Claiming to be younger at enlistment

[andrewalston]

One of my lot knocked two years off his age when he enlisted for the Royal Artillery in 1864.

He claimed to be 17 years 10 months, when he was really nearly 20. The rest of his records match well with a birth in 1844, including his death registration in 1914, which is mentioned because he had a pension. He even gives the village where his parents were living as his intended abode on discharge.

The first line in his service record says "Under age", and there seems to be a change in status on 19 March 1864, when he would really become 20.

But why did he fib about his age? Was it to avoid being sent to dangerous places? He was sent to Singapore in 1867, where he married and started a family. Relatively safe, though the record mentions suppressing pirates!

[PaulineJ]

More likely to get away with minimum height/ size requirements for an adult.
As a youth, he's got some growing still to do?

[Jomot]

I don't know, but I have one who claimed to be 17 years & 10 months in 1854 when he was in fact 22 & married with a young child. 

He was 5' 5" when he was invalided out a few years later, which doesn't seem that small for the time.  The only thing I could think of was to defer being sent abroad / into battle, but I remain as mystified as you 

[andrewalston]

His service record says 5' 6¾" at enlistment. 18 years later he had made it to 5' 8", so the army food must have suited him.

Maybe the bounty was better if you were under age. My chap received "£1 and a Free Kit".

[Drosybont]

I've got two Royal Marines in my family recorded as younger than they really were:  Charles Hotham born 22 September 1884, birth date in Royal Marines records 28 March 1885, and Robert Buck for whom Greenwich Hospital School gives date of birth 13 September 1853 but at enlistment date of birth is 20 December 1856. 

Thought it might be pension-related but I've asked both the Royal Marines Museum and the Fleet Air Arm Museum and neither could suggest a reason for it.  Meeting a height requirement is something I hadn't thought of - had assumed they might not have known their dates of birth.  In Charles Hotham's case, ironically after retiring from the Royal Marines he became a Registrar of Births, Marriages and Deaths!

Drosybont

[Joy Dean]

My Grandad, Ben Newton, gave his age as 18 years of age, when he joined the Dorset Regiment when he was 16; but that was claiming to be older at enlistment.

[HughC]

I think it was fairly common for those who were below the minimum age to claim to be older.  Claiming to be younger is less easy to explain.

When my great-uncle enlisted in the Canadian forces at the outbreak of the Great War he gave his younger brother's date of birth.  I don't know why: possibly promotion to officer from the ranks was open only to those under 30, and he saw his birthday looming?  However, he didn't pretend to be under 21 (and certainly not under 18).