Aurel Sercu Posted 19 July , 2019 Share Posted 19 July , 2019 A couple of days ago I posted my question in a Topic of mine that was 4 years old. No response (I understand). So now in a new Topic. (Though I don't know if 'Cemeteries and Memorials is the best section.) A very specific question related to Final Verification Forms and the Age often mentioned on headstones, Has it ever occurred to anyone in his or her research that it was found that there was a significant difference between the Age mentioned on the headstone and the real age (found in a birth certificate, or maybe the Censuses, etc.). I mean : not a difference of only 1 year, or 2 (which in a way can be understandable), but a striking and remarkable difference of let's say 4 or more years ... Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie2 Posted 19 July , 2019 Share Posted 19 July , 2019 Aurel, John Hollis Manchester Regt, was 26 on the 1911 census, the CWGC record him as 38 in 1918. https://www.cwgc.org/find-war-dead/casualty/85979/hollis,-john/ Charlie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 19 July , 2019 Author Share Posted 19 July , 2019 Thanks, Charlie. So an "error" of 5 years (If the 1911 Census is correct, then John Hollis in 1918 would have been 33, not 38. Is the 1911 Census in agreement with the 1901 Census ? I wonder if the 33 on the Final Verification Form, when in bad handwriting, was interpreted as a 38.(Of course we will never know.) (I may send you a PM. But that will be tomorrow. Right now my wife wants me to switch off the PC at last !... :-( And ... she is right... ) Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith_history_buff Posted 19 July , 2019 Share Posted 19 July , 2019 Thinking aloud, given that there was compulsory military service in France, and the matricules militaires have survived, I suppose this would be a topic that does not come up so often for the French and Belgian soldiers, that of declared age being different from actual age. A system of compulsory military service sees the male population being registered way ahead of when their national service obligation is due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie2 Posted 20 July , 2019 Share Posted 20 July , 2019 Aurel, The 1901 census and his marriage certificate agree with the 1911 census. Charlie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 20 July , 2019 Author Share Posted 20 July , 2019 Keith, You wrote : of declared age being different from actual age . Yes, I know about that. Many (too) young soldiers declared when enlisting they were older. But my specific question is different. It is about the difference between the real age of the soldier and the age (at time of death) and the age that later (after the war) was given by the next-of-kin on the Final Verification Form. I think that in some cases a wrong age was given by the relatives ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 3 August , 2019 Author Share Posted 3 August , 2019 I am very well aware : this would not be a Topic that would receive dozens of postings of course. So, after two weeks here I am again, but making my initial posting more specific. Has it ever happened to anyone in his research that he had the impression that the AGE that was filled in on the Final Verification Form was not the age of the fallen soldier, but of ... the person who filled in the document ? (I know, that would be 'silly', yet ...) Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC78 Posted 6 August , 2019 Share Posted 6 August , 2019 (edited) Not sure if this helps or not... Captain Charles Andrews was age 48 when he died: https://www.cwgc.org/find-war-dead/casualty/2757078/ANDREWS, CHARLES Until I had it corrected about five years ago, his CWGC record gave his age as 22. While I can't account for the mistake, I did note that his age was given as 22 on his 1892 marriage certificate. Edited 6 August , 2019 by PaulC78 clarify Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurel Sercu Posted 7 August , 2019 Author Share Posted 7 August , 2019 48 and 22 : a considerable difference ! Do you think there is reason to believe that the age 22 on the marriage certificate is responsible for the original wrong Age 22 ? I suppose not ... ? Coincidence ? I see Captain Andrews was married ...It would be interesting (for me) to know how old his children were some time in the mid (?) 1920s. (I write mid 1920s because that may have been when the Final Verification Form was sent to the Andrews family ; but of course, it could be earlier or later ...) As he married in 1892, his children may have been approx. 25 and younger when their father died ?... Maybe the Census 1901 and 1911 could reveal things ?... Aurel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now