Global Supercentenarian Forum
The Supercentenarian World
Notifications
Clear all
13/02/2023 6:07 pm
As a side note, would you be willing to accept Guinness World Records verification by proxy? GWR has apparently previously verified Dumitru Comanescu's (1908-2020) claimed age; would that be enough for the ESO to do the same by simply trusting GWR? Or do you need to personally look at the relevant documentation?
Preferably, we'd obtain the documentation ourselves. As you can tell from all the ESO validations of French SCs, they were only validated after we had received documentation - because as it turns out, the GRG, although often correct, was not always, as in the case of Jane Redpath (not born on 3 Mar) and Ellen Watson (did not die on 16 Dec), for instance.
Also, your organization also engages in SC claim debunking, if I recall correctly. If so, then there is a SC claimant (died in the US but born in Rhodes, now in Greece) who was probably not a SC at the time of his death:
https://the110club.com/nissim-nass-almeleh-1885-1997-t16814.html
But documentation from Rhodes would need to be acquired in order to be able to determine his age with certainty. It was likely slightly below 110, but we simply can't be 100% sure without an original birth record or something of that sort. He doesn't have a baptismal record since he was Jewish.
As you have correctly deduced, for debunked cases, too, we'd need documentation.
Overduidelijk misschien.
diego reacted
13/02/2023 11:27 pm
Dear Marco,
I have a question: If your organization (the ESO) was in charge of verifying American SCs, how would it verify a case like Aaron Bazemore's? The 1900 US Census lists him as being born in March 1880 (though we can't find an 1880 US Census entry for him, which suggests that he was likely born in 1881 or later), but his World War I draft registration card (from 1918) lists him as being born on February 20, 1881, which is the same birthdate that he claimed for the rest of his life (albeit sometimes claiming a different birth year later on, before reverting back to 1881 as his birth year in his old age).
If your organization was in charge of verifying American SCs such as him, would you go with March 1881 (even though his 1900 US Census entry does not give an exact date of birth but only a month and a year of birth) or with February 20, 1881?
Hi Futurist,
If these were the earliest two pieces of evidence available, we probably wouldn't verify his age (yet), as they show conflicting years of birth. In addition, as the only document from within the (possible) twenty years of birth does not show an exact date of birth, we wouldn't validate him to the highest degree of certainty.
And I suppose we wouldn't go with any DOB until more early-life evidence was found.
Obviously high-level validation wouldn't be possible for such a person, but what about mid-level validation?
As for more early-life evidence, for an African-American born in the 19th century US, I think that, for the most part, it would be very difficult to find birth and/or baptismal records for such a person, unless perhaps this person was a member of the African-American elite.
https://gerontology.fandom.com/wiki/Aaron_Bazemore
I'll have to check Jimmy's data, but I suspect that there are very few African-American SCs born in the 19th century who could achieve a high-level validation since generally their early-life documentation, specifically US Census records, does not list a full date of birth for them. Hilliard Hudson (1899-2009) would, of course, be an exception to this rule/trend because his World War I draft registration card (from 1918, I think) does, in fact, list his full date of birth, and it's barely within the 20-year-window.
13/02/2023 11:30 pm
As a side note, would you be willing to accept Guinness World Records verification by proxy? GWR has apparently previously verified Dumitru Comanescu's (1908-2020) claimed age; would that be enough for the ESO to do the same by simply trusting GWR? Or do you need to personally look at the relevant documentation?
Preferably, we'd obtain the documentation ourselves. As you can tell from all the ESO validations of French SCs, they were only validated after we had received documentation - because as it turns out, the GRG, although often correct, was not always, as in the case of Jane Redpath (not born on 3 Mar) and Ellen Watson (did not die on 16 Dec), for instance.
Also, your organization also engages in SC claim debunking, if I recall correctly. If so, then there is a SC claimant (died in the US but born in Rhodes, now in Greece) who was probably not a SC at the time of his death:
https://the110club.com/nissim-nass-almeleh-1885-1997-t16814.html
But documentation from Rhodes would need to be acquired in order to be able to determine his age with certainty. It was likely slightly below 110, but we simply can't be 100% sure without an original birth record or something of that sort. He doesn't have a baptismal record since he was Jewish.
As you have correctly deduced, for debunked cases, too, we'd need documentation.
Thank you for this information!
As a side note, you don't verify SCs who have lived in Europe for years but who were not either born there or died there, correct? SCs such as Michael DeSantis (1899-2009; lived in Italy for years during his childhood, apparently) and Toni Dondzila (1912-2022; lived in Poland for 13 years during her childhood and early adulthood).
14/02/2023 3:12 am
I figure that I might as well ask this: In the US, which early-life and mid-life documents actually give a full date of birth for SCs other than draft registration cards and, where applicable, naturalization records, passports, and travel records? Obviously there are birth and baptismal records, but they are not available for all US-born SCs by far. Many US-born SCs don't appear to have them. And US census records don't give a full date of birth, unfortunately.
diego reacted
14/02/2023 5:33 am
@Marco BTW, if you want a list of US SC cases that would be high-level validated, then based on this, I can tell you:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nPoPTxlJ7gv4YTrrAuCxhbpTyLs3jZavAEay1eclLqs/edit#gid=0
* means Foreign-Born; bolded means Male. So far, there are no males, though there will be later on.
*Velgjer Svien (1842-1953)
*Anna Swenson (1860-1971)
*Gertrude Schultz (1862-1972)
Bridget Deely (1866-1977)
Anna Murphy (1867-1980)
Alicia Blanchet (1867-1979)
*Joseph Hepworth (1867-1977)
*Giovanni Buffo (1867-1978)
Henry Hannah (1868-1978)
*Anna Schwab (1868-1978)
Nellie Spencer (1869-1982)
Mary Cota (1870-1982)
Sue Jackley (1871-1982)
*Augusta Holtz (1871-1986)
Elizabeth Neu (1871-1982)
Jessica Swift (1871-1982)
Hattie Mitchell (1872-1983)
Grace Spooner (1872-1982)
Mamie Eva Keith (1873-1986)
Mary McKinney (1873-1987)
Florence Knapp (1873-1988)
Bessie Bettencourt (1874-1985)
*Martha Rein (1874-1987)
Annie Cawthorne (1875-1986)
Pearl Wolcott (1875-1985)
Catherine Dodson (1875-1985)
*Johanna Frank (1875-1986)
Elzona Maxey (1875-1988)
Edna Guthrie (1876-1987)
Carrie Cook (1876-1986)
Jennie Parlin (1876-1986)
To be continued later.
14/02/2023 5:36 am
I stand corrected on the no males part; clueless me!
[b]*Joseph Hepworth (1867-1977)
*Giovanni Buffo (1867-1978)
Henry Hannah (1868-1978)[/b]
14/02/2023 6:49 pm
As a side note, you don't verify SCs who have lived in Europe for years but who were not either born there or died there, correct? SCs such as Michael DeSantis (1899-2009; lived in Italy for years during his childhood, apparently) and Toni Dondzila (1912-2022; lived in Poland for 13 years during her childhood and early adulthood).
No, we don't.
Overduidelijk misschien.
14/02/2023 6:50 pm
I figure that I might as well ask this: In the US, which early-life and mid-life documents actually give a full date of birth for SCs other than draft registration cards and, where applicable, naturalization records, passports, and travel records? Obviously there are birth and baptismal records, but they are not available for all US-born SCs by far. Many US-born SCs don't appear to have them. And US census records don't give a full date of birth, unfortunately.
Someone who researches / has researched American SCs could probably best answer this, but I reckon school records would also show a full date of birth.
Overduidelijk misschien.
Topic starter
14/02/2023 8:17 pm
Actually, come to think of it, I've created this topic (click!), so it's safe for you to ask specific questions. I will also redirect posts there if they venture off-topic in other topics. 🙃
Thank you very much. Also, I've got a question: Can I try verifying and double-checking SCs (and semi-SCs) in this thread as well?
No. This is not the place for that - and neither is anywhere else in the public part of the forum.
14/02/2023 8:18 pm
The fact that we have 0 living people from 1913 also means that 2023 is going to be the first year without a 110th birthday in Hungary since 2013 (given the unidentified 1910- and 1912-born cases are real ones)
Within a decade (or slightly more than a decade in the very best-case scenario), Hungary is likely to have no people who were born before the Treaty of Trianon. This would be very sad given the huge importance of that treaty in Hungarian history and how it massively shrunk Hungary's borders.
diego reacted
15/02/2023 3:34 am
Could this be his baptismal record?
[link removed]
Though it implies that he was born one day later than claimed, apparently?
15/02/2023 4:15 pm
@Mendocino TBF, there is a distance between unassisted walking and significantly assisted walking. For instance, IIRC, based on what I've previously heard, Maria Capovilla could still walk at age 116.5+, but only if she was simultaneously being held by two people (for balance, in order to avoid falls). I wouldn't be surprised if something similar is/was true for the SCs whom you mentioned above here.
Topic starter
15/02/2023 4:23 pm
@Mendocino TBF, there is a distance between unassisted walking and significantly assisted walking. For instance, IIRC, based on what I've previously heard, Maria Capovilla could still walk at age 116.5+, but only if she was simultaneously being held by two people (for balance, in order to avoid falls). I wouldn't be surprised if something similar is/was true for the SCs whom you mentioned above here.
Futurist, you've been posting here for about a week now (since 9 Feb). You have repeatedly been asked NOT to post off-topic - and that if you feel the desire to, to please do so in your own thread (which is this thread). Yet here is another example of a post that you posted elsewhere, but that is leading the original topic astray. (That topic is about Eusebio Quintero López, so NOT about María Capovilla and NOT about (un)assisted walking.)
We've also asked you to show a learning curve. I realise one week is quite soon to be demanding that everything runs smoothly and perfectly, but I do think you should be able to filter your own posts more critically. Before posting a reply to a topic, first have a good look at what the topic is about - and if it is about a certain individual, it's really not the right place to be discussing other supercentenarians in that same thread.
As I am expecting more mature and more focussed behaviour compared to what you've shown on the 110 Club (in other words, first filter your thoughts before hitting the "add reply" button), I'll give you one more week (9 Feb + 14 days = 23 Feb) before I need to be start handing out warnings.
I hope you will heed this advice.
Record_116 reacted
15/02/2023 4:29 pm
Ms. Aulenbacher had been living 20 minutes away from me in Wiesbaden, Hesse, Germany, until she settled over to live with her daughter in South Carolina, USA.
She was one of the oldest SCs to ever immigrate to another country, doing so at age 101. Is that the record for doing this for SCs?
Topic starter
15/02/2023 4:30 pm
And the above posts from the thread about Maria Aulenbacher's death are another example of straying off-topic, Futurist. Please restrict yourself to posting your condolences and to how that has made you feel, but don't start asking questions about who the oldest migrated (super)centenarians were - not the place for that.
Topic starter
15/02/2023 4:32 pm
Could this be his baptismal record?
[link removed]
Though it implies that he was born one day later than claimed, apparently?
No efforts to (re)validate someone, please. I've specifically asked/told you not to do so. Thank you.
15/02/2023 4:35 pm
Note that China has many false claims, so I am only including Plausible ones. Male cases are blue.
- Wang Zhanwen (born 15 Apr 1907) CHINA'S OLP SINCE 20 Dec 2017
- Xu Senzhen (born 22 Sept 1907) VICE-DOYENNE SINCE 20 Dec 2017
- Wang Sunshi (born 6 Oct 1909)
- Gou Zhijie (born 4 Jan 1910)
- Qiu Fuzhen (born 1 May 1910)
- Tao Ruisheng (born 16 July 1910) DOYEN SINCE ?
- Wu Zhicheng (born 10 Aug 1910)
- Chen Zhongbo (born 18 Aug 1910) VICE-DOYEN SINCE ?
- Yang Longsheng (born 13 Dec 1910)
- Shen Guangyuan (born 18 Jan 1911)
Is it really possible to give someone the title of "China's OLP" when it's a country of 1.4 billion inhabitants, spurious age claims, and little prospect of the person in question being validated? How do you define "plausible", for instance?
The only claim on here who I'm fully convinced of is Shen Guangyuan, due to his biography. But even then, it's possible he could be a year younger from our perspective due to the East Asian age counting.
I'm also pretty confident that Yang Longsheng is the age claimed as well (his daughter is around 90, and he has some records from the 1950s stating his exact age), but the 1910 birth year in his case is almost certainly unconverted, so he would be born in 1911 in the West.
How extensive do you think that record-keeping was in China 110+ years ago? Obviously Chinese records aren't online on places like FamilySearch.org or Ancestry.com, but could they exist somewhere in China? Or do you think that if China had the equivalent of Japan's koseki system, then a lot of such Chinese records were already destroyed in the past during the warlord era, Chinese Civil War, and/or Cultural Revolution?
Topic starter
15/02/2023 4:36 pm
How extensive do you think that record-keeping was in China 110+ years ago? Obviously Chinese records aren't online on places like FamilySearch.org or Ancestry.com, but could they exist somewhere in China? Or do you think that if China had the equivalent of Japan's koseki system, then a lot of such Chinese records were already destroyed in the past during the warlord era, Chinese Civil War, and/or Cultural Revolution?
There's no link to the topic of the thread, nor to the ten listed people in the list (a link that Ollie and Mendocino did have in their posts). Are you beginning to see what I mean with the filter you should first apply to yourself?
15/02/2023 10:30 pm
No efforts to (re)validate someone, please. I've specifically asked/told you not to do so. Thank you.
Even in my own thread right here, right?
15/02/2023 10:37 pm
@Marco I've got a question for you: Just how frequently does the ESO rely on censuses to verify SCs?
15/02/2023 10:37 pm
Actually, come to think of it, I've created this topic (click!), so it's safe for you to ask specific questions. I will also redirect posts there if they venture off-topic in other topics. 🙃
Thank you very much. Also, I've got a question: Can I try verifying and double-checking SCs (and semi-SCs) in this thread as well?
No. This is not the place for that - and neither is anywhere else in the public part of the forum.
Thank you for telling me this.
15/02/2023 10:38 pm
As a side note, you don't verify SCs who have lived in Europe for years but who were not either born there or died there, correct? SCs such as Michael DeSantis (1899-2009; lived in Italy for years during his childhood, apparently) and Toni Dondzila (1912-2022; lived in Poland for 13 years during her childhood and early adulthood).
No, we don't.
Thanks.
15/02/2023 10:40 pm
I figure that I might as well ask this: In the US, which early-life and mid-life documents actually give a full date of birth for SCs other than draft registration cards and, where applicable, naturalization records, passports, and travel records? Obviously there are birth and baptismal records, but they are not available for all US-born SCs by far. Many US-born SCs don't appear to have them. And US census records don't give a full date of birth, unfortunately.
Someone who researches / has researched American SCs could probably best answer this, but I reckon school records would also show a full date of birth.
School records, maybe, but school censuses, apparently not, at least for those from the 19th century. I've looked at some Mississippi school census entries from the late 19th century and they don't give a full date of birth or even a year of birth, only an age. ("Mississippi Enumeration of Educable Children")
15/02/2023 10:46 pm
I suppose that there's another question that I'm curious about: Just how badly did World War I affect extreme male longevity? If a male's odds of becoming a SC were 1 in 500,000, and 10 million men perished in WWI, then it seems like we missed out on around 20 male SCs as a result of WWI, with such ages:
110: 10
111: 5
112: 3
113: 2
114: 1
But maybe a male's odds of becoming a SC were a bit lower, such as 1 in 750,000 or 1 in 1 million. In which case, we would have likely lost out on these male SCs:
1 in 750,000 odds of a male becoming a SC:
110: 8
111: 4
112: 2
113: 1
1 in 1 million odds of a male becoming a SC:
110: 5
111: 3
112: 2
113: 1
diego reacted
15/02/2023 10:47 pm
I suppose that there's another question that I'm curious about: Just how badly did World War I affect extreme male longevity? If a male's odds of becoming a SC were 1 in 500,000, and 10 million men perished in WWI, then it seems like we missed out on around 20 male SCs as a result of WWI, with such ages:
110: 10
111: 5
112: 3
113: 2
114: 1
But maybe a male's odds of becoming a SC were a bit lower, such as 1 in 750,000 or 1 in 1 million. In which case, we would have likely lost out on these male SCs:
1 in 750,000 odds of a male becoming a SC:
110: 8
111: 4
112: 2
113: 1
1 in 1 million odds of a male becoming a SC:
110: 5
111: 3
112: 2
113: 1
These are the ages at death, FWIW, not the total number of additional men who would have reached each of these ages. So, in the last scenario, five additional men would have died at age 110, three at age 111, two at age 112, and one at age 113 in a scenario without WWI.
diego reacted
