I've seen a lot of births in my family from 1864-1900 recorded with dates weeks or months after baptism. Why is this happening? Did it cost to register the required civil paperwork and you waited until you could pay? Did the farmer's not keep track of
the actual dates back in the day? (parents were illiterate based on "his mark" notations in records)

An an example, in my G-Grandfather's family there was a civil birth recorded as 1 Sep 1875, but he was baptized on 1 August 1875 and he recorded his birthday as 22 Aug 1880 on his citizenship application.

Another brother's birth was recorded as 12 Sep 1879 and his baptism was a month earlier on 21 Sep 1879. He used 12 Sep 1882 on his citizenship application though.

What's with the "fluid" birthdays?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/24/2020 10:06 AM, robjoyce1@gmail.com wrote:

I've seen a lot of births in my family from 1864-1900 recorded with dates weeks or months after baptism. Why is this happening? Did it cost to register the required civil paperwork and you waited until you could pay? Did the farmer's not keep track

of the actual dates back in the day? (parents were illiterate based on "his mark" notations in records)

An an example, in my G-Grandfather's family there was a civil birth recorded as 1 Sep 1875, but he was baptized on 1 August 1875 and he recorded his birthday as 22 Aug 1880 on his citizenship application.

Another brother's birth was recorded as 12 Sep 1879 and his baptism was a month earlier on 21 Sep 1879. He used 12 Sep 1882 on his citizenship application though.

What's with the "fluid" birthdays?

Just a guess, but probably more attention was paid to baptism than to registering with civil authorities. The baptism info comes from
handwritten parish registers and is quite specific to the date. The
civil registrations I have seen often give the year and a three month
period (why I don't know - maybe privacy?). I don't know whether it cost
to register a child - probably not given the poverty in most areas.

We always celebrated my late mother's birthday as August 25, 1912. All
her documents state it was August 4, 1912. I guess it really did not
matter to her. We laugh about it.

--
Worse than the ordinary miserable childhood is the miserable Irish
childhood, and worse yet is the miserable Irish Catholic childhood.

Pennsylvania - Tá sé difriúil anseo.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 25 May 2020 17:13:57 -0400, RoddyMcCorley
<Roddy.McCorley@verizon.net> wrote:

[...] The

civil registrations I have seen often give the year and a three month
period (why I don't know - maybe privacy?).[...]

Year and quarter-year reflect the indexing periods.

See sections 15 and 17 of http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1863/act/90/enacted/en/print.html
to see that Ireland was the same as England and Wales, for which there
is a description at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Register_Office_for_England_and_Wales#The_GRO_indexes

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 24 May 2020 07:06:52 -0700 (PDT), robjoyce1@gmail.com wrote:

I've seen a lot of births in my family from 1864-1900 recorded with
dates weeks or months after baptism. Why is this happening? Did it
cost to register the required civil paperwork and you waited until you
could pay? Did the farmer's not keep track of the actual dates back
in the day? (parents were illiterate based on "his mark" notations in
records)

An an example, in my G-Grandfather's family there was a civil birth
recorded as 1 Sep 1875, but he was baptized on 1 August 1875 and he
recorded his birthday as 22 Aug 1880 on his citizenship application.

Another brother's birth was recorded as 12 Sep 1879 and his baptism
was a month earlier on 21 Sep 1879. He used 12 Sep 1882 on his
citizenship application though.

What's with the "fluid" birthdays?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 24 May 2020 07:06:52 -0700 (PDT), robjoyce1@gmail.com wrote:

Another brother's birth was recorded as 12 Sep 1879 and his baptism
was a month earlier on 21 Sep 1879. He used 12 Sep 1882 on his
citizenship application though.

That actually looks like the right way round. It could be explained
where it is wrong by the priest writing in the wrong column.


--
Steve Hayes
Web: http://hayesgreene.wordpress.com/
http://hayesgreene.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/afgen/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)