CHESHIRE-L ArchivesArchiver > CHESHIRE > 2001-02 > 0981739917
From: "Gail Stokes" <>
Subject: [CHS] Ages on Marriage licences
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:31:57 -0000
Thanks to all who offered suggestions on this topic. Unfortunately, I cannot double-check on a census for these ancestors as they are too early! The problem I had was that my gggg grandfather John Stokes stated he was 21 years and upwards on his marriage allegation, when in fact, if he was the only John baptised at Cheadle (where he came from) he was in fact born in 1733 - making him more like 29 in 1762 than 21 years and upwards! His bride was born in 1736. However, his brother Charles Stokes has no baptism at Cheadle. I have often wondered whether Charles and John were actually born somewhere else, and just moved to Cheadle to be near a relative, John Stokes the gardener. As I am directly descended from John married in 1762, this does matter. John Stokes senior (the gardener) has an 8 year gap in his children in Cheadle, which makes me wonder if he married again after being widowed. However, he did have a John (1733) but no Charles.
Ah well - the mystery goes on. I am still a bit loathe to accept my John as being a whole 8 years older than he stated, and will continue to search for his death/burial (after 1782) in another parish, just to be sure. My John and Charles were also educated and signed their marriage licences very neatly indeed, and all John's children were likewise literate. Charles died the year after he was married and had no issue. I should think if they could read and write, they could also calculate age correctly. The family also had their own pew in the Church, so were well known to the Rector of Cheadle. I doubt John could have got away with lying so much about his age.
These little mysteries are what keep us digging!
(In the sixteenth year of Stokes research!)