Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Bronwen, post: 682301, member: 5833&quot;]On, no, join on in.&nbsp; I thought all this had to be getting pretty tedious for the wider community, so Jivvy &amp; I have been continuing to bat it around by PM.&nbsp; I remarked in one message, referring to the very entry you have spotted, that I now understood why there has been confusion over whether it was Lamant or Lamont: there were 2, both with first initial J.&nbsp; Jivvy replied that she didn&#039;t know right off what I was talking about, but had worked it out. I still haven&#039;t been able to figure out how to get photos into my messages, wanted her to see what the cameo world has been seeing all these years, so uploaded here &amp; tagged her.</p><p><br /></p><p>I get the feeling they were competitive brothers.&nbsp; First is the cameo that goes with the Lamont signature, second is Lamant:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]185802[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]185803[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>Now that she&#039;s on the trail with me, Jivvy &amp; I keep finding Schmolls &amp; J just turned up another Mouhe.</p><p><br /></p><p>I don&#039;t understand what time period Mr. Burgess, writing in 1919, is talking about.&nbsp; The &#039;early years of the 19th century&#039; were before Victoria was even born &amp; helmet shell does not seem to have been widely used until a bit further on.&nbsp; I can understand, from the way the signatures look, why he would think the name was Lamont, but why does he think this Lamont was working in the early 19th?&nbsp; An example I have of one with a date says 184_:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]185804[/ATTACH]</p><p>Sleepy, have to get to bed.&nbsp; Meeting someone in the morning at the planetarium.&nbsp; <img src="styles/default/xenforo/smilies/wink.png" class="mceSmilie" alt=";)" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in