Genealogy Chat

Hi, Im new to all this exciting family tree stuff. I have been looking at some birth records for family on Ancestry and some census listings for them. I have noticed that sometimes the year of birth on the birth record is totally different to the one on the census i.e 3/4 yrs difference, but I know its the same person. Sorry if this is a bit of a stupid question but im guessing the birth records are most likely to be more correct dates, than on the census, is this true?

If you are looking at the births, marriages and death reference - yes that would be the correct one. Dont worry too much when rellies are shown years out - it really depends on who was giving the info, when their birthday fell - if it were a day before the census night they would appear a year older than if it were a day after. Ive got women who seem to knock a few years off every 10 years, its a wonder they arent in a cradle by the time they die! Do read the tips for newbies thread and the getting started info on the home page.

The birth records indicate when the birth was registered, so they have to be after the event - usually fairly soon (to comply with the law), but occasionally much later, or even not at all. Census info is as accurate as the people chose to be. Not everyone was much bothered about ages unless they needed to be a particular age for a purpose (e.g. getting married without parental consent). There are lots of examples of people who managed to age less than ten years between censuses. My g-g-mother shed about six years when she married and stuck to that for subsequent censuses. That certainly caused me some trouble! Christine

ages were rounded up and down to the nearest 5 for adults ine early censi.....ie say a couple were aged 49 and 52,they could both be recorded as aged 50.

Ok, thanks for your replies guys. It has stopped me wondering. Cheers Sarah

Alter - when I first looked at an 1841 census - I thought I had triplets in the family!!

I would add Sarah, to actually know the date of birth, not the quarter as shown on the registration, you have to buy the certificate - which will give you lots of other info too - from GRO online for £7. On older records, pre 1837 registration you will usually only get the baptism date - this can be many years after the actual birth of the person. Before you start buying certs - remember never pay more than £7 - there are a few scam sites out there which charge up to £50 a go.

The 1841 census had children's ages as actual-values up to 20, and thereafter ages were all supposed to be rounded down to the next lowest 5. So 20 = 20-24 25 = 25-29 30 = 30-34 and so on. Having said that, it's obvious (when you look) that some enumerators couldn't be bothered rounding down and just put in the ages they were told. Christine

We all know the rules for 1841 census. So explain this to me Ann, 45, Milliner?, Y William, 46, no occupation, Y Samuel, 15, Labourer, Y Ann, 15, Tailor?, Y Henry, 10, Y Jane, 10, Y

2 sets of twins then Jim! Cant beat my triplets in Sussex though.

Jim, The rule was actually to round down anyone over the age of 15 so your two 15 year olds were (if the enumerator read the rules right!) anything between 15 and 19.

Sorry, I should have checked.. I've seen a number of accurate-type ages over 15, so didn't double-check. Christine

Hi, I Have triplets born 1884!!! Albert, Bertie and Charles (although I always thought the mname Bertie was just a different way of saying Albert ) that HAS been confusing !!! Janinex

Just a thought from a novice Bertie=Bertrum

Janine, my lot in 1841 werent actually triplets, just all their ages had been rounded down to 20!

Oh sylvia !! it hadn't occured to me it could be bertrum.It would make more sense.either that or my g grandma didn't have much imagination when it came to names !!! Will go and look it up. Janinex