Genealogy Chat
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
Help with age on census image plse (Ancestry -1851
Profile | Posted by | Options | Post Date |
---|---|---|---|
|
Elaine | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:30 |
see below |
|||
|
Elaine | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:30 |
I have a William Dawe on the 1851 census who’s age I need to clarify. Source info HO107/1475 It’s been transcribed as 35 born c1816, but to me it looks like 45. Can some kind person take a quick peep and let me know what you think. (When he married in 1837 he was a widow, which ties in with him being older than his wife) Thanks very much Elaine x |
|||
|
Merry | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:34 |
I think it's 45. At a push it could also be 65 (but unlikely!). The one thing it isn't is 35!!!! Merry |
|||
|
Helen | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:34 |
I reckon it's a 4 rather than a 3. could be a 6? |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:35 |
I know this sounds a bit old, but to be honest it looks more like 65 to me. If you look at the son who is 6 years old, the first number of William's age looks a bit like that. Kath. x |
|||
|
Louise | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:37 |
Hi Looks like 45 to me, if not 65 rather than 35. Bestwishes Louise |
|||
|
Gwyn in Kent | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:38 |
I think it's 45. If you look closely there is a line that crosses through the horizontal line.between each person's record.... as in Frederick aged 4. Why didn't they sharpen the pencil?? |
|||
|
☼ Orangeblossom ☼ - Tracy | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:38 |
Would help if they didn't put lines through the middle lol I agree, it's not 35. |
|||
|
Merry | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:39 |
Was the 1837 marriage after July (for father's details)??? I wondered about this? WILLIAM DAW Christening: 22 SEP 1805 Okehampton, Devon, England Parents: Father: JOHN DAW Mother: SUSANNA Messages: Extracted birth or christening record for the locality listed in the record. Merry |
|||
|
KathleenBell | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:43 |
That would make it more likely to be 45 then Merry. If only the enumerators had known we'd all be scrutinizing their work all these years later, maybe they'd have taken more care, lol. Kath. x |
|||
|
Elaine | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:46 |
Thanks to everyone very much. Yes Merry the marriage was Sept 1837 in Exeter and his father was a John. Off to do some more digging. Thanks again Elaine x |
|||
|
Rachel | Report | 14 Mar 2006 13:53 |
I would say 45 personally. Do you have him on the 1861? OK so he's not there just looked, youngest child born 1853. I suggest you ask for a lookup on the 1841 census for William, it should give you an idea of roughly how old he was then. They would probally be in the London area as that's where John was born. |
|||
|
Merry | Report | 14 Mar 2006 14:10 |
His death cert would have his age on it (hopefully near enough correct!!) I wonder if this is him? Deaths Sep 1854 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DAW William St Geo Han Sq 1a _13 Unfortunately the page number is virtually invisible on both FreeBMD and on Ancestry Beta :o(( Merry |
|||
|
Elaine | Report | 14 Mar 2006 14:27 |
Thanks again, yes I think that must be his death. Will ask for a look up on 1841. Here's hoping. :-) Elaine x |