Genealogy Chat

On one the marriage certificates I have, the ages of the bride and groom is simply given as 'Full Age'. Does this mean they were both 21? On all the other certificates I have, the ages of both are given, even if they were 21.

Not necessarily, it just means that they were at least 21. They could have been older, anything from 21 to 81, though that is pushing it a bit beyond the realms of possibility, but you know what I mean. It is annoying when you get one of them isnt it.

Could I just add that I know of instances in my own tree where 'full age' is a lie, i.e. one or both were under 21. Perhaps they were asked 'Are you of full age?', and they said 'Yes', even if it were not true. Stan

That is a good point Stan, they had to be 21 then, to marry without parents consent. More recently, proof of age was required, and if underage, parents had to be present at the marriage, and usually they were the witnesses.

Please could I mention that it depends on the year it states "full age". In the UK, the laws changed in 1929 to mimimum age for marriage of a female was increased from 12 to 16 and for males from 14 to 16. If "full age" relates to being able to vote I am not certain on this because I am not sure when a female was alowed to vote. The age of majority (when a person was allowed to vote) changed in 1969 - ie a person could marry without parental consent at 18 not 21 as previously. I am not up to date of when females were allowed to vote at all. I believe no female was allowed to vote at all in certain (early 20th century) years. I think it was of the Emily Pankurst era that this changed. I am not into history so cannot be sure on this.

I have yet to own a marriage cert where 'Of Full Age' was quoted but it's true that they did lie to make it seem that they were older. I just received a certificate, the other week and I knew the bride to be only 17 (although soon to be 18), however the marriage states both bride and groom were aged 20, at the time of marriage. Neither set of parents were the witnesses. Conversely, my great-uncle was 34 (soon to be 35) when he married in 1925. However, due to the fact that he was marrying a bride, who was only 19, he decided to make his age, 27!

Full age and legal age to marry are 2 different things. Full age should be 21 or over - i.e. age to marry without parent's consent as above. Legal age to marry was always much lower as stated - 12 for girls at one point. Anything under 21 SHOULD be shown accurately - but as said, they didn't have to prove it, just look it. Does that make sense? Maz. XX

Hi, There wasn't "universal sufferage" until 1928. They let women vote gradually! First they gave the vote to married women then to single women. The voting age was 30 (I'm almost sure) when the vote was given to those other than landowners. Full age on certs always means 21 or over as has already been said. It also appears in wills - heirs can inherit when they are of full age, meaning 21. Gwynne

Great great granny was baptised in 1833 and married at 18 in 1849. Either she was baptised at 2 or told a porky when getting married. I think that it was at the same church so maybe the priest had amnesia. LOL

Brian Baptisms were often carried out when children were older. My gt-gt-grandfather and 3 (or it may be 4) of his brothers were all baptised on the same date. Sue

Sue Agreed, in the absence of a firm birth date I'm keeping an open mind. However: The only other item with her "age" on it is the 1881 census which is obviously wrong as it shown her as 65 with a four year old child. (and shows her husband as 84). LOL