Hello Jordan Thanks for the helpful information. It explains why the alias was continued through the convict records. My first thought was simply that on being arrested Charles gave a false name and, as is common in that situation, he chose a very common surname. Thanks to listers I now know that the alias wasn't just a false name, but had real significance. So we learn, little by little ! Cheers Ken From: Jordan <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [PJ] Alias Hi Ken Perhaps you have read a modern understanding of an alias backwards onto the historical use? I have posted on this topic on this list before and will quote from that: The Oxford Dictionary of Local and Family History says that: "Aliases were used in cases of illegitimacy, upon the remarriage of a parent, upon inheriting property from a female relative, etc. In some cases the alias form was inherited for several generations and was thus similar to a double-barrelled surname." In legal documents such as pardons there was a concern that if all the known names were not listed then the document might be defective. That is, if the document named a person as William Lucas but the conviction was in another name such as William Wake or William Lucas alias Wake, then the person referred to was another person. In the 18th and 19th centuries the law was obsessed by formula and generally speaking documents could not be amended. The form alias is a hangover from the use of medieval Latin in legal proceedings. It is short for 'alias dictus' or 'elsewhere called' usually translated as 'otherwise called' (also known as). I would have thought it was more liikely that a person with a common surname such as Smith would have an alias in the sense of another name used to distinguish this Smith from that Smith. Regards