Which birthdate do I use if there are different dates on different documents? (native, find)

[SpeedDemonND]

I’ve located a birth record in Italy of an ancestor which states his name is Luigi and he was born on January 24th, 1897. Just a few years later, he immigrated to the United States along with his father, mother, and younger brother.

However, on almost all of his USA documents (marriage record, WWI and WWII draft/registration, etc.) his name is listed as Louis (rather than the Italian version, Luigi) and his birthday is listed as January 21st (rather than the 24th, like his birth record states).

I assume that since the birth record was recorded shortly after his birth, and even includes the time of day he was born (6:30 AM), that it is genuinely accurate. It is also the same date written down in the Italian index of birth records. However, that’s basically the only document I have before he immigrated to the USA a few years after that, and all other USA documents I’ve found have a different day listed, and therefore, will not support the “official” date of birth.

Which name and birth date should I be using when building my family tree? Should I use the name and date listed on his birth record in Italy, or the name and birth date he wrote on virtually all of his American documents?

Any help would be appreciated. Thank you!

[suzy_q2010]

Most genealogy software will allow you to make multiple entries for a fact and give the source, so you could document both dates and give all of the places you found them. I do not think you can assume that the Italian records are the most accurate. For example, if the birth happened on the 21st and was recorded on the 24th, the recorder make have accidentally used the current date rather than the real birth day. Also, the person giving the information may have told the wrong day.

Have you looked for an obituary? Death certificate? Checked church records? How about FindAGrave?

As to name, I would use the birth name and note that it was Anglicized later.

[Roselvr]

I do birth both ways, I'd do the 21st as the main one but alternate date is the 24th. As to his name, I'd write it Luigi "Louis" last name. You can also write it both ways, Louis or Luigi as alternate. I have Italian ancestors for my hub who's names were Anglicized. I have my mother and her aunt who's name that started with a V were written as a W. Think Wilma Flintstone. There is no W in Hungarian. In that case I put the W name in quotes.

[SpeedDemonND]

Hi suzy_q2010, thanks for your reply.

All of the United States records I’ve been able to find so far include January 21 as the birth date. These include records for his marriage, WWI and WWII draft registration, and an application for a headstone for US Military Veterans.

I have not been able to find any Church records for this area of Italy to help confirm the birth record’s date.

While it’s possible the birth record is inaccurate, it states that it was recorded on January 27, and that the birth took place on the 24th at 6:20 AM. This information was provided by the midwife, according to the record.

In addition, the record also states that it was read to all witnesses in attendance and was signed only by the midwife, as the parents could not read or write.

While I know we can’t operate on assumptions, it would seem strange to confuse a full week’s time for just a few days and that neither the parents nor the midwife would correct the record after it was read to them and before it was signed.

[SpeedDemonND]

Thank you Roselvr, I will write his name out the way you suggested.

[Roselvr]

Originally Posted by SpeedDemonND

Hi suzy_q2010, thanks for your reply.

All of the United States records I’ve been able to find so far include January 21 as the birth date. These include records for his marriage, WWI and WWII draft registration, and an application for a headstone for US Military Veterans.

I have not been able to find any Church records for this area of Italy to help confirm the birth record’s date.

While it’s possible the birth record is inaccurate, it states that it was recorded on January 27, and that the birth took place on the 24th at 6:20 AM. This information was provided by the midwife, according to the record.

In addition, the record also states that it was read to all witnesses in attendance and was signed only by the midwife, as the parents could not read or write.

While I know we can’t operate on assumptions, it would seem strange to confuse a full week’s time for just a few days and that neither the parents nor the midwife would correct the record after it was read to them and before it was signed.

It sounds like the birth record is the correct date and the one in the US was from memory. Happens more often then you think. I have relatives who's birth years are wrong on their headstones. I'd list what he had in the US as the fact. I think adding the Italy birth as an alternative would work fine. Unfortunately they didn't care so much about the DOB as we do today. It just didn't matter like it does now.

[suzy_q2010]

Originally Posted by Roselvr

It sounds like the birth record is the correct date and the one in the US was from memory. Happens more often then you think. I have relatives who's birth years are wrong on their headstones. I'd list what he had in the US as the fact. I think adding the Italy birth as an alternative would work fine. Unfortunately they didn't care so much about the DOB as we do today. It just didn't matter like it does now.

My father's date of death is wrong on his headstone (off by one day). My brother made a mistake when he ordered the memorial. That was in 2003.

I have another ancestor with the wrong date of death on his grave marker, too. I found a news article about him that gave the correct date. He was a judge and well known in the community.

[NorthofHere]

The Italian birth record is probably correct. Use that as the official date but add two entries for birth, one showing the Italian birth record and the other showing all US documents. Someone made a mistake when in the US and it just continued on. Do you have any record of when he and his family arrived? You may also try and track down his social security application if he was still alive when social security went into effect. You should be able to get the record for him, I got my grandfathers who was born in 1895. If you can't get it yet, you probably can get it in a year or so. I'm not sure the date currently that allows you to get it, it is either 1896 or 1897. The social security application gives a lot of information. It was the only document that had my grandfather's mother's maiden name.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by SpeedDemonND

I’ve located a birth record in Italy of an ancestor which states his name is Luigi and he was born on January 24th, 1897. Just a few years later, he immigrated to the United States along with his father, mother, and younger brother.

However, on almost all of his USA documents (marriage record, WWI and WWII draft/registration, etc.) his name is listed as Louis (rather than the Italian version, Luigi) and his birthday is listed as January 21st (rather than the 24th, like his birth record states).

I assume that since the birth record was recorded shortly after his birth, and even includes the time of day he was born (6:30 AM), that it is genuinely accurate. It is also the same date written down in the Italian index of birth records. However, that’s basically the only document I have before he immigrated to the USA a few years after that, and all other USA documents I’ve found have a different day listed, and therefore, will not support the “official” date of birth.

Which name and birth date should I be using when building my family tree? Should I use the name and date listed on his birth record in Italy, or the name and birth date he wrote on virtually all of his American documents?

Any help would be appreciated. Thank you!

There's an order of precedence, and the birth certificate rules.

In the absence of a birth certificate, at least in the US, Social Security documents such as the Claims Index or the Death Index rule. You may list an alternate birth date.

In the absence of those, the next rank is immigration documents.

The next is death certificates.

That's followed by draft registration or service records.

Then tombstones.

Finally, marriage or divorce records.

Birth dates simply weren't that important in the past. A lot of people had no idea when they were born, and they didn't have a reason to know when, either.

You'll also see conflicting birth locations. A lot of people have no idea where they were actually born.

Then you have the idiots on Find-a-Grave who are totally clueless.

They list people's birth places as Jellico, Campbell County, Tennessee.

Um, no.

If you were born in Boston, or Lot, or Sexton or Cane Creek, then you were born in Whitley County, Kentucky, not Jellico, Campbell County, Tennessee.

You got your mail from Jellico. Why? Because that was the nearest post office, which was much, much closer than the post office in Williamsburg, Whitley County, Kentucky.

So, if your mailing address was RFD No 1 (RFD is Rural Free Delivery), that means you lived in Boston. The rural route number, 1,2,3,4 or whatever tells you exactly which town, Boston, Lot, Sexton, Cane Creek and such.

When they file a Social Security claim, whether it's for disability or retirement benefits, and they list Jellico RFD 2 as the address for their birth place, it doesn't mean they were born in Jellico, it means they were born in Lot.

You have to know why things are the way they are.

You get conflicting death dates, too.

I recently had three conflicting dates of death. The death record and death index had the same date, but Social Security had a different later date, and the tombstone has an entirely different date of death.

Always use the death certificate, because the coroner knows when you died, but Social Security does not, because your death is not imputed knowledge.

Social Security doesn't know you're dead until someone reports that fact to them. That was the big deal during Hurricane Katrina.

All those people were living in grandma's house, and grandma was collecting Social Security. Then grandma died, and no one reported it, because they wanted to keep stealing money from Social Security.

Now comes Katrina.

Oooops.

No more checks, no more direct deposit, and those people were screaming bloody Hell.

Social Security was there. They had representatives on-site with cold hard cash to pay out to beneficiaries, but that's the thing. The beneficiary and only the beneficiary could sign for the money. After a few months, Social Security is still sitting on piles of cash, and it didn't take them long to figure out that those several thousand people were actually dead. And, of course, Social Security promptly informed New Orleans Parish, and the neighboring Parish governments, and since 90+% of those people died intestate without a Will, the Parish governments put the properties in probate.

Not only did those people get cut off from stealing Social Security benefits, they lost the property they were living on.

[PA2UK]

The birth record is a primary source for the birth data, everything else is a secondary source for the birth data. Primary sources trump secondary sources.