Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

How accurate are Census ages ?

  • 08-05-2015 12:39am
    #1
    OU812
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,075 ✭✭✭


    I've just today come into two families, one 1901 & one 1911 who are on both of my parents sides of the family.

    The ages are slightly off in both of them compared with what I had before (locations also).

    However, there's several names in both which I have and the ages while appearing incorrect are almost the right amount of years apart.

    Would it be common for the ages to be off ?

    For example, in one of them, my GG Grandfather is listed as being 42 in 1901 therefore, born in 1859. I know he died on the 24th April 1916 - yes, *that* date (shot through the throat). Which puts him at 57 at death.

    However a medical report from his job in 1915 has his stated age at 50 & his death certificate has him listed at 60


Comments

  • #2
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,585 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    They're not. Basically anyway

    People didn't know, people lied, people aged themselves up for pension purposes, etc, etc. I've women in my tree who "aged" three years in ten and older people who aged 15.


  • #3
    OU812
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,075 ✭✭✭OU812


    So is the best bet to now go looking for birth certs ?

    These two families have given me a huge amount of detail, I'm 90% sure they're correct & I'm lucky in that in one of them is three generations, which has given me a massive jump back to 1824


  • #4
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,585 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Birth and/or baptism records are definitely where to go to next, if you're unsure on census ages. They're of value anyway due to the other info on them.


  • #5
    Coolnabacky1873
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 556 ✭✭✭Coolnabacky1873


    OU812 wrote: »
    So is the best bet to now go looking for birth certs ?

    No birth certs before 1864 so you will need to focus on Church baptisms.


  • #6
    OU812
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,075 ✭✭✭OU812


    Coolnabacky1873 wrote: »
    No birth certs before 1864 so you will need to focus on Church baptisms.

    Well this just took a turn for the impossible...


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    pinkypinky
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,676 Mod ✭✭✭✭pinkypinky


    Have you read our sticky? It might answer some of your basic questions.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056388162

    Genealogy Forum Mod



  • #8
    OU812
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,075 ✭✭✭OU812


    Does anyone know what dates the 1901 & 1911 Census were taken ? It'd help me tie down a couple of DOBs.

    Thanks


  • #9
    shanew
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,777 ✭✭✭shanew


    Census date is mentioned on the household forms - 31 March 1901 and 2nd April 1911

    p.s. the ages for your Dargans on the two census returns are all over the map - young children age roughly correctly, but teenagers and adults dont come close to being consistent.


  • #10
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    Yeah I noticed the same in my own family tree.

    One situation was to hide an underage pregnancy I believe.


  • #11
    OU812
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,075 ✭✭✭OU812


    shanew wrote: »
    Census date is mentioned on the household forms - 31 March 1901 and 2nd April 1911

    p.s. the ages for your Dargans on the two census returns are all over the map - young children age roughly correctly, but teenagers and adults dont come close to being consistent.

    That seems to be consistent through the families. There's a difference of +/- 10 years in a lot of them.

    In one case I have the DOB, age stays consistent in the first census, then by the second he's gained seven years, I have an employment record where he's de-aged 10 years & on his death cert, he's aged + 6 years again


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    desbrook
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,847 ✭✭✭desbrook


    There's a stigma about wives being older hence they take off a few years to make themselves younger than their husbands I've noticed .


  • #13
    Jellybaby1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,108 ✭✭✭Jellybaby1


    But we don't do that these days so future genealogists won't have the same problem thankfully! :D


  • #14
    pinkypinky
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,676 Mod ✭✭✭✭pinkypinky


    I must remember next year to scan a blank and filled in copy of my own census return for records.

    We ask "date of birth" now so accuracy should be better.

    Genealogy Forum Mod



  • #15
    Eve222
    Registered Users Posts: 84 ✭✭Eve222


    The ages in the census had me confused for a while. A family member in the 1901 census put his age as 56, in 1911 it was 70. At first I couldn't find his baptismal record anywhere, then I had found baptismal records I believed to be his and his siblings, but couldn't be sure because of the two ages in the census. I went back to have another look at 1911 and saw something I had missed. In the original he gave 70 and the months, it matched the baptismal record I had for him. So it pulled everything together for me.


  • #16
    kildarejohn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 324 ✭✭kildarejohn


    Another reason why ages between 1901 & 1911 are inconsistent is that Old Age Pension came in in 1909 for people over 70, so anyone of (say) 60 who understated their age in 1901 would be sure to declare their full age in 1911.
    Good info on pension introduction here http://www.irish-genealogy-toolkit.com/irish-pension-records.html


Advertisement