Genealogy Chat

I am sure I have found my Paternal G G G Grandparents having visited local records office and finding their marriage certificate , my problem is different ages on the census pages.Is this a common thing and should I presume the ages on the marriage certificate are correct?I am finding the correct names and fathers names etc but different ages every time

Very common, ages are often out on census returns. 1841 for instance is rounded down to the nearest 5 so a 23 yr old could be down as 20.

Also it depends who gave the information to the enumerator and how accurate they were and if they actually knew the correct ages.

I wouldn't worry too much about age differences or even place of birth differences if all other facts match

Ages often vary between censuses and, No, you can't presume ages are correct on marriage certs. People often lied about their ages. Sometimes because they were too young to marry without parental consent and sometimes to make an age difference to their spouse look smaller.

The general rule most people go by is take the age on the earliest census as the most accurate.

If you are still not sure, post the details and I am sure people will give you their opinions as to whether you have the correct people.

I have James Pemberton and Alice Unsworth married 1855, ages 21 and 19 repectively both born in Wigan

Sheila, can you please tell us their fathers' names and occupations?

James Pemberton I think was an agricultural labourer
Richard Unsworth I am not sure

for ref

Marriage: 10 Jun 1855 All Saints, Wigan, Lancashire, England
James Pemberton - (X), 21 Collier Bachelor of Pemberton
Alice Unsworth - (X), 19 Spinster of Pemberton
Groom's Father: James Pemberton, Labourer
Bride's Father: Richard Unsworth, Weaver
Witness: John Hampson; Ann Smith, (X)
Married by Banns by: Wm.Thos.Whitehead Curate
Notes: [Month of marriage first recorded as May then corrected]
Register: Marriages 1854 - 1855, Page 241, Entry 481
Source: LDS Film 1885697

You have saved this record to My Ancestry (Shoebox). Remove

This record has been added to your shoebox.
1861 England Census
about Alice Pemberton
Name: Alice Pemberton
[Alice Unsworth]
Age: 22
Estimated birth year: abt 1839
Relation: Wife
Spouse's name: James Pemberton
Father's name: Richard Unsworth
Mother's name: Mary Unsworth
Gender: Female
Where born: Wigan, Lancashire, England

Civil Parish: Pemberton
Ecclesiastical parish: Pemberton
County/Island: Lancashire
Country: England

Street address:

Occupation:

Condition as to marriage: View image

Registration district: Wigan
Sub-registration district: Pemberton
ED, institution, or vessel: 5
Neighbors: View others on page
Household schedule number: 157
Household Members: Name Age
Richard Unsworth 68
Mary Unsworth 65
William Unsworth 20
James Pemberton 23
Alice Pemberton 22
James Pemberton 1
Buckhead Boardman 21

Looks like I have the right people , Thanks everyone

where is Little Hulton?


This could be Alice's baptism ...... and therefore looks as though she was very unsure of her age!!

Baptisms: 18 Aug 1842 Peel Chapel, Little Hulton, Lancashire, England
Alice Unsworth - dau of Richard Unsworth & Ann
Abode: Little Hulton
Occupation: Weaver
Baptised by: T. Airey P. C.
Register: Baptisms 1830 - 1846, Page 156, Entry 1243
Source: LDS Film 1885713


this is from www.lan-opc.org.uk/Search/indexp.html



sylvia

Little Hulton is Salford area and about 9 miles from Wigan

but

If the 1861 census above is right (which on the face of it it is) Alice's mother was a Mary, unless of course Mary was Richard's 2nd wife

edit - from 1881 census William's mother does appear to be Mary

Hi, just to say you cannot take too much notice of ages given on either the census or to be honest on certificates.
I have a marriage cert with both the age of the groom and his surname not correct. I had to check his adddress to ensure that I had the right person. On another marriage cert I had the father named wrongly, I searched and searched for the named person but to no avail, and finally agreed with a "hot match" that I had the wrong person.
Sorry to be a "jobs comforter" but it does happen, don't forget that lots of people could not read or write so depended on the registrar.
good luck. M.

"The general rule most people go by is take the age on the earliest census as the most accurate."

Sorry Potty, I tend to disagree with this if you're looking at the 1841 census which tends to be the earliest surviving census in most areas. The ages on the 1841 census weren't always accurate. Above a certain age on the 1841 census, (I think 15 years of age) the ages were rounded to the nearest 5 years.

I think the point is that if someone is shown as aged three on the census, it is likely that it is pretty accurate, whereas if the age is shown as 23 then it could be out by a number of years either way and you would not know.

Also, in certain parts of the country it was not considered the right thing if the groom was younger than the bride often leading to one being overstated and the other understated. We have just this issue with my wife's great grandparents, whose ages vary by + or - 2 years as the years go by.

I always have a chuckle at those individuals who take a couple of years off until they're old enough to be venerable then they start adding the years.



Ozi

Oh I take the point Inspector and it's good advice except however for the 1841 census (if the person didn't know that the 1841 census was rounded up & down in some cases) It wasn't meant to be a criticism of the advice just a word of warning so people were aware :)