I'm wondering if anyone can help me with my search. I know for sure that my GGGF is John Kiernan who married Eliza Charles on 29-Nov-1866. I believe they were both born in 1850. They lived in Drummucker when the 1901 census was done. They had 3 children that I know of: Mary Ann (1867), Edward (1869) and John (1871). He was a farmer. John's son Edward - my GGF married Elizabeth O'Brien in 1897 in New York.
John's father was also named Edward. There are 2 Edward's in the 1901 census and I believe that one of them is my GGGGF. One is from Drummucker and one is from Drumeela.
Edward from Drumeela: 69 at time of 1901 census - that would mean that if John was his son he would have been 19 when he was born.
Edward from Drummucker: 65 at time of 1901 census - that would mean that if John was his son he would have been 15 when he was born. Catherine his wife (first or second wife?)was 60 at the census - that would make her 10. Not possible.
Can anyone from the area help? I know the Irish families were big back then, so it gets a little confusing.
Thanks, Jeff
Kiernan's in Leitrim - Drummucker, Drumeela.....?
Moderator: efinn
-
Jim Irvine
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 9:38 am
- Location: Liverpool, England
First of all take ages in the 1901 census with a pinch of salt. They could be easily 10 years out (or sometimes even more). Also what makes you think John and Eliza were born in 1850? Do you have a parish record of their birth? I find it hard to believe they married at 15. Do you have a death record for them? Try comparing their stated age at death with their age at marriage.
An example;
My ggf's age in the Census was given as 60 i.e. born 1840. His age at his marriage in 1875, according to the parish records, was 27 i.e. born 1848. His age as given on his death certificate in 1933 was 78, i.e. born 1855.
I have searched the parish records, which start in 1845, to no avail; he does not appear anywhere. Family tradition, and my mother remembers him well, says he was 93 when he died (NOT 78!) which would make the 1840 date more realistic as does the fact that he does not appear later in the records.
My point, again, is never to trust ages given in any record if they refer to the first half of the 19th century. Go for your best guess using common sense.
Jim
An example;
My ggf's age in the Census was given as 60 i.e. born 1840. His age at his marriage in 1875, according to the parish records, was 27 i.e. born 1848. His age as given on his death certificate in 1933 was 78, i.e. born 1855.
I have searched the parish records, which start in 1845, to no avail; he does not appear anywhere. Family tradition, and my mother remembers him well, says he was 93 when he died (NOT 78!) which would make the 1840 date more realistic as does the fact that he does not appear later in the records.
My point, again, is never to trust ages given in any record if they refer to the first half of the 19th century. Go for your best guess using common sense.
Jim