Genealogy Chat

Top tip - using the Genes Reunited community

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.

Boards

Quick Search

Single word search

Tools

Findmypast DNA Banner

Icons

  • New posts
  • No new posts
  • Thread closed
  • Stickied, new posts
  • Stickied, no new posts

Of full age

Login to Add Reply Watch This
ProfilePosted byOptionsPost Date

Janet

Janet Report 10 Sep 2003 16:58

I've just received a copy of my gt grandparents' marriage certificate, and it shows HIM as "Of full age" and HER as 22 years. Can anyone suggest why they didn't either put both their ages, or both as "Of full age"? Jan

Jacqui

Jacqui Report 10 Sep 2003 20:07

I can only assume that he was unsure as to his actual date of birth whereas the bride was! Don't forget that years ago people didn't celebrate birthdays like today - it was as much as they could do to live, let alone celebrate and mark the occasion. I think also that many children were sent out to work before the "proper" age to help swell the family coffers and by the time they cam to marrying age they had simply forgot exactly how old they were. I have the same problem now I've past 40!!! Jacqui

Janet

Janet Report 11 Sep 2003 17:52

Thanks for the reply, Jacqui - only just found it. Jan.

Mystified

Mystified Report 11 Sep 2003 19:36

My understanding 'of full age' is that your ggrandad was younger than ggmother. What it means is that he was old enough to marry. Whether this is true is something you might be able to check on a census?

Janet

Janet Report 11 Sep 2003 21:44

According to the 1881, he was 10 years older than his wife, which would have made him 32 at the time of his marriage. Unfortunately he died before the 1891, so I have no other comparison at the moment. I'll have to try and find someone with access to the Norfolk 1871, if there is one. Jan.