RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: iolaus on Saturday 02 February 19 20:41 GMT (UK)
-
Which date of birth is more likely to be the actual date of birth?
The one on official documents ie birth certificate, 1939 register
or the one on the baptism record?
(Ive only seen the text only for the baptism which shows birth date as 25th Apr 1886 (christening date 23rd May 1886) - others show 5th May 1886
-
I would go for the Birth Certificate! ;D
-
Yes I agree.
-
I have to favour the Baptism record. But you do need to see the original to be sure the transcription is accurate.
This was discussed Here (https://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=794601.18)
-
Since Civil Registration began, a Birth Certificate is a legal document and, especially after 1874, was compulsory.
Since the birth was registered within 42 days, the date is more likely to be accurate.
Many people weren't baptised, or were baptised months or even years after the birth.
Plenty of scope to mis-remember the actual date?
The 1939 Register shows the date of birth that an individual wanted to show. For many reasons people often wrote down the wrong year!
-
. . .
Since the birth was registered within 42 days, the date is more likely to be accurate.
. . .
Where is the evidence for this statement!.
The OP did not state the date of registration nor provided a GRO Ref.
-
Which date of birth is more likely to be the actual date of birth?
The one on official documents ie birth certificate, 1939 register
or the one on the baptism record?
(Ive only seen the text only for the baptism which shows birth date as 25th Apr 1886 (christening date 23rd May 1886) - others show 5th May 1886
This may be a case where the parents were late in registering the child, and gave a false date of birth so as to comply with the 42 day rule. They would have had no need to do this at the baptism, so the DOB given at the baptism may be the true date.
As already mentioned, you would need to check in the PR that the transcribed date is accurate.
-
And there is always the chance that the recorder misheard :P As I have come across various examples of that, it may have happened more than we think, especially if illiteracy was fairly common. On this occasion '25th' and '5th' may have sounded similar in some contexts - 'about the 5th' ?
-
I have a case which may be similar to the OP's.
My great grandmother was born in early May 1857.
She was baptised on 31 May, and her date of birth was given as 6 May.
Her birth was registered on 8 June, with the date given as 4 May.
For a long time I thought that the birthdate in the baptism register was more likely to be correct, being closer to the event, though the discrepancy always puzzled me. The birth was registered by her father, who was a schoolmaster born into a family containing several parish clerks, and I would have expected him to get it right.
When the 1939 register was released I found she had given the date there as 4 May, and I now feel that must be the correct date. My best guess is that the vicar misread his rough notes when writing up the baptism register.
-
Yet another possibility is that Roman numerals were used at some stage - it was much commoner in the old days - tho it seems unlikely that they would be used for the day, rather than the month. But if three slashes are written haphazardly they can easily be read as 4, 6 or even 3.
-
Which date of birth is more likely to be the actual date of birth?
The one on official documents ie birth certificate, 1939 register
or the one on the baptism record?
(Ive only seen the text only for the baptism which shows birth date as 25th Apr 1886 (christening date 23rd May 1886) - others show 5th May 1886
Either or neither is the short answer.
They weren't even the same month. I suspect an attempt to avoid a late registration fine.
Do you have original birth certificate or at least a facsimile of the original from local registration office?
You should look at baptism register. Clergyman may have mixed-up 2 babies baptised on same day.
My Irish grandma has 2 dobs, 5 days apart. I trust dob in baptism register in her case as she was baptised between 5 and 10 days old, depending on which dob was correct, whereas her birth wasn't registered for weeks. One of her sisters wasn't registered at all.
My mother's dobs differ by a few days. I have seen only a transcript of baptism register. I trust the birth registration in her case. That was the date she celebrated. Her father was more likely to have given the correct information when registering birth of his 1st child than my illiterate GGF when registering his 5th.
-
Thanks all - I suspect I'll never know
At least I know my great grandfather's birth certificate is the one that is wrong (not the case above) as he told me - his mother confessed when he was in his 20s (I assume when he saw his birth certificate and asked why it wasn't on the day he celebrated) - on the plus side I know when someone copied from my tree on ancestry as I have the actual date on there (with an explanation)
-
I came across one recently where the DOB from the 1939 register (showing as early December) lined up well with the birth registration in the first quarter of the following year.
Unfortunately the baptism took place in mid-November and gave a DOB in October!