Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
awareness of years of birth in recent people
0 views
Skip to first unread message
gera...@earthlink.net
Jan 28, 2012, 10:53:58 AM1/28/12
to
We all know that the U.S. Census has wildly-varying years of birth for
rural people of the 19th Century. But I thought that by 1900 urban
people pretty much all knew their years of birth. Am I mistaken about
that? What has been your experience?
I'm investigating assertions that three namesakes in Baltimore and
Washington D.C. during the period c.1890-1910 were all one person.
Two Censuses (in his parents' household) agree the Baltimore man was
born in 1867. One of his D.C. namesakes was born in April 1865
according to the 1900 Census; the other namesake in D.C. died in 1909
at 40 (no known Census record).
Could an urban man of good family during that era have been so unaware
of his actual birthdate in 1867 that he could sometimes give 1865 and
other times 1869?
P.S. There really is no evidence for linking the three, except
convenience: no two of the three are ever documented simultaneously
in the same year, and only one of the three has a known death notice
or death certificate. That is why people put the three into one.
rural people of the 19th Century. But I thought that by 1900 urban
people pretty much all knew their years of birth. Am I mistaken about
that? What has been your experience?
I'm investigating assertions that three namesakes in Baltimore and
Washington D.C. during the period c.1890-1910 were all one person.
Two Censuses (in his parents' household) agree the Baltimore man was
born in 1867. One of his D.C. namesakes was born in April 1865
according to the 1900 Census; the other namesake in D.C. died in 1909
at 40 (no known Census record).
Could an urban man of good family during that era have been so unaware
of his actual birthdate in 1867 that he could sometimes give 1865 and
other times 1869?
P.S. There really is no evidence for linking the three, except
convenience: no two of the three are ever documented simultaneously
in the same year, and only one of the three has a known death notice
or death certificate. That is why people put the three into one.
Paul Drahn
Jan 28, 2012, 11:55:48 AM1/28/12
to
Paul
ne...@jecarter.us
Jan 28, 2012, 5:58:15 PM1/28/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 07:53:58 -0800 (PST), gera...@earthlink.net
wrote:
I know that my maternal grandmother lied about her age to get a job
when she was about 14 or 15. She maintained that 'age' the rest of
her life. I found her actual DOB when I inherited an insect damaged
family Bible - at least the marriage, birth, and death pages were
scannable.
John
wrote:
when she was about 14 or 15. She maintained that 'age' the rest of
her life. I found her actual DOB when I inherited an insect damaged
family Bible - at least the marriage, birth, and death pages were
scannable.
John
Keith Nuttle
Jan 28, 2012, 8:33:04 PM1/28/12
to
find in any time period is the one we make today every January. The
first couple weeks of the year are frequently reported in the prior year
rather than in the year they actually occurred. ie the event took place
January 15, 1990, but is reported January 15, 1989.
Faced with three people who could be the ancestor you are looking for, I
would see if I can find them in the following couple of census, and then
the couple of previous census. Many times you will find that in one of
the sets of census there will be an impossibility for that specific
person being your ancestor.
For one of my ancestors, a cousin said she had found him living in
Crawford Co. in the 1860 census. Going forward to 1870 this person was
found still living in the Crawford Co., when you knew that by 1870 your
ancestor was living in VanWert Co. This was later proven in the 1870
census when we found our ancestor and his by then wife living in VanWert
Co. His name was horrible miss spelled, but there were other attribute
that showed the person in VanWert Co was our ancestor.
JDL...@yahoo.com
Jan 29, 2012, 2:47:09 AM1/29/12
to
period you have specified what year it was, was not frequently
important. Long Term contractes and the like for the common man were
near non existant. And as someone else pointed out. people have been
known to lie.
Speaking of which here's my guide to lies about age in the days when
there was no pesky birth certificate to catch your fib;
Look for the motive to lie. For example in order to marry or work one
might lie to look older. In the case of the early days of Soc Sec
people would add years to push up the date benefits would start. In
the case of May December marriages sometimes the age gap was
artifiicially shrunk. In some cases people would claim great age as
some sort of status symbol. And that doesn't even begin to touch the
many ladies and gents who wanted to shave a few years off for the sake
of appearing to be more youthful.
I can name two things that caused birth years to become needed to know
information. 1) The adoption of the birth certificate which was almost
everywhere in the US by about 1920. 2 ) Universal mandatory elementary
education in the US .which became widespread about the same time. This
includes the massive shift away from the farm towards cities and
towns.
Carol Botteron
Jan 29, 2012, 10:55:29 AM1/29/12
to alt-ge...@rootsweb.com
Remember that the information in the censuses did not necessarily
come from the person in question. A family member or neighbor
could have been mistaken about his age.
come from the person in question. A family member or neighbor
could have been mistaken about his age.
0 new messages