> I can assure you from my experience that it was illiteracy, compare marriage certs and entries.....the old x. was very prevalent...> Yes, for sure there are nearly all signed by the mark 'X', but I can not believe that such a mark meant it was always a result of illiteracy on the part of the informants. Consider this probable scenario of a time before the invention of photo-copiers and computer digitisation as to how the process of registrations might have been accomplished: The informants of a birth or death, or marriage (in which case the required form was completed by the officiating priest or minister) reported the event in person at the local registration office where they made their statements which was duly recorded by the local registrar or one of his staff, and then signed by the informants - if they could write their name. These individual declarations made at local registration offices were then sent to the town wherein the area Superintendent's registration office was located. There they were transcribed onto a large folio, and , at the end of that quarter year, were sent as a batch to the General Registry Office (GRO) Dublin, where they were again transcribed alphabetically in a large folio when all the original individual quarterly returns from the many Superintendents' registration districts were received. In consequence, when one obtains a copy from the GRO, or a local Superintendents' district office, it is understandable that the original signature of informants who could write, could not possibly appear on such a copy. So, that office at the time of issuing a certificate, the clerk had to write the name of the informing party and place an 'x' on the signature line over the original informants names. (I had occasion a few years ago to visit the Superintendents office in Limerick city and witnessed the clerk transcribe the information I had requested from a large folio onto a blank form of certificate). If the above scenario is what happened then one will understand the missing signature and its substitution by an 'x' at a time when no one even dreamt about a device that would make 'de facto' copies. I have copied this to other lists in the hope that someone more informed might add or detract from my supposition on the matter. ***** Reply to the LIST ONLY - Please ***** ***** Thanks for your consideration ***** Pádraig Mór, An Sean Gabhar ----- Original Message ----- From: "kevin " <kevinmcc59@eircom.net> To: <irl-cork@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 7:18 PM Subject: Re: Irish Birthdates > Hello Dolores, Sorry about the slip up of course it's 1864. You may very > well find yours inconsistent but that hardly means you can include all of > Ireland. I have encountered the same problem with Eng. and Wales as I > said. > I can assure you from my experience that it was illiteracy > compare marriage certs and entries.....the old x. was very prevalent.As > for rounding up and down that was only used in the UK census 1841 as for > the US i do not know, Regards,Kevin. > >> >> Sorry I offended , but after 25 years of research every document and >> census I have on my lines their ages never agree. Civil Registration >> started in 1864 not 1868. I was merely speaking from my experience even >> up to 1940's. Dolores