bantamforgot Posted 29 May , 2009 Share Posted 29 May , 2009 Does any person know of the above soldier & has any information as to a resolution of the circumstances regarding his death, private life? Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralphjd Posted 29 May , 2009 Share Posted 29 May , 2009 Is this the lad ? L/cpl Sam Antrobus W/834 13th Cheshires born Runcorn 1899 enlisted Neston kia 7-7-1916 age 17 commemorated Thiepval Memorial. Ralph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bantamforgot Posted 29 May , 2009 Author Share Posted 29 May , 2009 Hi Ralph, That's the trouble , allegedly he was kia on the 7th.Jly, 16 & was a married man with 6 children! He was a member of the 16th. Cheshires no. 58260 but is shown on the Tyne Cot memorial ? Colin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bantamforgot Posted 29 May , 2009 Author Share Posted 29 May , 2009 Hi Ralph, Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralphjd Posted 29 May , 2009 Share Posted 29 May , 2009 Yes, now I can the quandry one has with him. Ralph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobertBr Posted 29 May , 2009 Share Posted 29 May , 2009 Could this be him in the 1911 Census ANTROBUS, SAM; HEAD; MARRIED; Male; 30 yrs; JOBBING GARDENER; CHESHIRE RUNCORN ANTROBUS, ANNIE; WIFE; MARRIED 8 yrs; Female; 28 yrs; CHESHIRE GAYTON ANTROBUS, NORA; DAUGHTER; Female; 7 yrs; SCHOOL; CHESHIRE GAYTON ANTROBUS, GEORGE; SON; Male; 6 yrs; SCHOOL; CHESHIRE RUNCORN ANTROBUS, ANNIE; DAUGHTER; Female; 4; SCHOOL; CHESHIRE GAYTON ANTROBUS, ELIZABETH; DAUGHTER; Female; 2 yrs; CHESHIRE HESWALL ANTROBUS, JENNIE; DAUGHTER; Female; 3 MONTHS; CHESHIRE HESWALL Address; SCHOOL HILL HESWALL County; Cheshire District; Wirral Subdistrict; Neston Enumeration District; 3 Parish; Heswall cum Oldfield Somewhat older, which would seem to fit with the picture, the right area and allowing for another 5 years roughly the right number of children (or perhaps too few as they had 5 in 8 years). Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bantamforgot Posted 29 May , 2009 Author Share Posted 29 May , 2009 Thanks for that Bob, it would certainly fit the bill, as it is a 1911 census ,time for a 6th. child.! However he is listed in the 16th. Cheshires as no. 58260 & a private kia Oct. 17 in the article posted it mentioned L.cpl. & kia Jy. 16. Looking at the post from Ralph, Runcorn mentioned again , a relative ? Strange one. Thanks Bob, I think we are a little nearer. Regards. Colin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bantamforgot Posted 29 May , 2009 Author Share Posted 29 May , 2009 Hi Bob, I don't know if there is a mix up in the records but the man you found in the census from Runcorn would appear to be the right man , in the 13th. Cheshires kia Jy, 16 L.cpl. no W/834. however the age would appear to be incorrect, not 19!! Pte. S. Antrobus 16th. Cheshires no. 58260 kia Oct. 17 , this would appear to be the 19 year old, born Dunham Hill, Warrington. Ralph, might I ask where you found the birthdate of S. Antrobus (13th. Cheshires) from as this is still a problem relating to the ages & perhaps the records. Cheers. Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milner Posted 30 May , 2009 Share Posted 30 May , 2009 From Bob's post with 1911 details, an observation is that on the 1911 census the man lists his first name as Sam (not Samuel) and it lists married 8 years, so checking the records we get his marriage, again its listed his first name as Sam, not Samuel. Marriages Dec 1902 (>99%) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Antrobus Sam Runcorn 8a 416 Clarke Annie Runcorn 8a 416 CWGC lists this man as "Sam", but the other man as "Samuel" On CWGC, Sam has age UNKNOWN. But Samuel has age 19, Sam is a L/corp, but Samuel is a private. So the evidence points to him being "Sam" w/834 who would be aged 35 in 1916 (b 1881)(M 1902) and a L/corp. who is pictured and certainly looks to me to be in his thirties. Plus here is the sixth child, note wife's maiden name listed as Clarke Births Jun 1913 (>99%) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Antrobus Sam Clarke Wirral 8a 764 Name: ANTROBUS, SAM Initials: S Nationality: United Kingdom Rank: Lance Corporal Regiment/Service: Cheshire Regiment Unit Text: 13th Bn. age: Unknown Date of Death: 07/07/1916 Service No: W/834 Casualty Type: Commonwealth War Dead Grave/Memorial Reference: Pier and Face 3 C and 4 A. Memorial: THIEPVAL MEMORIAL Name: ANTROBUS, SAMUEL Initials: S Nationality: United Kingdom Rank: Private Regiment/Service: Cheshire Regiment Unit Text: 16th Bn. Age: 19 Date of Death: 22/10/1917 Service No: 58260 Additional information: Son of John Antrobus, of Oldfield Cottages, Dunham Hill, Warrington. Casualty Type: Commonwealth War Dead Grave/Memorial Reference: Panel 61 to 63. Memorial: TYNE COT MEMORIAL Regards Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 30 May , 2009 Share Posted 30 May , 2009 Service papers exist on Ancestry for 58260, Samuel Antrobus. They confirm the info as recorded by CWGC. He was aged 18 years, 10 months , when he enlisted in 1916, going overseas on 23 January 1917. He was the son of John (mother deceased). and had four siblings - Joseph, John, Esther & Annie. Born Dunhall. Lived Chester (sdgw) Killed in action 22/10/17. It may that the author of "Cheshire Bantams" has wrongly interpreted the information available to him in drawing his conclusion. It would not be an isolated incident as you'll see from my review of the book here John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bantamforgot Posted 30 May , 2009 Author Share Posted 30 May , 2009 Thanks Phil, I think the solution is as John states, which I had come too latterly, however post 2 from Ralph regarding the date of birth of "Sam" from Runcorn (1899)stlll poses a problem . I have asked Ralph for details of the date of birth as he stated & await his reply, as Samual was almost 19 when he enlisted in 1916 , 1899 seems not to refer to either man. However thanks to all who have assisted me in this "mystery" , it would appear Stephen McGreal made an error in believing "Sam" was a Bantam of the 16th. Cheshires. I did find another error relating to another Bantam earlier in the book. Again , thanks to all. Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest corhob Posted 30 June , 2014 Share Posted 30 June , 2014 Samuel Antrobus from Dunham Hill would have been my third cousin I have a photo of him in the Dunham Hill football team Date 1914 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATNOMIS Posted 20 January , 2021 Share Posted 20 January , 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now