Strange Baptisms

[Phoenix]

Some one else can do the research as I'm off to work, but

India at this period is governed by the East India Company - a private company. The soldiers are not, so far as I am aware, part of the British Army.

But... Wellington (then Wellesley, I think?) was part of the British Army.

So possibly two different sets of records to explore?

[Shona]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Some one else can do the research as I'm off to work, but

India at this period is governed by the East India Company - a private company. The soldiers are not, so far as I am aware, part of the British Army.

But... Wellington (then Wellesley, I think?) was part of the British Army.

So possibly two different sets of records to explore?

From Family Search:

Until 1859, there were two armies in India: the British Army and the Honourable Company (East India Company) Army. There were also several garrisons of French, Danish, and Dutch soldiers.

The British Army regiments were raised in England and spent several years in India, as well as in other places. For the most part, British Army records are stored in the National Archives (TNA) in Kew, London.

Honourable Company regiments were raised in India or England for service only in India. Their records are for the most part stored in the Oriental and India Office Collections (OIOC) at the British Library, also in London.

In 1859, following the Mutiny, all of the Honourable Company's regiments were absorbed into the British Army.

Note that many of your ancestors may have begun their lives in India in the British Army, then transferred to the Honourable Company's Army when they become too old or invalid for regular army work.

[Kit]

I don't know about the Army Records but the OIOC records are on FMP.

[Shona]

Just read this article - v interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/d...identity.india

Thank you for starting this thread, Toni. I have enjoyed expanding my knowledge.

[Merry]

That's a very interesting article. Thanks Shona.

So.....I've lost track a bit - are we saying Toni's Lawrence lived 1750/1-1805 and finished up a Lieut Col in the Bengal Native infantry. He is not to be confused with his namesake (and probable relation, 1775/80 - 1850) who held the same rank in the 1st battalion the Royal Lancashire Militia?

[Shona]

Originally Posted by Merry

Are we saying Toni's Lawrence lived 1750/1-1805 and finished up a Lieut Col in the Bengal Native infantry. He is not to be confused with his namesake (and probable relation, 1775/80 - 1850) who held the same rank in the 1st battalion the Royal Lancashire Militia?

I think so.

*crosses fingers*

[Merry]

Originally Posted by Shona

I think so.

*crosses fingers*

lol

[Kit]

Originally Posted by Shona

Just read this article - v interesting.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/d...identity.india

Thank you for starting this thread, Toni. I have enjoyed expanding my knowledge.

Very interesting article. Thanks

Thank you also for helping Shona.

Originally Posted by Merry

So.....I've lost track a bit - are we saying Toni's Lawrence lived 1750/1-1805 and finished up a Lieut Col in the Bengal Native infantry. He is not to be confused with his namesake (and probable relation, 1775/80 - 1850) who held the same rank in the 1st battalion the Royal Lancashire Militia?

I am trying to prove that 'my' Lawrence is in fact mine. I have this feeling he is, and my feelings are usually right, but I would like to back it up. Then you can help me sort out all the other Lawrences.

I think I need to trace the nameless daughter and William to see if people I know to be mine start appearing as witnesses for them.

So first task is to work out her name again and to remember it.

[Kit]

Originally Posted by Shona

RAWSTORNE, Edward. (1745/46-1801) Major General.
Colonel Comdt. Cavalry.b 1745/6. Cadet 1764. Admitted
1 Sept. 1764. Ensign 6 March.1765. Lieut. 14 Dec. 1766. Capt.14 Oct.1769. Major 9 Jan.1781. Lt. Col 14 Feb 1787. Col. 3 May 1796. Maj. Gen. 1800. d. Berhampore 7 July 1801.

Eldest son of Rev.William Rawstorne,52 years rector of Badsworth,Yorks.and Elizabeth his wife,dau. of Samuel Walker,of Stapleton Park,Yorks. Brother of Lawrence Rawstorne q.v His daus. m. William INNES and Thomas WARD,qq.v.

Services: Sailed for India in the Vansittart 4 Mar. 1764,aged 18.Ensign 1st Bengal Eur.Regt.;resigned his Commissionduring the "Batta mutiny" 15 May 1766. Dismissed Jan. 1767 for his mutinous support of Sir Robert Fletcher q.v.:restored 7 July 1767.Capt. comdg.28th Bn Sepoys in Dec.1777; Capt. Comdt. of Kalpi fort in 1778. Apptd. to comd. 21st N.I. 1st Jan.1781; comdg.at Fatehgarh in June 1781; comdg.27th N.I. in Apr. 1786.Fur.30 Oct.1786 till 20 Aug. 1790. Lt.Col.comdg. 6th Eur.Bn. in Feb. 1796; transfd. as Col. to 2nd Bengal Eur.
Regt.1796. Apptd. Col. Comdt. of newly-formed Cav. Bde. of four regts. 2 June 1797;comdg. at Berhampore May 1799 till death.
Refs: Burks Landed Gentry,4th edn.,p.1255,s.n.
Rawstorne,of Penwortham Priory,Lincs. G.M. 1802, i. 584.

RAWSTORNE,Lawrence (1750/51-1805).Lieut. Colonel,4th N.I. b.1750/51.Cadet 1778. Arrived in India 2 Oct.1778.Ensign Oct.1778.
Lieut 20 Nov.1778.Capt.1 June 1796.Major 10 Aug. 1801. Lt. Col. 30 June 1804. d.Aligarh 16 Oct.1805.

2nd son of Rev. Rawstorne and Elizabeth his wife. Brother of Edward Rawstorne,q.v. m.(?) His dau. m.Charles PORTEOUS,q.v.

Services: Sailed for India in the Nassau 1 Mar. 1778,aged 27.Apptd.Adjt. 28 Bn.Sepoys 22 March.1780.Fur.16 Dec.1784. till Nov.1788. Lieut. 5th Bengal Eur.Bn. in Dec.1788 and in
1790; 12th Bn. Sepoys in 1792; 6th Eur. Bn. in Feb. 1796.Transfd. as Capt. to 5th N.I.; as Major to Bengal Eur.Regt.;as Lt. Col. to 2/4th N.I. (? Second Mahratta War;defence of
Delhi Oct. 1804; Lt.Col. comdg. 2/4th N.I.)

I read this to be that Elizabeth (the daughter) was the daughter of Lawrence, who may be my Thomas' father.

However reading this link: The Asiatic Annual Register

says she is the daughter of late Major General Rawstorne, who is probably Edward above. I could not find a baptism, in India, for a daughter for Lawrence but there is one for Elizabeth, daughter of Edward.

[Kit]

News isn't looking good. Brother William has not given me any possible connections to Thomas. I'll have to go back to Elizabeth and hope. Otherwise I'm not going to have any links between them.