Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

Welcome to the Genes Reunited community boards!

  • The Genes Reunited community is made up of millions of people with similar interests. Discover your family history and make life long friends along the way.
  • You will find a close knit but welcoming group of keen genealogists all prepared to offer advice and help to new members.
  • And it's not all serious business. The boards are often a place to relax and be entertained by all kinds of subjects.
  • The Genes community will go out of their way to help you, so don’t be shy about asking for help.

Quick Search

Single word search

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

date and age differences between census and 1837

ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Helen

Helen Report 30 Jan 2005 13:36

Can anyone help? When I have an ancestor with a consistent age through most census returns, does anyone know why he 'might' (?) be 4 years older on 1837 online? Or have I got the wrong one? If I have, then I really have lost him as he is nowhere else that I have checked

Unknown

Unknown Report 30 Jan 2005 13:38

Are you talking about a birth or death - death registrations are often out because the person registering the death often does not know the exact age of the person. nell

Helen

Helen Report 30 Jan 2005 13:41

My G Grandfather is listed on all the census forms as having been born 1850 ish, I, and others, have looked for his birth on quite a few different sites and can only come up with one born abt 1846. Helen

TinaTheCheshirePussyCat

TinaTheCheshirePussyCat Report 30 Jan 2005 16:51

Hi Helen My own mother did not know her own mother's year of birth correctly. My grandmother was 2 years older than either my mother or I believed (until I started this research). Either my grandmother had forgotten, or else she deliberately made herself out to be younger than she really was. Even quite young children appear on censuses with the wrong age. I think it was just not so important to people a hundred years ago. It probably only started to really matter when old age pensions were introduced. I think it quite possible that there could be a 4 year error. Tina

Phoenix

Phoenix Report 30 Jan 2005 17:21

It's unlikely that a child of 4 or 5 is described as a 1yr old. What does the family structure look like in 1851? Is he the only child? Are the suspected parents a young couple or elderly? There ought to be clues on this census to suggest to you whether you have the right birth or not. Personally, I'd go with the idea of an elder sibling who died, while your ancestor simply didn't get registered. Most of my ancestors in the 1840s are not registered, though luckily their siblings are. B

Helen

Helen Report 30 Jan 2005 23:46

Thank you to everybody for your help, certainly given me something to think about Helen