You need to predetermine what your circa structure is OR allow for varience. Circa is often associated with classification of artifacts (books, photo's, writings) and other entities (unknown exact birth/death dates) where wide varience might be found. Keep in mind that reclassification of artifacts often occurs as more information is gained. Thus what Max has defined works, but I would also add a definative classification date and perhaps a column with a description and/or name of the classifier/entity defining the classification. You can determine if you need historical records of reclassification and how to handle that.
One other item of note regarding things of this nature - what calendar was in place defining the actual date for a day such as the The date Oct 4 (Julian) was followed by the date Oct 15 (Gregorian) which was a change made in 1582 and the similar change in 1751 that change Britian and its then colonies to the Gregorian calendar. Thus you need to determine the calendar in use which can be translated to present day calendars.
The point of this, is you MIGHT also need an identifier of the calendar in use assiciated with the determination and cite that as well.
Additionally, some events are associated with months denoted as "first month, second month etc." which, might be confusing as for instance the Quakers change where "first month" in 1751 was March but in 1752 it was January - especially noted when genealogy is the subject matter (as you imply) and births/deaths are the events.
For fun, toss in Caeser and Calends (first day of March) and his reform of the leap year/day where February 24 was the leap day as "second 6th day preceding the Calends" so there were two February 24ths (two 6th days) in leap years.
I point this out because the number of days in a leap year may in some instances vary your periods.
So, use a structure such as Max and/or Quassnoi propose, but possibly a bit more for the deliniation.
Citation for calendars and understanding: What is a calendar