RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: Paulo Leeds on Tuesday 27 February 18 22:21 GMT (UK)
-
I often see ancestors with 1,2,3 years difference each census.
lies? or did they just not know exactly how old they were/year they were born??
-
You need to remember that there were very high levels of illiteracy back then and people could not always "do their sums" when it came to ages
-
and they didn't have to know when they got to 60 or 65 as there wasn't the old age pension then ;D
Ages weren't really that important
-
i guess ages weren't the wholly documented thing they are now, every 10 years people probably 'forgot'
it's easy to forget that life without bureaucracy, departments, systems, computers was so much different
-
Women have lied about their ages for centuries!
Martin
-
1. Ages of adults on 1841 census wasn't intended to be accurate. Instruction to census enumerator regarding ages was to round down age of each adult to a multiple of 5. A child's age (i.e. under 15) was to be entered as given.
"Write the age of every person under 15 years of age as it is stated to you. For persons aged 15 years and upwards write the lowest term of 5 years within which the age is.
Thus for Persons aged
15 years and under 20 write 15
20 years and under 25 write 20
.....
and so on until the greatest age.
If no more can be ascertained in respect of any person other than that the person is a child or grown up write 'under 20' or 'above 20' as the case maybe."
www.hunimex.com/warwick/census/1841_cnum_inst.html
Some census collectors followed this instruction, some didn't.
2. 1841 census was taken in July, subsequent census days were in March or April.
Therefore a person who had turned 9 years of age in May or June 1841 would have been recorded as 18 years old on 1851 census and 28 in 1861, providing their exact age was known.
Edit. Oops! Just noticed and corrected an error in the age ranges.
-
Women have lied about their ages for centuries!
Cheeky. ;D
Before the system of registering births was introduced the most accurate records are in family bibles (assuming the family was literate and could afford luxuries like bibles). Some baptism records mention a date of birth, but this is a small minority. Middle-class and upper-class families would have been more likely to remember and celebrate birthdays as they had a higher standard of living than the working-class struggling to survive.
The UK state pension for people over 70 began in 1909 (over 70 years after the registration system began). Until then the only age limits were for marriage, employment and military service - but I doubt that people were always required to provide proof of age.
Philip
-
I often see ancestors with 1,2,3 years difference each census.
lies? or did they just not know exactly how old they were/year they were born??
I would say you are quite fortunate if you've only encountered differences of 1, 2 or 3 years. ;D
As well as people being 'economical with the truth' (especially popular with older women marrying younger men) you also have to bear in mind that 1841-1901 the records we are looking at have been copied at least once.
So on top of deliberate inaccuracy and unintentional inaccuracy, we are also potentially seeing the results of simple misreading/miscopying of what was originally written.
And in some cases a +/-1 year difference might be as simple as having a birthday around the time the census was taken, and therefore having a birthday before - or after - census day, depending on the decade.
-
I have some ancestors who were consistent and some who weren't so much. I have one ancestor who, according to the census, was born between 1803 and 1821...
I think sometimes they tailored age to their spouse. The man above had a first wife who was older than him and his age was higher there, but then remarried to a woman much younger and lo and behold his age drops. This was probably more common with women though.
With children, it's possible that, especially with a lot of children, the parents couldn't quite keep track of the ages.
As others have said, however, ages weren't as marked with milestones back then.
-
From "Making Sense of the Census" by Edward Higgs
"........the ages reported in the census must be regarded as only rough approximations of fact. In a period before systematic record-keeping many people had only an approximate idea of their date of birth, and in some cases there may have been temptations to give incorrect information. In very general terms one can say that the majority of ages stated will be consistent from census to census."
It can be said that the recording of ages is without doubt one of the most problematic features of the census returns. Ages reported in the census must be regarded as only a rough approximation of the fact. For instance working families may put down incorrect ages in order to get round restrictions on the employment of their children. There are numerous other reasons for ages to have been 'adjusted'
There is another thread on ages at http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=658914.0
Stan
-
thanks guys. very interesting answers.
easy to see now how ages and year of birth's should be taken with a pinch of salt in the 1800's
-
I think up until fairly recently people weren't too worried about their age. However these days we are asked for our date of birth or age on almost every form we fill in, either on paper or on the internet - even Rootschat has a space for age. So people know exactly when they were born. My grandmother went through the whole of her adult life thinking she was a year younger than she actually was.
-
The same caution needs to be applied to death registrations (and burial records) and the 1939 register. Even when a date of birth is recorded it is quite common for the day and month to be correct but for the year to be out.
I'm currently reading the book Narrowboat by Tom Rolt and this morning found a reference to 'Old Tom Parr' who was claimed to be over 152 when he died https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Tom_Parr
He managed to get himself buried in Westminster Abbey on the basis of what may be an early case of an amateur family historian finding the 'wrong' entry in the parish baptism register ;)
-
Women have lied about their ages for centuries!
People have lied about anything and everything since the dawn of language ::)
My first boyfriend said he was 22, then 23, then accidentally let slip that he was 25. He didn't have a birthday during that time and I never asked for proof. After he'd moved on I was told by a police officer that he was 27 and married :o
There was also a first name I didn't know about - apparently he chose to use his middle name. What he might have put on a census form is anyone's guess!
Carol
-
Even as late as the early 20th century not everyone was certain of their date of birth. I have instances in my grandmother's family where an older sibling was asked to confirm the date of a younger one's birth and my grandmother herself once told me she had for some years celebrated her birthday on what turned out to be the wrong date.
-
Even as late as the early 20th century not everyone was certain of their date of birth. I have instances in my grandmother's family where an older sibling was asked to confirm the date of a younger one's birth and my grandmother herself once told me she had for some years celebrated her birthday on what turned out to be the wrong date.
these are people who threw away or lost their birth certificates? (or their parents did)
-
I think up until fairly recently people weren't too worried about their age. However these days we are asked for our date of birth or age on almost every form we fill in, either on paper or on the internet - even Rootschat has a space for age. So people know exactly when they were born. My grandmother went through the whole of her adult life thinking she was a year younger than she actually was.
SWMBO's grandmother added a couple of years to her age to "legally" get a job and over the years forgot that it was a lie. This only came to light when she couldn't get her pension when she expected it.
Apart from the 1841 census, which gave me a lot of grief until I found out about the rounding of ages, most seem to be accurate to within 2 years. Since middle age I have needed to stop and think if asked my own age and have to do some arithmetic to work out my childrens' so I am not surprised that my ancestors didn't always get it right.
-
My father all the way through his army career, was born in 1909.You have guessed it he was born in 1910. So even in 1927 no proof of age was needed just your word. And that you looked old enough.
My father joined the army to escape a family of 8. Living in a two up two down, 10 foot wide cottage.
-
1. Ages of adults on 1841 census wasn't intended to be accurate. Instruction to census enumerator regarding ages was to round down age of each adult to a multiple of 5. A child's age (i.e. under 15) was to be entered as given.
"Write the age of every person under 15 years of age as it is stated to you. For persons aged 15 years and upwards write the lowest term of 5 years within which the age is.
Thus for Persons aged
15 years and under 20 write 15
20 years and under 25 write 20
.....
and so on until the greatest age.
If no more can be ascertained in respect of any person other than that the person is a child or grown up write 'under 20' or 'above 20' as the case maybe."
www.hunimex.com/warwick/census/1841_cnum_inst.html
Some census collectors followed this instruction, some didn't.
2. 1841 census was taken in July, subsequent census days were in March or April.
Therefore a person who had turned 9 years of age in May or June 1841 would have been recorded as 18 years old on 1851 census and 28 in 1861, providing their exact age was known.
Edit. Oops! Just noticed and corrected an error in the age ranges.
one of my ancestors was listed as Aged 29 on the 1841?? Shudn't that have been put as 25??
-
Some census collectors followed this instruction, some didn't.
-
I was once a Merchants Buyer responsible for the purchase of 16,000 items, sometimes I'd have two phone calls at once, one in each ear. I knew regulator discounts and current buying prices off the top of head.
Because of my qualifications, I got a job at a Local Authority, 8 years into that, then I woke up one morning, little memory and only knew that I had to telephone work to say I was too ill to go.
Due to a neuro condition, I now have to work out my age on a slip of paper, but I am not sure this minute if it is Thursday, Friday or Saturday today, I often miss out, because I have forgotten and somebody says did you see ... the other night.
If somebody was in a rush and said give me your age, I'd have to guess, but I know my exact date, place and address of birth and I know we are in 2018.
Mark
-
If somebody was in a rush and said give me your age, I'd have to guess, but I know my exact date, place and address of birth and I know we are in 2018.
Mark
On occasions I've had to ask "What year is it?" and then do a sum. I always remember the year I was born so I can calculate my age from that. I've always been very good at mental arithmetic. Like Mark, if I had to give my age in a hurry I would guess and might get it wrong.
-
On occasions I've had to ask "What year is it?" and then do a sum. I always remember the year I was born so I can calculate my age from that. I've always been very good at mental arithmetic. Like Mark, if I had to give my age in a hurry I would guess and might get it wrong.
I think a lot of us are probably like that, we know exactly the day, month and year of our birth, but have to think about how old we are.
-
Maybe they knew they were born in 1813 but never could work out what age they were in the 1881 census. They would have been 68 in 1881 but they may never have done the maths properly.
As said, they may have known the day and month of their birth but never the exact year. I am sure many of our ancestors at least knew their month of birth.
-
Women have lied about their ages for centuries!
Not just women!
Young men might claim to be older to get a job, or join the services.
They may adjust their age to be closer in age to a prospective partner.
Older men might claim to be younger so as to keep a job. A 58 year-old labourer has better job prospects than a 68 year-old one. Ageism is nothing new!
-
To answer Paulo Leeds question about what happened to the birth certificates - I have no idea. I have often wondered if people did not routinely have copies of birth certificates for their children. Maybe they had to pay and the cost was too high? I have several replacement ones which were issued when the child became old enough to go to work or joined the army. I guess such things were not a priority in those times unless needed by "the authorities".
-
Some census collectors followed this instruction, some didn't.
Yay for the ones that didn't :)
-
Yay indeed for the census collectors that didn't follow instructions! Also for those parish clerks who added their own little comments.
-
Yay indeed for the census collectors that didn't follow instructions! Also for those parish clerks who added their own little comments.
what sort of comments? :)
-
Yay indeed for the census collectors that didn't follow instructions! Also for those parish clerks who added their own little comments.
what sort of comments? :)
One of my favourites is baptism of an illegitimate child during Napoleonic Wars. Father was named. Then it was noted that the woman's husband was away serving in a certain regiment.
I've come accross a few baptisms where incest was suspected. I mentioned one last week on a thread about step-siblings marrying.
Then there were the Anglican curates trying to uphold laws of Church and State in force during early 18thC, venting their frustration against recalcitrant Catholics in their parishes.
Some 18thC Catholic registers, which were simple notebooks, have entries which were nothing to do with church matters such as invitations to dinner, settlements of financial matters between parishioners, yield from a fruit tree, cures for human & animal ailments.
-
It would be interesting to know whether people routinely needed birth certificates for anything specific. When would you need it? The concept of how people thought about ID was quite different to now.
If you didn't really need it, maybe registering it was good enough. There are very few earlier birth certificates handed down my family, given the number of people born, so I suspect most poorer people just didn't get them if you had to pay.
Anyone know how this usage of the birth cert itself evolved?
-
Yes in 1841 some people's exact ages were given. And I even know a Surrey parish where county of birth was given for some people not born in county. If only the enumerator of St Peter Le Bailey, Oxford did this, I would have got the county of birth of my ancestor James Smith who died in 1849.
-
Apologies if this appears twice, I sent my message but it seems to have disappeared.
I have a baptism entry where the clerk has recorded the father's occupation in French which was useful as I suspected the family was from France. This is not proof I know but interesting. Sometimes there are additional comments such as information stating from where an incomer originated. Another particularly useful one for me was the note that the burial of a young man, whose name was the same as his cousin, was the "son of the shoemaker".
-
Yay indeed for the census collectors that didn't follow instructions! Also for those parish clerks who added their own little comments.
what sort of comments? :)
My favourite so far: "Conceived in fornication!" ;D ;D ;D
-
To answer Paulo Leeds question about what happened to the birth certificates - I have no idea. I have often wondered if people did not routinely have copies of birth certificates for their children. Maybe they had to pay and the cost was too high? I have several replacement ones which were issued when the child became old enough to go to work or joined the army. I guess such things were not a priority in those times unless needed by "the authorities".
I think there was a charge for full birth certificates, but a "short" birth certificate was free of charge. These only record the name of the child and date of birth, and are usually on very flimsy paper. I found a couple of these in family papers from the early 20th c and they had almost disintegrated, so many of these will not have survived.
(http://www.stepbystep.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Birth-certificate-300x298.jpg)
-
I have an ancestor whose birth date varies inbetween 1814 and 1833 in the census. Yes, a 19 year variation. And he had a common name. But I know from plenty of other documents that he is the same person. He is 38 in 1871. Again it may have been a mistake for 58. Ages on censuses only as accurate as what is being told, and the enumerator probably made mistakes themselves.
-
Thank you Sloe Gin. I too have a couple of these short certificates and they were issued some years after the child's birth so I wondered if they had been obtained when the individual was starting work.