27thBN Posted 5 November , 2009 Posted 5 November , 2009 Does anyone have any ideas as to why quite a few (I have 3 in my collection) soldiers enlisted with aliases ,they could not all have been escaping from the law ?? Under age obvious but as to men at 25 Ideas as to why? Thanks MC
Guest Posted 5 November , 2009 Posted 5 November , 2009 Hi: Underage? Fleeing the Law? Likely deemed medically unfit, & so went & enlisted under another name. No computers then. One Canuck that I'm aware of enlisted 4x & had 3 diferent reg. #'s. Finally died in 1921 of heart failure due to 2x pre-war rheumatic fever. It's a killer & so you do your bit & enlist. Regards, THW
Doc2 Posted 5 November , 2009 Posted 5 November , 2009 Does anyone have any ideas as to why quite a few (I have 3 in my collection) soldiers enlisted with aliases ,they could not all have been escaping from the law ?? Under age obvious but as to men at 25 Ideas as to why? Thanks MC Running away from wife and family? Family opposition to military service? Some may have been apprentices running out on contracts. Doc
roughdiamond Posted 5 November , 2009 Posted 5 November , 2009 Does anyone have any ideas as to why quite a few (I have 3 in my collection) soldiers enlisted with aliases ,they could not all have been escaping from the law ?? Under age obvious but as to men at 25 Ideas as to why? Thanks MC My Great Uncle was discharged as "unlikely to make a competant soldier" from the Scottish Rifles (Cameronians) in 1914, a year later he enlisted and served with the Royal Marine Light Infantry under his Mothers maiden name.
Ron Clifton Posted 5 November , 2009 Posted 5 November , 2009 Family opposition, or possibly cultural opposition, may have been a significant factor. I believe that a number of Jewish men enlisted under aliases, including Abraham Beverstein who served as A Harris. In his case, and others, the Germanic origin of his surname may also have been a factor. Under-age soldiers sometimes enlisted under an alias to make it harder for their families to trace and reclaim them. Ron
IPT Posted 5 November , 2009 Posted 5 November , 2009 I think some may have been AWOL from other regiments.
27thBN Posted 6 November , 2009 Author Posted 6 November , 2009 Great seems to be a wide range as to why .I mentioned running from the law as a starting point as 2 of my chaps service records shows that their aliases were discovered and they were charged lost rank ,to cells ,lost pay and the other chap just had a large notation at top of most pages in service file that he had an alias and that was just about it no penalty at all .The other chaps must have done something wrong.But anyway thanks for ideas any more are welcome thanks all MC
Ron Clifton Posted 6 November , 2009 Posted 6 November , 2009 The Army was fairly used to men giving aliases and would normally treat them like your third chap - there were even regulations saying how their records should be treated. The other two may have been deserters or otherwise undesirable and the court-martial was probably for "giving a false answer on attestation" which was effectively treated as perjury. It may not have been the use of an alias which was the root of their offence. Ron
27thBN Posted 7 November , 2009 Author Posted 7 November , 2009 Ron yes the idea of wrong name on joining and them being an undesirable type gave the army an way of penalizing the men in question.More than they legally could have done if they were just generally pains in the system Thanks MC
Perth Digger Posted 7 November , 2009 Posted 7 November , 2009 This is not use of a false name, but a case of having a choice of surnames. And it's an officer. Capt. Guy Valentine Nossiter, 1/6th London Regiment, was the son of Sidney Valentine Nossiter, an actor who used the stage name Sidney Valentine. Guy is on CWGC as Valentine and in the Stock Exchange memorial list as Nossiter. He married in 1914 as Guy Valentine and was commissioned under that name. When Guy's widow remarried in 1922, she gave her name as 'Nossiter or Valentine'! Illegitimacy and mothers remarrying could lead to alternative surnames of choice too. Mike Does anyone have any ideas as to why quite a few (I have 3 in my collection) soldiers enlisted with aliases ,they could not all have been escaping from the law ?? Under age obvious but as to men at 25 Ideas as to why? Thanks MC
Ron Clifton Posted 7 November , 2009 Posted 7 November , 2009 More than they legally could have done if they were just generally pains in the system Oh, I don't know! Section 40 of the Army Act, "Conduct prejudicial to good order and military discipline" meant "they" could get at you for almost anything they didn't like. It didn't carry a death sentence, though. Ron
27thBN Posted 7 November , 2009 Author Posted 7 November , 2009 Well Ron going by section 40 they did not need a good reason they could pretty well get you for anything ,so blows that theory.I like the leaving the wife one best (but i did not write this ) :whistle: Thanks All MC
stuartd Posted 8 November , 2009 Posted 8 November , 2009 I read a story recently, but I can't remember for the life of me where or the precise details, of a soldier who had enlisted, went AWOL and then later decided to re-enlist under a different name. If my memory serves me right, he went AWOL from the Navy and then enlisted in the army - or was it the other way around? Hmmmm...well you get the idea and the reasoning!
CGM Posted 8 November , 2009 Posted 8 November , 2009 ARCHER J H (AIF) served under five aliases. You can look him up in Mapping Our Anzacs (B2455). He was a serial enlister / deserter, enlisting six times, using five different names (plus actually enlisting twice with his own name). During his time(s) in the army he was the subject of a court martial, fined £4.11.7d for lost kit, in trouble for being in unlawfull possession of khaki while a patient, lost his medals, and finally lost his discharge papers three times and it was decided he would not be issued with a fourth set. However, in case this caused difficulty when he applied for a job it was decided his army record would be made available to any future employer. Oh, and only once in the six times he enlisted did he claim to be married. I don't believe he gives us any clues as to why other soldiers enlisted under an alias, but his papers are very interesting to read. I believe I am correct with all these points; I drew up a small spreadsheet to keep track of his history. I think he is someone I would like to have met.... Regards CGM
27thBN Posted 9 November , 2009 Author Posted 9 November , 2009 CGM It would be hard to believe that you would have to be on the ball 24 hours a day to remember who you are so you do not get into further trouble.Maybe that's what the problem was with him having so many aliases he slipped up from time to time ,hard enough today just remembering all the passwords we all have without having different identities MC
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