Family Dates Don't Add Up

[pansypetal]

I have a uneasy feeling about a section of my family tree despite being assured by my mother in law that the gravestone that gives me some details is the correct headstone.
I am looking at James Kearney – the family headstone is at http://www.discovereverafter.com/plot/10867 it advises that James DOD is 20/03/1878 aged 54. His children’s DOB’s are Elizabeth Jul 1863 and Francis 26^th June 1871 (DOD according to teh headstone was 16/07/1942 aged 71), using the parents names I couldn’t find any other registered births or baptism records.
James was married to Mary Moran, no wedding date. According to the headstone she died 20/01/1900
In the revised Valuations records at Proni I have found the land transfer from James Kearney to Francis Kearney and it looks like the observation date for this was 1901.
My hesitation is the age at which James and Mary would have had the children. And Francis would have been only 6 when his father died, but the land was transferred much later which I would have assumed was a more like time frame for the death of his father James.
However my mother in law, this is her family line is sure that this is the grave of her family as she used to visit it.
All the details and dates look very unlikely so am abit stumped as to how to confirm or rule out these details.

[Olde Crone Holden]

pansypetal

I've never done any Irish research, so my observations are just general ones.

James would have been 39 when Elizabeth was born - that doesn't seem particularly old to me. I think Irish men tended to marry later rather than earlier. Of course, he MIGHT have been previously married.

The land transfer was surely connected to Mary's death in 1900 as James would have left it to her, not to his six year old son.

OC

[SmallTownGirl]

I see that you've posted the same query on RootsChat.

http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=684981.0;topicseen

STG

[pansypetal]

Thanks OC, I wasn't sure as compared to the rest of the family they where all alot younger.........

[pansypetal]

Yes STG I posted it another seperate forum

[Janet in Yorkshire]

A 6 yr old wouldn't have been able to have land transferred to him. It would have been placed in trust for him until he achieved his majority at the age of 21.
Plenty of men, especially farmers, married much later than at the age of 39.
A man on my tree married for the second time in 1911 - he was then aged 82. A daughter was born in 1912 and another in 1915 (although she only lived a few months.) My man died in 1917, 2 days short of his 88th birthday. When he married wife number 2, she 37 years old, a year younger than the last of the eleven children of his first marriage.

Jay

[pansypetal]

Thanks Janet.

Quiet new to family history especially tracing Irish relatives which is my partners side, so compared to all the other relatives I have found who all married young and had lots of children apart from the odd one this seemed quiet a different scenario. I know that at 6 he wouldn't have inherited the land but just naturally assumed that the father died later which was the point of transfer. This is also my first experience of using the Valuation reports............

As it seemed so different to all the other relatives its just nice to get some reassurances that its not that uncommon. Thanks

[Elwyn]

I have a uneasy feeling about a section of my family tree despite being assured by my mother in law that the gravestone that gives me some details is the correct headstone.
I am looking at James Kearney – the family headstone is at http://www.discovereverafter.com/plot/10867 it advises that James DOD is 20/03/1878 aged 54. His children’s DOB’s are Elizabeth Jul 1863 and Francis 26^th June 1871 (DOD according to teh headstone was 16/07/1942 aged 71), using the parents names I couldn’t find any other registered births or baptism records.
James was married to Mary Moran, no wedding date. According to the headstone she died 20/01/1900
In the revised Valuations records at Proni I have found the land transfer from James Kearney to Francis Kearney and it looks like the observation date for this was 1901.
My hesitation is the age at which James and Mary would have had the children. And Francis would have been only 6 when his father died, but the land was transferred much later which I would have assumed was a more like time frame for the death of his father James.
However my mother in law, this is her family line is sure that this is the grave of her family as she used to visit it.
All the details and dates look very unlikely so am abit stumped as to how to confirm or rule out these details.

The revaluation records normally record the head of household (who is not necessarily the owner or tenant). I have never seen a child listed as head. Normally when a farmer died he left the farm to a son (usually the eldest, if willing). The wife got a life interest which expired when she died. That way the farm passed to the next generation and not sideways to some other family (eg if the widow remarried).

So when the farmer dies, he would normally be replaced in Griffiths either by his widow or by an adult son. You would not expect it to be a minor. The Griffiths clerks were often out by a year or two with their dates, and so that always needs to be taken into account when searching for deaths etc.

[pansypetal]

thanks Elwyn