Why would someone use a wrong birthdate despite knowing his correct one?

[medpat]

My lOH's stepmother's father registered her about a month after the birth so he wasn't near the date limit. That's the trouble, we could understand it if it was to make the register date limit but one of her parents made the mistake either in telling her the wrong date or registering with the wrong date.

[Marmalady]

The OP, however, is not just the day, but a whole year as well! Does the year tally on the Censuses, I wonder? If not, then the error could reside in the parents (assuming they gave the enumerator the information). If the years do tally, then maybe Edward was the one who got things wrong.

The ages given on censuses tally with the 1879 birthdate:

1881  age given 1 yr  actual age 18 months
1891  age given 11 yrs actual age 11 1/2
1901  age given 21 yrs actual age 21 1/2
not on 1911 census

Baptism in 1896 age given 17 actual age 16 1/2  birthdate in register of 1880 would mean age of 15 1/2

Entry into Belgium in 1911 1880 date corrected to 1879 date

1939 census 1879 birthdate given

[IJDisney]

The ages given on censuses tally with the 1879 birthdate:

1881  age given 1 yr  actual age 18 months
1891  age given 11 yrs actual age 11 1/2
1901  age given 21 yrs actual age 21 1/2
not on 1911 census

Baptism in 1896 age given 17 actual age 16 1/2  birthdate in register of 1880 would mean age of 15 1/2

Entry into Belgium in 1911 1880 date corrected to 1879 date

1939 census 1879 birthdate given

Was he living with the same people throughout the census years? It looks as if whoever informed the enumerator was well aware of the correct year (we can't tell which specific birthday was taken). Even the baptism shows that they knew the correct year (he was 17 in 1896).

But how strange that the baptismal record shows that his stated age and birthdate don't match. Its odd no one noticed, so I reckon it was a scribal error on the part of the vicar/recorder at that time. It was only when Edward needed official proof of his age that he or someone picked up on the error, and his birth certificate was checked.

Or maybe Edward always knew the correct date, and the baptismal entry writer is the source of the errors. Did Edward fill the original entries in on the form? If someone other than Edward filled in the form using the baptismal record, then Edward might have made the correction himself.

Or it was a possible compound error; the family got the birthday wrong - the baptismal record took the family error, and also got the birth year wrong - someone in need of official proof noticed the discrepancy in the baptismal record regarding the year of birth and supposed age - the birth certificate was obtained and the double error revealed!

You may never find out, but its an interesting anecdote to add to his life story.

[groom]

So the only time the wrong birthdate is given is on the baptism and the entry into Belgium? I think it could just be, as I suggested earlier a mistake on the baptism record.

[Marmalady]

Was he living with the same people throughout the census years? It looks as if whoever informed the enumerator was well aware of the correct year (we can't tell which specific birthday was taken). Even the baptism shows that they knew the correct year (he was 17 in 1896).

But how strange that the baptismal record shows that his stated age and birthdate don't match. Its odd no one noticed, so I reckon it was a scribal error on the part of the vicar/recorder at that time. It was only when Edward needed official proof of his age that he or someone picked up on the error, and his birth certificate was checked.

Or maybe Edward always knew the correct date, and the baptismal entry writer is the source of the errors. Did Edward fill the original entries in on the form? If someone other than Edward filled in the form using the baptismal record, then Edward might have made the correction himself.

Or it was a possible compound error; the family got the birthday wrong - the baptismal record took the family error, and also got the birth year wrong - someone in need of official proof noticed the discrepancy in the baptismal record regarding the year of birth and supposed age - the birth certificate was obtained and the double error revealed!

You may never find out, but its an interesting anecdote to add to his life story.

Yes, he was living with his parents on all 3 censuses

As he did not need to give his age on entry into Belgium, only his birthdate it is unlikely any would pick up on a discrepancy.

I haven't got a baptismal certificate for him, only the entry in the register --but I think any such baptismal certificates that I have seen have only got date of baptism recorded, not age or date of birth
And would a man of 31 carry around a baptismal certificate? I would have thought, even at that time, a passport would be considered sufficient identification
I am presuming the passport had the correct 1879 date and it was when this was compared to the information on his entry form that the discrepancy was noted and the alteration made

As you say, we will probably never know the reason, it will forever be yet another little mystery attached to my father's family

[Andy_T]

Coming back to the original question
" Why would someone use a wrong birthdate despite knowing his correct one? "

It's difficult to know if it's a deliberate lie or just a transcribing error or forgetfulness in sunset years.

I have a great great grandfather born 1810 and different census years his age gradually became younger and finally in 1881 census his date of birth showed 1820.
Another well off ancestor was 80 years in the 1841 census and he died in 1849 and his headstone shows not 88 years but AGE 95.
He was born in 1755 so when he died in 1749 he had not reached 95 years.
Deliberate untruth or just honest mistake - Who Knows? 

This reminds me of Podark's Aunt Agatha who set her heart on having a 100th birthday party and Russ' arch enemy, the cold calculating George Warleggan cancels her birthday party and exposed her real age. 
This suggests this kind of deliberate lying probably happened.

Andy_T

[mlsmith1947outlook.com]

I have wondered the same thing. My aunt did the same thing. On her marriage license she stated her age as two years younger then her real age, and then in the next census she stated her real age. I have wondered if she made herself younger than she really was because her husband was four years younger? Was it not appropriate for a women to marry a man four years younger than herself but it was OK to marry someone two years younger? 

[Geoff-E]

I have three dates of birth for my grandad-
1) My dad said his dad was born on 6th October;
2) Birth certificate says 1st October 1887
3) 1939 Register has 26 October 1888

His sister also had some variations-
1) Birth certificate 27th October 1889;
2) First marriage "aged 24" when actually 26;
3) Second marriage "aged 66" when actually 67;
4) 1939 Register has 27th October 1894;
5) Death certificate 23rd October 1894 (registered by her daughter).

[ALAMO2008]

My Grandfather's elder brother Edward William Wainwright was born on 16th Sept 1879 -- I have his birth certificate to prove this.

He was not baptised as a baby, but as a teenager in May 1896. Here his birthdate is given as 23rd Sept 1880 -- a year and a week later!

This confusion of birthdates continued into later life. In 1911, when he would be in his early 30s, he travels from Germany into Belgium. On his entry documents, he originally gives his birthdate as 23 Sept 1880, but this is crossed out and 16 Sept 1879 written in a different hand

Can anyone think of any reason for the use of two birthdates like this?
I have ruled out the death of a 1879 baby and ensuing re-use of names for a 1880 baby.

I am Baffled why the Birth Certificate you have Proves you say his Birth date.
It doesn't.
It Proves Only the Date the Mother "Said" to the Registrar was the Birth Date. Nothing More.
I have a Relative and the Birth Certificate states he was born 24 June 1894 Registered on the 42nd final time-limit for Registration
However the Priest Baptised him on 30 May 1894 and recorded it in the Consecutive Baptism Log Register
And noted in the New Column alongside that entry
Gave the Actual Date of Birth as 20 May 1894
And therefore Not as the Birth Certificate Proved.

At what age was your Relative told his Birth Date ? And by Who ?
When his Mother had him Baptised 16 years later
It is not surprising she couldn't remember the exact date assuming she could count.
In 1879/80 did it matter when your Birth Date was?
You were not going to get a Pension when you reached 65
And they probably didn't celebrate Birthdates and sent cards

In my Experience 1939 Register entries copied by the Enumerator from What was Said are not very reliable either.