Genealogy Chat

see below:

My ancestor is born circa 1819 and marries before the start of civil registration. He does not die until 1903. Which census is likely to give me the most reliable information regarding his age and birthplace? There is no definitive “right answer” to this. All comments are welcomed, especially any factors which might make you change your answer.

the earliest you can lays your paws on i would guess or a consensus on 'most occurances' ~Jess~

I would find him on all possible census' and go for places and names that are repeated the most ( Does that make sense ! ) .... must say I also agree with Jess I have found the earlier census to be a bit more accurate as people maybe haven't had time to move around too much and forget places !! esta

Brenda A question for you - you have 6 censuses to choose from. I don't know how easy it would be to find him on the earlier ones, but you should be able to find him on 1901 and 1881 fairly easily. Unless there is a huge discrepancy, I would stick with those to start with. I have to say that the only relative I've found who is inconsistent on his place of birth is my husband's gt grandfather who has 3 different places (all in London, of course!) on 3 different censuses. No wonder the GRO couldn't find his birth cert when he applied for it! nell

I do have one relative (not my hypothetical example) who I found on 1851 -1881 living in Edgefield, Norfolk and giving that as his birth place, born circa 1836. No sign of him or indeed his family in 1841. On the 1891 census he said Gimmingham. This is not the same registration district at all. When I looked in 1841, there he was, with the rest of his family and several other people missing from the parish..... in the workhouse! In 1901 he says Edgefield again. Whether he was actually born in the workhouse is unclear as there appear to have been several children with the same name (the surname is BROWN, so nice and unusual) baptised, without the correct number of burials, but at least I now have him on every census!

I'd say the earlier census if you can access them. The younger a person is, the harder it is for them to add on the odd 9 or 10 years (not many 20 year olds look 30, but a 50 year old could pass for 60, if you see what I mean). They also haven't had so much time to 'forget' where they were actually born. Kath. x

But of course it depends on who filled out the census form and what if anything they asked individuals. Lots of people were in lodgings and the landlord would have filled it out - he may not have bothered to ask, but assumed. Mind you this gt grandfather of my husband's is a pain - one of the censuses said Hallam, which made me think Sheffield, but the original census form clearly says Holborn. He also says he was born in Bromley (by Bow) and in Southwark! It's true the family lived in all these places, but they aren't exactly adjacent. I wouldn't mind but he's called Charles Carter and there are loads of them born 1864-66. nell