Genealogy Chat

Can anyone please offer some advice as to this mystery? On the 1901 census, I have Herbert Lowe born abt 1860 living with wife Alice b. 1861, and children Gertrude, Pauline, Herbert, Gordon, Florence Naomi, Edith, and Constance - all in Lewisham. I have Herbert and Alice's marriage cert (Jan 1881) and young Herbert's birth cert (1885) all stating their surname as Lowe or Loewe or Lorwe! I've been unable to find them on any previous census, but today, I found out why - they are listed as surname Crease on 1891 and Creese on 1881. I can understand the enumerator mis hearing but Creese sound nothing like Lowe! Also, on the 1891 census, one of their sons, (Paul) Herbert Lowe is listed as Lowe and visiting his grandparents! Can anyone offer any advice as to why they might have used a different surname - as far as Im aware there was no previous marriage. Thanks. Steph

My grandfather was born Anderson, but for some reason was christened as Humble, and he and his parents are on the 1871 census (about 6 months after his birth) as Humble. However they used their proper name for the rest of their lives. Can't come up with any explanation other than they might have done a 'moonlight flit' as the father was unemployed on the 1871 census when he changed the name. Kath. x

Have you looked at the family above them on the image? Might just be that the ennumerator forgot to write down a new surname

how did you know to look under Crease for the family? jeanette

Thanks both for your suggestions. It seems as though they chopped and changed their surname. Their children were all recorded at birth with with the surname Loewe, as were the marriage certs, but for some reason, they are listed as Creese on the 1881 and 1891 census! He was an annuitant, whatever that is! I dont know how to solve this mystery because even if I send off for the birth cert of one of the other children, I just know it will have the surname Lowe on it - also why did they allow their other son staying with his grandparents, to use his proper name. Do you think I will ever get to the bottom of it, or shall I just let it go. Thanks. Steph

how do you know it is the same family?

what are the census ref numbers please? got 1901- Leahurst rd Alice Lowe abt 1861 London, England Wife Lewisham London Constance Lowe abt 1898 London, England Daughter Lewisham London Edith Lowe abt 1893 London, England Daughter Lewisham London Florence Lowe abt 1891 London, England Daughter Lewisham London Gertrude Lowe abt 1882 London, England Daughter Lewisham London Gordon Lowe abt 1889 London, England Son Lewisham London Herbert Lowe abt 1860 London, England Head Lewisham London Herbert Lowe abt 1886 London, England Son Lewisham London Pauline Lowe abt 1882 London, England Daughter Lewisham London found the family you mean in 1891 - in Horton st?

An annuitant just means he got some kind of pension, or allowance from an insurance policy. I think you will probably just have to let it go as you say, which is what I've had to do with my grandad's family name change (but that doesn't mean to say I wouldn't be over the moon if someone could come up with the real reason). Kath. x

Ive got them on the 1901 census, the ref for the 1891 census where they are listed as Crease, is RG/520 Lewisham Folio 73, page 27. On the 1881 census, its just Paul and ALice listed as Creese and the ref is RG11/0720 Folio 111 page3.

Thanks for that Kathleen. I know what you mean about perhaps its best to let it go, but Im like a dog with a bone now, and just have to find out (if I can) why this happened. Am so grateful for any help, advice or tips on here!

Have one similar in Hubby's family where they couldn't stick with one surname, but alternated completely haphazardly between two completely different ones, apparently completely at random. the reason was that the husband was illegitimate but had been brought up by his biological father who had married his mum after the birth and was named on the child's birth cert. In the census records where he was a child he was the only one in the household with a different surname, because he was born before the marriage of his parents (how cruel is that??) Anyway, he never made up his mind for the rest of his life. In your case, I did wonder if the annuity had anything to do with it???? If it was supposed to be paid out to him in name XYZ, but he really preferred his ''other'' name ZYX??? Merry

Is the name Crease anywhere else in the family? Just with him being an annuitant, thought perhaps someone might have died and left them some money if they changed their name to the name of the deceased (far fetched I know), but just trying to come up with ideas. Kath. x

How did you know instead of lowe I will look under creese or did you do it by address?

Have you seen the actual census images? Surnames are often open to interpretation - I have found Chowns transcribed as Thomas and the original image could have read either way. Perhaps the Loewe was of German origin and they wanted to be less foreign? I have a branch of husband's family who changed from McCarthy to Carter between 1866 and 1871. His gt grandfather Charles tried to apply for his birth cert as Charles Carter in 1936 and as he was registered as Charles McCarthy, the GRO couldn't find it. What is even more bizarre is that an elder sister married with her maiden name McCarthy when her parents were Carter, and one of the siblings remained McCarthy - he is on the census with his father James Carter in 1901. Also discovered James Carter started life not as James McCarthy but as Dennis McCarthy - this is the name on his marriage cert and his son Charles' birth cert, though he is James McCarthy in 1851 and 1861 census!!! nell

The census image definitely says Crease, Nell. Kath. x

On the marriage cert of Paul H Lorwe (misspelt!) to Alice Jane Hood, on 1st Jan 1881 in Charlton, his father is listed as Paul Lorwe and is a merchant, so that suggests he was alive and maybe not short of a bob or two! If that was in the Jan and as far as Im aware the cenus date for 1881 was 3 Apr, I suppose his dad could have died by then, but why call himself Creese, unless it could have been his mother's maiden name I suppose! Sorry, am thinking aloud now!

How I came to find them under Creese, was because someone mentioned months ago, that there was a similarity with the first names, but I didnt take much notice as the surname was so different. However, tonight, looking at the images, it is most definitely them, even the second initials are the same, as is the place of birth.

We can only speculate as to name changes. I assume the McCarthy lot wanted to sound less Irish for some reason. But people change their names because a) they want to hide - maybe from the Law, maybe from the rent man? b) they just prefer a different name c) they inherit some money or want to continue a family name that might otherwise die out nell

I've had discrepancies like that whe they were trying to hide something and thought the ennumerator might discover who thet really were and report it to the council or authorities, but it seems strange to have changed so completely. Have you looked for any other Creese's that might be connected to them? Kim

If it is DEFINITELY Crease and not Lowe (and I have seen far worse mistranscriptions than this) then a Family Row comes to mind - 'And what's more, I'm not your bloody father, your mother had a fling with a bloke called Crease'. A friend of mine was given as his 21st birthday present from his parents, his Birth Certificate, which showed him to be illegitimate and not the son of the man he called Dad.I cannot begin to tell you the effect this had on him,(what were they thinking of?) but for the rest of his life he used his biological father's name, not the name he had grown up with. I never said it to him, but I remember thinking, how do you know she told you the truth about your real father? Olde Crone