Can anyone tell if it is likely that a man would marry at the age of 15? I have Thomas Blewett m Ann Dunstan in 1821 and then he is 35 in 1841, I think I have his birth in 1806, the parents names are as I expected. Somehow I wonder if I have got confused as 15 seems young for a man to marry. Your thoughts appreciated.[confused]
ID:2915
* married at 15?
-
Jane
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8441
- Joined: 01 Nov 2002 15:00
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Somerset, England
- Contact:
married at 15?
If you are working the age from baptism, it's possible the baptism could have been latter. I think marriages of minors was possible with permissions.
Jane
My Family History : My Photography "Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."
My Family History : My Photography "Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."
-
NickWalker
- Megastar
- Posts: 2401
- Joined: 02 Jan 2004 17:39
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Lancashire, UK
- Contact:
married at 15?
'Before Hardwicke's Marriage Act of 1753 there was no lower legal age of marriage, except during the 1650s when it was 16 for 'men' and 14 for 'women'. In 1753 it was fixed at 14 for men and 12 for women and remained at those ages until the Age of Marriage Act in 1929 which raised it to 16 for both.' (Quote from book 'The Family Tree Detective' - Colin Rogers). If they were this young then I believe a consent section on the marriage form should have been filled in.
married at 15?
thanks for your help, seems likely it could be right then. I think that is my youngest marriage...yet. I cant imagine my boys married yet and their 27,24 &18 never mind getting married at 15 [rolleyes]
-
Jane
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8441
- Joined: 01 Nov 2002 15:00
- Family Historian: V7
- Location: Somerset, England
- Contact:
married at 15?
Remember life expectancy has risen hugely in the last 200 years, in the 1800's I have seen various figures with an average of around 30, this of course is distorted by by the large numbers of infant deaths, but even so people living into their 60's was exceptional, I think this means people did marry much younger than they do now.
Jane
My Family History : My Photography "Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."
My Family History : My Photography "Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit salad."
-
tommy166
- Gold
- Posts: 20
- Joined: 20 Dec 2006 21:55
- Family Historian: V6.2
- Location: Bournemouth, Dorset, UK
married at 15?
Remember also that the enumerators in the 1841 census were supposed to round down ages over 15 to nearest 5 below - although not all did - so he could have been between 35 and 39 at that time, making him possibly 19 at time of his marriage.
-
LittleMissP
- Platinum
- Posts: 39
- Joined: 21 Sep 2007 23:35
- Family Historian: None
married at 15?
I also have a marriage at 15 in my tree, at first it confused me, esp being in 1927, but exceptions to the rule are part of someone's family tree!
I'm sometimes just think that at my age (going on 30) I would've had several children and be well past the 7 year itch if I'd lived 100 years ago, going on my family history... Times change.
Also remember at 15 he had probably been working for a while and been a significant contributor to the family income, not doing a paper round or hiding under a duvet all day! (like I did!)
Paula
I'm sometimes just think that at my age (going on 30) I would've had several children and be well past the 7 year itch if I'd lived 100 years ago, going on my family history... Times change.
Also remember at 15 he had probably been working for a while and been a significant contributor to the family income, not doing a paper round or hiding under a duvet all day! (like I did!)
Paula
married at 15?
And I would be dead or in a workhouse[grin]