@sailor-haumea yes but keep in mind I’m personally only looking into centenarians from the North East of England.

The other interesting thing about Blaze Driver is that he lived across 3 different centuries.

I'm sure this has happened for quite a few hundred years now as the required age to achieve isn't that high (if your birth year ends in say 96-99). But we still don't know too many whose birth predates the 1700s.

Posted by: @beaumont

↑

four verified centenarians born before 1750

Was Margaret Turnbull debunked?

According to Durham Records Online, there was a Margaret Turnbull born in 1774 at Hunwick who may have been the Margaret Turnbull who died at Hunwick in 1776.

Posted by: @fish

↑

Posted by: @beaumont

↑

four verified centenarians born before 1750

Was Margaret Turnbull debunked?

According to Durham Records Online, there was a Margaret Turnbull born in 1774 at Hunwick who may have been the Margaret Turnbull who died at Hunwick in 1776.

I haven't been able to reach a conclusive decision regarding her. Turnbull was/is a very common surname in the North East of England. My mother has two aunts and both married different men with the surname Turnbull, just to give some perspective lol.

I am on the cusp of verifying another early centenarian case:

Dorothy Buttiman (nee Common), bapt 15 March 1745, died 30 September 1851 (aged 106)

Investigation notes attached below:

I'll take some time to review everything again before verifying, but all the evidence seems to match up very nicely.

While researching my family tree, I stumbled upon the death record of an Elizabeth Holder, who died in the first quarter (Jan/Feb/Mar) of 1860 allegedly aged 101. The registration district of death is Dursley, Gloucestershire, England. I decided to research further to see if she really was an early centenarian.

Her burial record states she was buried on 2 April 1860 at Holy Cross in Owlpen, very close to Dursley, so she probably died in late March.

Find My Past gave me a match for her 1851 census record:

I then found her daughter Sarah's baptism record, which confirms she was baptised in Owlpen on 20 March 1785. Her parents were James and Elizabeth Holder. Using this information, I looked to see if Elizabeth had other children:

* Mary - bap. 17 Jan 1790

* Richard - bap. 17 Jan 1790

* Richard - bap. 23 Feb 1794

* James - bap. 16 Apr 1797

* Richard - bap. 2 Apr 1802

* William - bap. 2 Apr 1802 (born 1798 according to Find My Past transcript)

* Rachael - bap. 2 May 1805

Seeing that Sarah is the oldest child, it's likely that James and Elizabeth were married a short time before her birth. Bearing this in mind, I was able to find a likely marriage record. Elizabeth Shipton married James Holder on 29 August 1784 in Uley, a village right next door to Owlpen.

Next step - looking for a baptism record. There are 2 possible matches in Uley:

* Elizabeth Shipton - bap. 25 Dec 1761, parents John and Mary

* Elizabeth Shipton - bap. 5 Sep 1762, mother Mary. After further research, I found a record that confirmed this Elizabeth was buried on 12 April 1765.

This means that Elizabeth Holder was likely "only" 98 when she died. Not a centenarian, but still a very good age for that time. Only exaggerated by a couple of years, and probably not deliberately, but still shows the importance of the validation process.

I found the burial record of Mary Jane Turner, who was buried in Ditchling, East Sussex, England, on 19 September 1857 with an age given of 100 years, 8 months.

I found her 1851 census, which shows her as unmarried, and from a well-to-do family since her nephew was a rector, her great-nephew was a student at Oxford University, and she also had housemaids.

As she was unmarried, her case may not be able to be verified to the rigorous standards required, but I was able to find a baptism record which matches the 1851 census.

A Mary Jane Turner, daughter of William and Sarah, was baptised on 25 January 1757 in Keymer, which also fits nicely with the age given on the death certificate. Just to be more certain, I checked her nephew Edward's ancestry. He was baptised on 8 July 1794 in Westmeston as the son of Richard and Jane Turner. Mary Jane did have a brother named Richard, baptised 14 June 1763.

If the baptism record is a match, then Mary Jane Turner can be considered an early centenarian, with a lifespan of c.25 January 1757 - c.19 September 1857, or 100 years, c.228 days.

Here's another claim I found a while back:

Margaret Thornton Clarke died on 7 March 1864 at 2 Pine Cottage in Blackheath, London, at the claimed age of 106. Her obituary notice as printed in the 12 March 1864 edition of The Sun (this newspaper, not the modern one):

The only other contemporary mention of her I can find in newspapers is a small notice from 1849 looking for her next of kin for probate purposes, which also noted she lived in Wapping at the time (about 6 miles away from Blackheath). With this information in mind, let's try to find her in censuses:

1861 census: Margaret is listed at age 103 living at 2 Pine Cottage, listed as a 'boarder'. Notably, the census provides her birthplace as being Aldgate. The head of the household is Aberdeen-born Jessie Till, aged 60.

1851 census: Margaret is listed at age 93 at 5 Pier Head, Wapping, listed as a 'visitor'. A Scottish-born Jessie Till, aged 51, is listed as a servant - confirming that this is definitely the same person. Besides this, it's worth noting that the head of household is 79-year-old Kitty Walton. 

1841 census: Margaret is listed at age 80 at 5 Pier Head, Wapping. 70-year-old Kitty Walton is once again listed as the head of the household, and 40-year-old Scottish-born Jessie Till is a servant. The ages of everyone on the form is rounded - so Margaret being a few years younger than expected isn't too concerning here. 

So we have a pretty comprehensive view of Margaret's later years, but the main setback is that no-one on these forms seems to be explicitly related to her. Let's see if we can find anything from Margaret's earlier years:

1758 baptism record: Margaret Thornton Clarke, daughter of Samuel and Susanna Clarke of Houndsditch, was baptised at St Botolph's Aldgate on 8 February 1758. 

This seems like a perfect match at first glance. Firstly though, let's try to rule out a potential identity switch by looking for all the children born to Samuel and Susanna Clarke of Houndsditch:

Elizabeth Clarke, bap. 12 Dec 1753

Joseph Clarke, bap. 12 Nov 1755

Margaret Thornton Clarke, bap. 8 Feb 1758

Edward Clarke, bap. 16 Jan 1760

William Clarke, bap. 2 Jul 1762

Susanna Clarke, bap. 13 Jun 1766, bur. 18 Nov 1766

Jonathan Clarke, bap. 2 Sep 1768

Given that Margaret only had one younger sister who died at the age of 6 months this would seem to eliminate the possibility of the Margaret Clarke who died in 1864 being a younger sibling (the only potential issue being the larger-than-usual gap between William and Susanna's births, but in my eyes using this as evidence against the case is going far beyond healthy skepticism). 

Unfortunately, none of these records mention Susanna's maiden name. The only potential marriage record I can find is between Samuel Clarke and Susanna Wilkins on 21 Jun 1747 in the nearby church of St Botolph's Bishopsgate. If this is the correct record, it would leave a gap of 6 years between the date of marriage and their first known child (though perhaps the baptisms of any children in the meantime simply weren't recorded?) - either way I wouldn't be willing to fully hedge my bets on this being the correct record just yet.

This leaves us with the largest issue with the case - Margaret's life between childhood and old age. Census records don't really give us enough information here - for instance we don't know what her occupation was, nor the nature of how she came to live with Kitty Walton. I'm reminded of Elizabeth Gray (1748-1856) a bit, although in that case there are enough records pertaining to her family to form a more conclusive link between the person born in 1748 and dying in 1856. 

Would be curious to know everyone else's thoughts on this! 

A couple of days ago, I stumbled upon this newspaper article from 1936 that mentions 'Antje Jans', a woman that reportedly was baptized on 22 December 1654 in Leeuwarden, Friesland and died in the same place on 11 March 1762 at the claimed age of 107 years and 79 days.

Franeker Courant, 24 July 1936 (source: Delpher.nl)

Translation: 'Antje Jans, a widow, died on 11 March 1762 in Leeuwarden, at the age of over 107 years. She was baptized there on 22 December 1654, and became a member of the Reformed Church on 27 May 1681. She was able to see in life, children, grandchildren's children, and of the latter not only children, but even grandchildren's children. She was fortunate enough to be the oldest person from the aforementioned city, as well as the oldest member of the Reformed Church there. The said woman was of sound mind until the end of her life. She was buried on the 19th (of May) at the Jacobiner Kerkhof among a large crowd of people. (To be continued.) A. H.'

After doing a little research, this is what I found so far:

First, her date of death. I found a confirmation of her date on 11 March 1762 on AlleFriezen.nl:

Second, her membership of the Reformed Church. I found her 1681 membership of the Reformed Church on FamilySearch (page 85):

Finally, her date of birth. I found a 1654 baptism register of the city of Leeuwarden on FamilySearch as well. Despite 'Antje Jans' not being mentioned to have been baptized on 22 December, I did found the name of somebody that has been baptized on 17 December that looks a lot like 'Antje Jans' (page 142):

 Any thoughts on this case?