Whether a Marriage or Death certificate gives better information depends on a number of factors.

The following refers to the UK.

Many early Marriage Certificates simply say of Full Age which only tells you they are older than 21.

Whereas a Death Certificate or Burial record gives a specific Age at death.

Later Marriage Certificates do give the spouse’s Ages but no Place of Birth.

Whereas a Death Certificate gives an actual Date and Place of Birth.

So in my opinion a Death Certificate is usually better than a Marriage Certificate.

Also a Census record for a child usually gives an accurate Age and Place of Birth.

Regards, Mike Tate

 

From: family-historian@groups.io <family-historian@groups.io> On Behalf Of Victor Markham
Sent: 03 February 2020 18:46
To: family-historian@groups.io
Subject: Re: [family-historian] Importance Value of various Birth Sources

 

I would say any marriage certificate would be before death certificate. These would be more important than census details which you can think of as being supplementary to the certification.

This is the first message I have received via the new system and would say it is better than the old one

Victor

Get BlueMail for Android

On 3 Feb 2020, at 18:25, "David.potter5 via Groups.Io" <googlemail.com@groups.io target=_blank>david.potter5=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hi Forum.

I'm looking for advice on how to 'weight' birth sources in degree of importance. Of course not all will/may exist in my list below, and some will contain lesser info that others. But I'm looking for a recommendation on how to Rank the following types of Sources that support the Birth of an Individual.

I have one order of importance in mind: Birth Certifcate (if exists), Baptism, Death Certicate (if exists), Burial, Census - 1939, Marriage Certificate (if exists)

Can I have your views please.

Thank you

David Potter