RootsChat.Com

Hi, yes I am wondering if I've been reading more into this that might be the case.  Sophia had children with both Henry and James but its curious that she reverted to using Henry's surname almost immediately James had died, and while her children with James were still living with her.  There's probably nothing in it but it just fascinates me.

Thanks.

I have ancestor who had an alias -- thougt it might be to do with his convict history. After 40 years of thinking so, newly released records enabled me to determine that his widowed mother remarried to a man with the alias surname when he was young.  So he had his birth name but was also known by his step-dad's surname.

I had a twice widowed ancestor who reverted to her first husband's surname because she had no children with the second man and i guess it stopped her having to explain her relationship to her children constantly.

We all assume aliases imply something sinister but basically all it means is that you are known by a different name. Lots of married women these days use both their married surname and their maiden names at various times -- not to mention the ordinary mispronunciations and misrecordings every day such as by shop assistants etc

We must remember too that amongst the people with the greatest number of aliases are the royal family and nobility -- only for them it is dignified by being called titles and not just aliases.

Regards
pH

Hi all and a huge thanks for all the help and suggestions.  I think I've got a long job on my hands working out what happened to Henry but this thread has definitely clarified a few things for me.  Many thanks.

Hi JM.
Yes. I think we may be onto something here.

We have an illiterate Sophie at home with the children while her "husband" is on his ship on census night.
The kind person Fitzgerald next door but one, completes her required form for her and even extends his/her kindness to writing GLEN's signature.

Sophie is keen to observe propriety and chooses to have her "husband" listed as present at home lest her children status is cast into doubt.

GLEN would not be he first person to be found in 2 places on census night!   

A good story?
Sue

Hi Sue, oh its turning into a great story.  Its the first time I've run into issues with a census return, all the help here has been great.  Thanks.

MMmmm...
Now, this might be interesting or not.

For those that can see the 1911.

Image 686 is the Glen family.
Click back to image 682, the Fitzgerald family.

Make a close comparative study of the hand writing, particularly words such as daughter and Ship.

Any comments?
A helpful neighbour completing forms or my imagination

Sue

ADDING
Look at the writing for John FITZGERALD

Hi Sue.  OH WOW!!!!! You've definitely hit on something there, its very distinctive handwriting, looks like the same ink too.  Also the upper case G in George and Glen. That looks very much to me like someone else filled in the form for Sophia, for whatever reason.

They are definitely the most intriguing family I'm tracing, and also the hardest to find 

Quote from: jonw65 on Wednesday 07 July 21 09:30 BST (UK)

James Glen was doing training for the RNR, 15.2.11 to 31.5.11
Devonport Depot?
& "Carnarvon"?

Here he is!
1911
James Glen, 23, born Newcastle, Provisional Stoker
On HMS Carnarvon, at anchor in Torbay
https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XW9H-8QP

He wasn't in Liverpool!

Hi Jon, oh you are scaringly good at this    I'm playing catch up here.  Ok so if he wasn't in Liverpool then did Sophia complete the 1911 census form I wonder?  And if he wasn't in Liverpool she shouldn't have listed him on it should she?

I have that RNR record from TNA which is very good.  The addresses given throughout it all tally so its definitely the 'right' James GLEN.  This story is just more intriguing the more I go on.  Thank you