Census returns arent accurate -they are like insurance forms where people put down they dont smoke or drink less than 5 pints a week when its not true.

The enumerator only collects the form but does not check it.

I think its unrealistic for you to expect that people did not put false data in returns for whatever reason.

shanew

CDfm wrote: »

...
I think its unrealistic for you to expect that people did not put false data in returns for whatever reason.
...

I never suggested that there weren't some people that entered false information deliberately, but I believe that the majority of incorrect ages are down to simply not being able to work out their own ages.



Shane

CDfm

shanew wrote: »

I never suggested that there weren't some people that entered false information deliberately, but I believe that the majority of incorrect ages are down to simply not being able to work out their own ages.



Shane

Sorry Shane

My older sister lies about her age and she is married to her lawyer. her real age would go on the car insurance but something like a censorship form no chance. It was a surpriseb to her daughter that she was older than me.

I find it very funny & think what you are seeing here is a bit of human vanity.

CD

bonzer1again

something I learned whilst doing my family tree was that the old age pension came into effect in 1906 ish , and people who were cute then lied about their age making themselves older, in order to get the pension earlier...this might explain why the ages on the 1901 census and the 1911 census are so varied.