Age discrepancy on RN records

[wendyandrews]

 My husbands Grandfather was born on 27th June 1890 in Tideford, St Germans, Cornwall. We know he was in the Royal Navy and then became a Coastguard. This morning I looked at the online records at the National Archives and downloaded the RN record for an Ernest Bartlett (his name) born in St Germans. It shows that he joined the RN on 12th Oct 1906 but gives his dob as 12th October 1888. Would he have lied about his age? If so, what reason would have caused him to do so? I am thinking these records must be his as I can't find any Ernest Bartlett born in St Germans in 1888.
Any ideas?

Wendy

[gortonboy]

he probably lied so he could join up,,,he was 16,so he probably gave a year of birth to make him 18,,and therefore old enough to enlist ? 

[wendyandrews]

Thank you, I didn't know if it would have been 16 or 18 for joining up. If it was 18, then it makes sense.

[Winterbloom21]

That's certainly a little odd, because although people did lie to get into the services if they were too young, that wouldn't have been the case with him.    If he was born in 1890 and would have been old enough to join the RN at 16 in 1909.    My own grandfather was younger than that when he did it.
Also the whole date of birth is different, rather than just the year.

But who knows why people do half the things they do?    It took us ages to find my great grandfather in the 1891 census because he was living under an assumed name for ten years - absolutely nobody knows why.

Maybe it's just a common or garden mistake on behalf of the person in the office when your relative joined up.  Imagine the scene, a queue of noisy teenagers, he's on his own dealing with this because his oppo who should be there is off sick, and just at the vital moment when he's filling out the form, he glances at the wrong birth certificate.     It happens.    I'm particularly keen on this theory as the date of birth (12th Octo) is the same date as the date of joining.     That's the sort of mistake that people make when working under pressure!

[Winterbloom21]

Sorry, there's a typo there, I should have typed 16 in 1906.

[fifer1947]

Yes I agree with gortonboy, he was too young to join up in 1906.  It looks like he just said the same date as he signed up as his birth date and changed the year to fit.

 

[wendyandrews]

I'm glad you all think he changed his birthdate to suit...was thinking someone may tell me it couldn't be him. I'm 99% sure it must be, it's just annoying that the dates don't tally, but I guess it was more common in those days to lie about age for employment- I know my Gran did when she went off to be a nurse in about 1930. Did they not ask for copies of birth certs then?
Wendy

[fifer1947]

Maybe that's why so many got away with signing up under age!    If he'd given his right age he'd have had to have parental permission and would have been signed up as a "Boy".

I also checked freebmd and there's no birth in 1888 in St Germans for an Ernest.  Here are the entries for "Ernest Bartlett" for 1888.

Births Sep 1888
BARTLETT    Ernest Alfred                Watford    3a   540   
BARTLETT    Ernest Edward         Chipping N.    3a   846    
Births Dec 1888   
BARTLETT    Ernest                         Yeovil    5c   425   
BARTLETT    Ernest George W         Shoreditch    1c   58   
BARTLETT    Ernest William                 St. Thomas    5b   39    

[Winterbloom21]

You're quite right, Fifer, he would have had to have Mum and Dad's permission to join when under 18.    I was forgetting that; my grandad joined when he was very young because he had a widowed mother to support.

So, I reckon that's your answer, Wendy.   If he was fit and strong looking, I don't suppose they asked too many questions.