1
Berkshire Completed Look ups / Re: COMPLETE - Bucklebury Parish Baptisms - Thomas ADAMS c 1809-1813
« on: Wednesday 16 December 09 21:05 GMT (UK) »
Thanks - that explains a lot. I just couldn't fit that Henry piece in the jigsaw, and it turns out that it wasn't a piece of the jigsaw in the first place. I'll now start pursuing JESSEs. And Mary Ann ADAMS.
By the way, does anyone know why anyone would lie about their age to an Army recruiting officer in 1831 to appear YOUNGER than they really were? I know that my grandfather lied about his age to to appear OLDER than he really was in order to join up for the first world war. But it seems my great great grandfather (if he was the Thomas JESSE/ADAMS above) claimed that he was younger than he really was when he joined the 35th Regiment of Foot in London. His military records show that he said he was 17 years 11 months old when he joined up in London on 11th February 1831.
Was there some sort of age-limit, or a cut-off for certain types of people. Or was it that he was relatively short (5'6")? The 35th had a minimum height requirement and maybe he wanted it to appear that he might have a bit of growing left in him?
Because these military dates were so detailed, and pointed to a March 1813 birthdate I gave them more weight than the fuzzier census and burial indications of an 1811/2 birthdate
By the way, does anyone know why anyone would lie about their age to an Army recruiting officer in 1831 to appear YOUNGER than they really were? I know that my grandfather lied about his age to to appear OLDER than he really was in order to join up for the first world war. But it seems my great great grandfather (if he was the Thomas JESSE/ADAMS above) claimed that he was younger than he really was when he joined the 35th Regiment of Foot in London. His military records show that he said he was 17 years 11 months old when he joined up in London on 11th February 1831.
Was there some sort of age-limit, or a cut-off for certain types of people. Or was it that he was relatively short (5'6")? The 35th had a minimum height requirement and maybe he wanted it to appear that he might have a bit of growing left in him?
Because these military dates were so detailed, and pointed to a March 1813 birthdate I gave them more weight than the fuzzier census and burial indications of an 1811/2 birthdate