Hi again,
The reasons I asked about the birth certificate of Duncan the South African soldier are-
Young men often told wee lies about their D.O.B. when they enlisted and made themselves out to be a bit older than they actually were (you probably knew this
)
And it was common practice to name the first born son after the father's father. This meant that even if this child died the name could and very often
would be used again for the next son.
This seems strange to us now in the 21st century, I could never call a baby after one who had passed away. But this did happen in Scotland during this time. My own mum born in the 1930s discovered in the 70s that she had had an elder sister born and died 2 year before my mum. To my mum's shock she found that they shared the same forename and middle name.
So what I'm suggesting is could Duncan have been maybe 1 year younger born circa 1899 and named after his recently deceased brother?
Just a thought. Apologies if I'm way off track,
Looby
