At that stage early marriage was very rare and pretty much restricted to the gentry I think. Most people could not marry until they had finished their apprenticeship, or were otherwise capable of supporting themselves. Apparently living with parents when married was very rare. I would be skeptical - either the baptism is late (as age about 5-10) or it is not your man. Julie On 07/09/2011 16:49, elizabeth howard wrote: > It could also be an entirely different John Daniell . > > > > life is hard . soften it with a cat \\\=^..^=/// > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Fry"<fredbonzo@iafrica.com> > To:<norfolk@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:25 PM > Subject: Re: [NFK] Marriage at 16? > > >> On 2011/09/07 10:07, megrose61 wrote: >>> On trawling through the Matlaske Parish Registers on Family Search, I >>> have >>> come across the birth of a person I believe is an ancestor, John Daniell, >>> born 1666. In 1682, John Daniell and his wife, Aliz, had their first >>> son, >>> Jonathan, baptised. This would only make John Daniell 16 years old. Do >>> you >>> think there is some error in the register, or has anybody come across >>> very >>> early marriages before? >> Don't make the common mistake of assuming that the date of baptism is >> close to >> the date of birth. Baptism could have been several years after birth. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Mike Fry >> Johannesburg >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> NORFOLK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message >> > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to NORFOLK-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > -- Julie Harold FreeREG Norfolk Coordinator http://www.freereg.org.uk