Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Illegitimacy or assumed name. I'm losing my focus and need guidance

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Illegitimacy or assumed name. I'm losing my focus and need guidance

    Good afternoon all you experts.

    In reasearching my family tree I have hit a massive brick wall, see my earlier post:

    Good afternoon to you all. Are there any brickwall demolision enthusiasts out there??


    (Apologies for the spelling error, I've only just noticed that on that day I couldn't spell demolition!!!!)

    This is a general cry for help as I seem to be getting out of my depth and losing my focus.

    I suppose (to start with) that I am very lucky, in that I have a very rare surname; Cressingham (and it's variants, Crossingham, Crassingham, Crossinggum etc.), so records, by and large, are very easy to trace and the person's relationship to me is virtually guaranteed somewhere down the line.

    But one little family group of 'Cressinghams' have evaded all of my (and other more experienced researchers) best efforts to figure out their ancestry.

    This has left me to believe that the gentleman in question either: -

    Was the illegitimate son of one of the young ladies or gentlemen of the family, who was 'hidden' away from the rest... But to my, my father's, or my grandmother's knowledge there were never any family murmurings of such an event or person.

    Or: The gentleman in question is not in fact a Cressingham, and he, his wife and his daughter lived out their lives under an assumed name...

    His name?? Hugh Montrein Cressingham, Wife, Eliza Ann (Rossetter/Roisetter) and their daughter Lylie Montrein Cressingham (Married name Van Baerle)

    The strange thing is that I know more about them as a family unit than I do of any other Cressingham of a similar age. I have photographs of Hugh and of Lylie, I have the originals of Hugh and Eliza's wedding and Hugh's death certificates. Plus very much more.

    Hugh was allegedly born in 1863 either in Brighton or Hurstpierpoint....

    But before 1882 (when he enlisted in the Bedfordshire Reg't in Kempston, Bedford) he is a ghost, and I cannot find his parents either.

    Sooooo; after all of the above preamble my questions are: -

    If he were a 'back stairs baby' or indeed was truly a Cressingham how could he not appear in BDM or censuses between 1863 and 1882? and why don't his parents appear.......Ever??

    And if he took on an assumed name 31st March 1882 to effect his attestation into the British Army. How could he then live out the rest of his life without ever being 'found out'? He served in the army until 1920, ended up as Quartermaster and Honorary Lieutenant Colonel awarded the DSO & DCM and finished his military career working in the war office.

    Hugh died in 1946, Eliza in 1948 and Lylie in 1960.

    Given the above 'bare bone' facts... Were there no points or events in a person's life between 1863 and 1946 where they would have been required to provide 'incontrovertible documentary proof' of their identity and/or history??

    I'm really just fishing, to see if anyone more experienced than myself in this genealogy malarkey can re-focus me; as I am now way outside of my sphere of knowledge and feel that I am just floundering around in murky waters that are rapidly threatening to engulf me.

    Very best regards

    Paul Cressingham.

  • #2
    To be honest its not that hard to hide oneself even now. It must have been much easier in those days when hardly any evidence of identity was needed. Then and now, one can call oneself whatever you wish, although you might be prosecuted if the name change was for criminal purposes.

    My OH has a family who changed their names from McQuone to Mellor (although they kept the McQ. nmae on various forms as a middle name for their children. We have no idea why they changed or even exactly when. James Henry McQuone was registered with this name at birth; appears on the 1871 census with it; and then marries in 1876, in a different county, as James Henry McQuone Mellor and calls himself James Mellor thereafter. It took many, many hours of puzzling to sort that out.

    Anne

    Comment


    • #3
      You truly have an intriguing and interesting mystery!

      I think it would be helpful to establish from what you know from your extensive post 1882 information your respective degree of confidence that he was:

      1. Named Hugh and/or Montrein and/or Cressingham
      2. Born Hurstpierpoint
      3. Born c1863

      Based on only a very limited search on my part perhaps I can conclude (or challenge):

      A. he states he was born Hurstpierpoint. This is in Cuckfield RD. There are NO Cressing* or Crossing* BMDs in this RD (ever!) nor are there any Hugh births there 1862-67. Conclusion: he was not born in Hurstpeirpoint.

      B. There are no Hugh M* births 1862-1867 in E&W that even remotely resemble Montrein as a middle name. Conclusion: he was born outside E&W

      C. There are no Cressing* BMDs at all in Sussex before Jun 1874 and these are almost wholly in Hastings. There are, however, significant numbers of Crossing* BMDs but these are mainly Battle, Hastings, Ticehurst etc. The first Brighton area event is Charles CROSSINGHAM's marriage in Q4 1874 followed by a couple of female births but very little else. For what it's worth there is a Male CROSSINGHAM birth Q3 1863 Ticehurst - but who knows what that is. There are (to all intents and purposes) NO Cressing* BMDs in E&W 1860-1870 but quite a few outside Sussex for Crossing* Conclusions (if the family were in E&W in 1860-1870):
      - family name more likely to have been Crossingham
      - family likely to be based in Hastings / Ticehurst area or poss. in other clusters: West Country, Essex, North London (just from a quick review of FreeBMD results)

      Would be interested to hear your views

      PS: I note from (your?) document on Ancestry that he was supposedly the son of a farmer in Sussex who ran away from home and attested 31 Mar 1882 at Kempston Barracks (Bedfordshire) where he was previously a bricklayer. This seems odd to say the least as there were presumably plenty of opportunities to join the Army much closer to home!
      Last edited by Bertie; 26-11-12, 15:22.

      Comment


      • #4
        Maybe he wasn't even really called Hugh! Sorry to be a pessimist :(

        However on the bright side if he did choose the name Cressingham for himself he must have heard it somewhere before. Its not the sort of surname you would dream up, or take as an easy option.

        I do think there may be some mileage in Bertie's proposal that he was not born in England and Wales.

        Anne
        Last edited by Anne in Carlisle; 26-11-12, 15:56.

        Comment


        • #5
          There are no Montrein's but there are Montrion's around the Brighton area with strong military links , and particularly to India .... discussed on a previous post ...here
          Retired professional researcher, and ex- deputy registrar, now based in Worcestershire. Happy to give any help or advice I can ( especially on matters of civil registration) - contact via PM or my website www.chalfontresearch.co.uk
          Follow me on Twittter @ChalfontR

          Comment


          • #6
            I have a sub to Sussex Family History Group and can find no Cressinghams at all in Hurstpierpoint. Neither can I find any reference to any Cressinghams there on a brief search on the British Newspaper Archive site (they have some Sussex papers and Hastings seems to be a hot spot). I can only conclude that your man was creative and preferred an alias.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Anne in Carlisle View Post

              I do think there may be some mileage in Bertie's proposal that he was not born in England and Wales.

              Anne
              This was my immediate thought too. As your scenario sounds like my own fruitless ancestor search, and that reason being... he was born abroad, where records were not compulsory introduced until the 1890's.

              Are there any clues at all within his marriage cert. Did he marry by banns or license. Thinking laterally if by license is there a chance of change of name due to bigamy. There are so many variants. My own ancestor married 3 times by license, each time away from his home address, as I have built up the story it makes sense, but not due to anything illegal..... so far.
              Bubblebelle x

              FAMILY INTERESTS: Pitts of Sherborne Gloucs. Deaney (Bucks). Pye of Kent. Randolph of Lydd, Kent. Youell of Norfolk and Suffolk. Howe of Lampton. Carden of Bucks.

              Comment


              • #8
                It is only VERY recently (last 20 years or so) that anyone has ever been challenged to prove that everything they say about themselves is true. It would have been extremely easy for anyone in the 1800s to start using a new name and I cannot imagine who would ever challenge that name or why - your surname is whatever you choose to call yourself and there is no concept of legal surnames in British law.

                That male birth in 1863 (Bertie's post, #3, above,) needs eliminating.

                OC

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi all,

                  Many thanks to you all for your responses... I shall gather my thoughts and notes and reply to you shortly.

                  Best regards

                  Paul.....................

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I posted on your other thread by mistake so take a look at it

                    Edna

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hi again all,

                      Bertie. In response to your queries: -

                      1. Named Hugh and/or Montrein and/or Cressingham, No confidence in it at all
                      2. Born Hurstpierpoint. Hurstpierpoint is only mentioned in his regimental obituary, in all other sources he claims to have been born in Brighton
                      3. Born c1863, Not very confident. He attested in the army on his alleged 19th birthday, 5' 11 1/2" tall 140 lbs & 33" chest. He continued to grow to reach a peak of 6' 4" and 50" chest.

                      Based on only a very limited search on my part perhaps I can conclude (or challenge):

                      A. he states he was born Hurstpierpoint. This is in Cuckfield RD. There are NO Cressing* or Crossing* BMDs in this RD (ever!) nor are there any Hugh births there 1862-67. Conclusion: he was not born in Hurstpeirpoint.
                      I have also manually searched the actual census sheets for Hurstpierpoint for 1861,1871 and 1881 with the same results, and am now working my way through the sheets for Brighton.

                      B. There are no Hugh M* births 1862-1867 in E&W that even remotely resemble Montrein as a middle name. Conclusion: he was born outside E&W
                      If he is truly a Cressingham I can find no Cressinghams that 'drop off the radar' who might possibly 'moved' abroad during the relevant period of time. Or indeed any Cressinghams (other than Hugh)who appear as if out of thin air during the same period, Plus there is nothing on FIBIS or in Australian & NZ records. I've always believed that Montrein is a maternal surname somewhere down the line, especially as he gave the same middle name to his daughter... But can find no Montreins within the UK records system.... Ever.

                      C. There are no Cressing* BMDs at all in Sussex before Jun 1874 and these are almost wholly in Hastings. There are, however, significant numbers of Crossing* BMDs but these are mainly Battle, Hastings, Ticehurst etc. The first Brighton area event is Charles CROSSINGHAM's marriage in Q4 1874 followed by a couple of female births but very little else. For what it's worth there is a Male CROSSINGHAM birth Q3 1863 Ticehurst Ah the mystery Crossingham. (See Horace Tilden, below) This is the only time this 2nd Crossingham born in 1863 appears in the records system. I cannot prove his existence at all, after this one entry there are no further records for a Crossingham born in 1863 other than Horace Tilden. So perhaps an infant mortality??- but who knows what that is. There are (to all intents and purposes) NO Cressing* BMDs in E&W 1860-1870 but quite a few outside Sussex for Crossing* Conclusions (if the family were in E&W in 1860-1870): This Crossingham/Cressingham/Crossinggum et al. mixture of names does indeed cloud the issue.
                      -
                      family name more likely to have been Crossingham (recorded and/or transcribed as. As there are loads of Cressinghams recorded as Crossinghams in the records over the years in question)
                      - family likely to be based in Hastings / Ticehurst area or poss. in other clusters: West Country, Essex, North London (just from a quick review of FreeBMD results)
                      We are in the main a Sussex based family, in the Hastings, Battle, Brightling area. Given that his place of birth is mostly given as Brighton and the mystery (male) Crossingham allegedly came from the Ticehurst area I have spent a lot of time homed in on Brightling (On the basis that it sounds quite like Brighton and is very close to Ticehurst) and there were a lot of Crossinghams from that village area. Including 1 farmer, John Henry Crossingham, who was the father of Horace Tilden Crossingham also born in 1863, Incidently Horace is my 2nd cousin 4x removed).

                      Would be interested to hear your views

                      PS: I note from (your?) document on Ancestry that he was supposedly the son of a farmer in Sussex who ran away from home and attested 31 Mar 1882 at Kempston Barracks (Bedfordshire) where he was previously a bricklayer. This seems odd to say the least as there were presumably plenty of opportunities to join the Army much closer to home!
                      It is one of the things that gnaws away at me.Most Cressingham/Crossinghams have tended to join the local, Royal Sussex Reg't. So a 19 y. old 'runaway' travelling 120 miles to join the army, exactly on the day of his 19th birthday.... It never has added up to me.

                      Anne and Jill, I couldn't agree more... If you want to hide.... Where Oh where would a 19 year old bricklayer or runaway farmer's son drag out an alias like Hugh Montrein Cressingham from??? Plain John Smith would do me........
                      ;)

                      AnthonyM, The Montrions are still a work in progress with me, I am struggling to make the Montrion and Cressingham/Crossingham families paths cross working on known addresses for both within the Brighton area.

                      Bubblebelle, Hugh attested in 1882 but did not wed until 1892 so he was well established in the army as Serjeant H Cressingham before he married. He and Eliza married by banns, and there are no clues on their certificate.

                      I think that covers it for now, but please keep the questions coming. It may trigger something.

                      Thanks in advance and best regards

                      Paul...............
                      Last edited by Cressy; 27-11-12, 00:26.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        An observation:

                        Horace Tilden Crossingham is registered on the page after "Male Crossingham" and that would suggest they were twins. Normally if one is not named it means they didn't survive.

                        A number of trees on Ancestry have Horace Tilden Crossingham on them. It might be worth getting in contact if only to eliminate him.

                        EDIT - no, forget him, he gets married in 1888. (But I wonder who his twin was? There's no death reg for the twin)

                        OC
                        Last edited by Olde Crone Holden; 26-11-12, 23:21.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hi OC,

                          The twin thing followed closely by the death of the second unamed child had crossed my mind, but I am nowhere near experienced enough to have taken it as a 'fact'. And yes Horace Tilden continues to appear in the records system during the period when Hugh magically appears.... But this talking about it all again to strangers is very theraputic and helpful as it's forcing me to carefully re-assess my research and re-read my copious notes more fully than I have done for a while now.

                          So please do keep asking questions, no matter how simple they seem. They will all be greatfully received and courteously answered.

                          The answer is out there somewhere, and because his name (or maybe chosen alias) is sooo very singular and unique, and by virtue of that very uniqueness I'm sure that it must have some kind of reason or rhyme behind it I'm still fairly positive that this problem is crackable. If I were searching, for instance, for a John Smith or William Jones, then I would have accepted the impossibilty of the task ahead of me a long time ago.

                          Very best regards

                          Paul.................
                          Last edited by Cressy; 26-11-12, 23:59.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hi Clematised,

                            Thanks for your response, interest and time...

                            The possibility of a Montrion connection is one that I am researching at the moment, following an earlier post by AntonyM, and it does have a lot going for it, as the Montrion name is very similar to Montrein and there are connections to Brighton around the right time.

                            This particular one looks a good possibilty at first glance, but he is born far too late to have any bearing, as Hugh attested into the army in 1882 giving his age as 19 and Hugh Rochfort Montrion would only have been 8 at that time.

                            But your input is very much appreciated, and that name is oh so very tantalisingly close....

                            Very best regards


                            Paul......

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Paul - one or two other thoughts / queries:

                              Hugh is a relatively uncommon name in England (much more common in Scotland) and I would speculate you would find it in earlier generations (say father, uncle etc) so "Hugh rich" families (so to speak) would be if interest. On balance, I would be inclined to say that this was his real name.

                              From memory I think he states his father as Hugh Robert - however, that may simply be made up and unless Hugh appears anywhere else in your Cr*ssingham line I would tend to rule out that as his surname.

                              Montrein: others have linked this to Montrion. However, I understand he is consistent about this (including with his daughter) and as he was literate I would tend to rule this name change out. Another suggestion was (per French) "montre in" as a sort of joke (as in Hugh appears in Cressingham) but that would surely be "montre en"? However, Montrein would seem an impossibility to make up and retain throughout one's life unless it were his real name or else he knew someone with that name (but then why include it?). Conclusion: this part of his name is real and significant

                              Cressingham: on the face of it, this is made up (unlikely?) or adopted for some reason (more likely?) unless per above that Hugh appears elsewhere in the Cr*ssingham line. Cressingham (Great and Little) are in Norfolk not far from Swaffham and the route from there to Kempston is easier to contemplate than that from Brighton. Is there anything to suggest a Norfolk connection? Perhaps for some reason Hugh Montrein wanted to hide from the world and became Hugh Cressingham?

                              Attested on his 19th birthday? Somehow, this date coincidence does not ring true, but great to remember (born on the same day I attested) for the rest of one's life. Perhaps he did not know his true date of birth (not that uncommon but for him suggests other possibilities - e.g. adopted, in an institution etc.) but perhaps the age is about right.

                              Is there anything in his military papers that hints at family (preferably before his marriage)?

                              Bricklayer - this may well be true (and poss. his most recent occupation) but seems unlikely if his father was a farmer / gentleman (thus, poss. his father was not!)

                              He says he was born Brighton - perhaps he simply lived there for a while? Do you have any evidence of a real connection with this place? It must be significant in some way as he would surely have to speak to his wife and daughter about his origins and a random place would not work (as he would have to describe it?) Nonetheless his marriage in Devon is very convenient to whatever story he made up!

                              Given he attested around 11 months after the 1881 census have you exhausted all Hughs born around 1863 +/- (and are any bricklayers)?
                              Last edited by Bertie; 27-11-12, 06:41.

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Whilst I agree that making up such an unusual name suggests the name(s) have some significance to HIM, it may be only to him and the rest of us cannot see it!

                                I've just been reading about the father of Justin Welby (the new Archbishop of Canterbury, whose name was Gavin Welby and who was an English aristocrat from the landed Welby family. He stood as a conservative candidate in the 1950s and moved in very elevated circles. In fact, it turns out the man was a German Jewish immigrant (with obviously, a German Jewish surname) who changed his name and re-invented himself in 1914 (as did many other Germans/Jews, of course). Why he decided on the name Welby is not known although it is rather curious that the lady who was (much later) to be his second wife, was genuinely from the landed Welby family. No one knew about this name change, not even his son. A lesson in how we all believe what we are told.

                                Bricklayers don't have posh names. I did fleetingly wonder if he knew Hubert Crossingham, maybe even got his sister into trouble and fled for the army. Hiding in full view with a most unusual name, no one would connect Hugh Montrein Cressingham with Jake Sykes the bricklayer.

                                OC

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Paul

                                  I notice from another post of yours (elsewhere) that he signed his attestation form simply as Hugh Cressingham - so plenty of time to add Montrein to his name (i.e. by the time he married).

                                  Can you confirm the details of his attestation in terms of what he actually said re. his birthplace / parish / county and can you confirm that he actually attested at Kempston Barracks itself (for example, as opposed to that is where he then went to to join up with the regiment).

                                  His height is also of significance: he could possibly pass for 19 even if he was (say) only 16 - perhaps a factor to consider. Also, are Cressinghams notably tall?

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Hi OC,

                                    As ever, thanks for the reply.

                                    I suppose that you are very likely right in what you say, and even if I continue until the day I die I will never ever crack the mystery, but you have hit on one of the very points that keep me plugging away. "Bricklayers don't have posh names" and within that it's "Montrein" and the fact that he also passed it on to his first born and only child that really gnaws away at my brain.... As you know, in the 'posher' circles of British familes it was the habit to use maternal and grandparental (is there such a word??) surnames and the likes as a middle name for the children... But: -

                                    There are no Montreins in the UK record system ever, that I can find
                                    In all of my searches I have only ever found 4 in total: -
                                    Peter Montrein, born 1881, Baltimore USA
                                    Anna Montrein, born 1882, " "
                                    Elizabeth Montrein, born 1908, " "
                                    Gabriel Montrein, born 1803, St. Zotique Canada
                                    All of whom where dead ends.
                                    No towns, villages or areas etc. called Montrein in the world, that I can find.
                                    Montrein does not appear in any of the lists of 'Christian' names through the ages that I can find.
                                    There are no other records that I can find of people with the given name of Montrein
                                    No historical or current references to the word 'Montrein' in any way, shape or form, animal, mineral or vegetable. Other than one, single reference to an 18th century decorative, but empty watch case that I've found. In French a "faux montrein".
                                    In fact, Montrein, to all intents, is a 'non-word' (another of my semantic inventions OC )

                                    But I would love somebody to prove me wrong in any or all of the above..

                                    So in a wierd, wonderful and totally unexplainable way all of the above brings me back to the 'fact' that it is an ancestoral name somehow and somewhere down the line. Otherwise my man made up a word to use as a middle name when opting to join the army.

                                    As you can probably see I'm a stubborn little bu**er at times......

                                    Very best regards

                                    Paul................

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Hi Bertie,

                                      A few more answers and comments for you sir.....

                                      Paul - one or two other thoughts / queries:


                                      Hugh is a relatively uncommon name in England (much more common in Scotland) and I would speculate you would find it in earlier generations (say father, uncle etc) so "Hugh rich" families (so to speak) would be if interest. On balance, I would be inclined to say that this was his real name There are no other Hughs (rich or otherwise) within the Cressingham/Crossingham family tree that I have ever found. In itself, Hugh would be regarded as a 'posh' name amongst the simple, honest working folk of the clan, where William, Edmund, Walter and similar honest english working class names are the norm.

                                      From memory I think he states his father as Hugh Robert - however, that may simply be made up and unless Hugh appears anywhere else in your Cr*ssingham line I would tend to rule out that as his surname. In his army file, he gives his father's name as Robert Cressingham and on the marriage certificate it is given as Hugh Robert Cressingham, Gentleman. A rare difference in Hugh's otherwise consistent information.

                                      Montrein: others have linked this to Montrion. However, I understand he is consistent about this (including with his daughter) and as he was literate I would tend to rule this name change out. Another suggestion was (per French) "montre in" as a sort of joke (as in Hugh appears in Cressingham) but that would surely be "montre en"? However, Montrein would seem an impossibility to make up and retain throughout one's life unless it were his real name or else he knew someone with that name (but then why include it?). Conclusion: this part of his name is real and significant. My gut feeling is also that Montrein has a significant meaning (see my earlier response to OC)

                                      Cressingham: on the face of it, this is made up (unlikely?) or adopted for some reason (more likely?) unless per above that Hugh appears elsewhere in the Cr*ssingham line. Cressingham (Great and Little) are in Norfolk not far from Swaffham and the route from there to Kempston is easier to contemplate than that from Brighton. Is there anything to suggest a Norfolk connection? Perhaps for some reason Hugh Montrein wanted to hide from the world and became Hugh Cressingham?, Although my parents, my sister and me and my family now live in Norfolk, there are no historical links to Great/Little Cressingham or Norfolk as a whole, and as quoted above I have been unable to find a Montrein family anywhere within the UK records system; ever.

                                      Attested on his 19th birthday? Somehow, this date coincidence does not ring true, but great to remember (born on the same day I attested) for the rest of one's life. Perhaps he did not know his true date of birth (not that uncommon but for him suggests other possibilities - e.g. adopted, in an institution etc.) but perhaps the age is about right. I agree totally that the birthday/attestation dates do not ring true.. Adoption or institutions are well outside of my very limited skills (6 months) as a genealogy expert, and of course they still leave the issue of his lack of early records and choice of name.

                                      Is there anything in his military papers that hints at family (preferably before his marriage)? Nothing at all

                                      Bricklayer - this may well be true (and poss. his most recent occupation) but seems unlikely if his father was a farmer / gentleman (thus, poss. his father was not!) Again I agree with all of this, but, also again, as a serjeant on his wedding day why use the term Gentleman for his father... It would make more sense if he had of been a young officer at that point in his life, with certain standards to maintain.

                                      He says he was born Brighton - perhaps he simply lived there for a while? Do you have any evidence of a real connection with this place? It must be significant in some way as he would surely have to speak to his wife and daughter about his origins and a random place would not work (as he would have to describe it?) Nonetheless his marriage in Devon is very convenient to whatever story he made up. No real or substantial connection with Brighton at point in the family tree. The only thing about Brighton that 'might make some sense' Is Preston Cavalry Barracks (given Hugh's choice of a lifelong military career). The 9th Lancers were stationed there during the time of Hugh's conception and birth, but I have been unable to prove any family connection to that regiment.

                                      Given he attested around 11 months after the 1881 census have you exhausted all Hughs born around 1863 +/- (and are any bricklayers)?,Pretty much so I believe. My notes tell me there were some 6,500 Hugh's born between 1862 & 1866 none of whom have I jotted down for further investigation. But it is a while since I went down that route, and the old memory fades quite quickly these days....

                                      I notice from another post of yours (elsewhere) that he signed his attestation form simply as Hugh Cressingham - so plenty of time to add Montrein to his name (i.e. by the time he married). Do you know what Bertie.... This is the first time that I have ever, ever noticed that on his attestation forms and in his signatures on it his name and initials are just Hugh or H Cressingham..... No mention of Montrein or M..... That is truly bizarre the hundreds of times I have looked at them and it's never clicked!!!!! Other family member's attestation forms give their full name.... oooooerrrrr

                                      Can you confirm the details of his attestation in terms of what he actually said re. his birthplace / parish / county and can you confirm that he actually attested at Kempston Barracks itself (for example, as opposed to that is where he then went to to join up with the regiment). ​please see the attached copy..

                                      His height is also of significance: he could possibly pass for 19 even if he was (say) only 16 - perhaps a factor to consider. Also, are Cressinghams notably tall? Modern Cressinghams are all of average height

                                      Best regards

                                      Paul................
                                      Attached Files

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        You feel that Montrein is of clear significance. I actually don't and I'll tell you why.

                                        We had a thread on here a while ago which concerned someone with a most unusual middle name. there was not one incidence of this unusual name anywhere in the world, and google only picked up the man and his daughter as both having that middle name.

                                        I came to the conclusion - and not everyone agreed with me - that this man had OVERHEARD two surnames in his wife's family and had run them together, not knowing how they were spelled, making a unique but very plausible sort of name. Why did he do that? Airs and graces I thought.

                                        So...did Hugh Robert/ overhear someone talking about Monterreigns or some other similar name and thought it would be a touch of class added to his own? My own grandfather added a completely fictitious "family name" in late middle age, we never knew why, but perhaps it was to make him stand out from the motley crowd who were all born with the same very common name as he was!



                                        When you get to the end of your tether with this, lol, you might consider looking at newspapers in the area (where Horace lived) and seeing if something jumps out.

                                        OC
                                        Last edited by Olde Crone Holden; 27-11-12, 18:53. Reason: rubbish

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X