The other problem is that people lied. I have a relative whose age given to the census taker changed each time: 1900 - born 1880 1910 - born 1884 1920 - born 1888 1930 - born 1895
She was born in 1880. CE -----Original Message----- From: Brian L. Lightfoot [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 9:51 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [LegacyUG] Entering birth years into Legacy Ron's caution about calculating age based on census data is quite worthy. Most US census figures were based on a person's age and place of abode as of June 1st or Apr 1st. Using either one of those as the cut-off date for the census, one person who was born in February would be one age while another person born in July of the same year would appear as one year younger. Probably the best American census for determining age was the 1900 census in which the month, year and age of the person were supplied but even then you’d be surprised at the number of entries that just are mathematically impossible. For example, someone is shown as born in Jan 1880 and 19 years old instead of 20 years old. Then there are entries showing someone born in Nov 1880 and 20 years old instead of 19. The US census that is the easiest to determine birth years was the 1920 census. It was the only census based on age and residency as of January 1st. That census provided only a person age but determining their year of birth is easy: 1919 minus age equal year of birth. For example, someone showing an age of 10 would have been born in 1909; someone aged 40 would have been born in 1879; and someone aged 1 would have been born in 1918. All ages plus the birth year have to add up to 1919. It’s the only US census to use that residence date of Jan 1 otherwise the enumeration date was originally in August, then changed to June 1 in 1830 because it interfered with the farmers harvest, changed to Jan 1 in 1920, and then changed again to April 1 in 1930 because the winter weather interfered with the enumerators. It has since remained at April 1st. When entering a person's age in Legacy, some people have chosen to use “about” instead of an exact year when the only clue to their age is based on census data. Unless one really knows if the person was born before or after the cut-off date of the census, then the use of the word “about” is truly correct. But as Ron stated, the truthfulness of the person providing their real age throws another unknown factor into the equation. I personally have decided to not include the word “about” for those people in which I am relying only on a census age. I figure, what’s the big deal…if I enter 1820 instead of "about 1820" for a person's birth year and the truth is really sometime in 1819, does that mean anything of importance that significantly impacts any other facts? I'm not saying being sloppy in record gathering is permissible but rather obtaining exact dates and ages is difficult enough and even then the source of the data might be subject to interpretation. The hardest part is getting reliable dates and ages for the women who traditionally understated their age by a factor of anywhere from 1 to 10 years. Brian in CA -------------------------------------------------------------- From: Ron Ferguson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 1:51 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [LegacyUG] Entering birth years into Legacy A recent post prompts me to comment on the recording of an individual's year of birth. Frequently it is calculated from an age given in a census or death record for example, and common practice is to deduct the stated age from the year of the record to arrive at the birth year. But, is this correct? Let us look at the English censuses; these are usually taken in March, so if someone was aged 8 at the time of the 1911 census then there birth year would be 1911-8=1903. But consider, the birth actually took place between March/April 1902 and February/March 1903, so the probability is that the birth year was actually 1902. Naturally, the odds on which year a person was actually born will vary according to the month of the event. All the major websites use the simple calculation when using the year of birth and death, so caution. The English 1911 census also adds a further field recording the number of years married and, again, the probable year of marriage would depend on the month of the census, in this case March so the calculation would be as given above for births. It is most common in users' databases for the owner to have used the simple calculation when recording a date which could, therefore be a year out. Mind you, given the honesty of people about their ages a wider variation is also quite likely. Ron Ferguson Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
