George James Kent, born Plymouth, Devon abt. 1830. died New Zealand, May, 1909.

[Otakou73]

One tree on ancestry has a baptism for Harriett Heath, 28 June 1848, St. Mary Guildford
Parents George and Harriett
Source England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975.

She is transcribed on ancestry as Henriett Hath (Surrey, England, Church of England Baptisms, 1813-1921)

Death in NZ in 1929
Harriet Kent, age 81

The birth of Elizabeth Harriet was registered on Nov 1 1876. (born 1876 Sept. 22)
The informant was Harriet Kent, mother of the child.
Father -Joseph Kent fisherman age 36  born Plymouth. England.
Mother - Harriet Kent  age 23 formerly Heath born Guildford, Surrey.

So Harriet's age was well out on that birth registration. And she was the informant. Apparently!
No age given for Harriet on Henry John's registration?

Sorry, I missed that. Her age on Henry John’s registration, according to the informant, George Kent, her husband and the child’s father,  was 29. Which she would have been if she was 23 when her daughter was born.
If those ages are accurate, she could not have been 80 or 81 when she died.

George’s age at his inquest was given as 79 by his older son (George James).
And that son’s children were always told that the photo of their grandmother, (Harriet) that hung on the wall of their parents house was taken on her 80th birthday (she was pictured holding a cake).

I am now wondering now if the children of George and Harriet ever knew the correct ages of their parents.

[rosie99]

I am wondering whether he was just George Kent and the son assumed he had a middle name especially as it does not appear on any documents that George or his wife initiated.  It is likely that 'Joseph' Kent was just an error by the clergy on that baptism.  The registers were often completed in batches so it would have been easy to make an error

[Otakou73]

I am wondering whether he was just George Kent and the son assumed he had a middle name especially as it does not appear on any documents that George or his wife initiated.  It is likely that 'Joseph' Kent was just an error by the clergy on that baptism.  The registers were often completed in batches so it would have been easy to make an error

I am thinking the same about that birth registration.
Assuming that the information George gave when registering his son’s birth was accurate:
He was born in Plymouth, Devonshire.
In March, 1882 he was 47 years old, therefore was born 1834 or early 1835.
A newspaper advertisement that  he had found a skiff out at sea indicates he was living at Otakou in 1864.
What is certain is that:
He married Harriet Heath in January, 1876.
He was accidentally drowned in 1909.

If the age on his death registration was  provided by the same son who told the inquest  that his father was 79 when he died, I wonder if the names of his parents might be inaccurate as well?
Those were recorded as being George James Kent and Helen Kent, formerly Mitchell.

[jonwarrn]

It's possible that George's year of birth, based on the age given, varies from certificate to certificate.
I mean there are two or three other birth certificates you don't have. I am not suggesting that you buy them. But obviously we don't know what age was given for George on them. They could drag his birth back to about 1830 again!

The Intention to Marry notices have often been mentioned on Rootschat. Didn't someone on here do look ups at the archive at one time? Anyway, it may give age and number of years in New Zealand for George?

[wivenhoe]

Can you confirm please that the documents that you have for NZ BDM are printouts.

You are transcribing hand written details.

[Otakou73]

Can you confirm please that the documents that you have for NZ BDM are printouts.

You are transcribing hand written details.

Yes. They are printouts, not certificates.
They are handwritten.

[wivenhoe]

Documents where William KENT is the author of information about himself should be read as the most reliable until/unless you have reason to believe otherwise.

That would be the marriage record, and child's birth record.

[jonwarrn]

Documents where William KENT is the author of information about himself should be read as the most reliable until/unless you have reason to believe otherwise

Who is William Kent?

[Otakou73]

Documents where William KENT is the author of information about himself should be read as the most reliable until/unless you have reason to believe otherwise

Who is William Kent?

I think wivenhoe meant George Kent. But I wouldn’t mind too much if a William turned up among the Georges for some variety in the names!