Genealogy Chat

Please does anyone know in which order children were named after members of the family, i.e. parents, mothers mother, fathers father etc. I am stuck on one or two branches at the late 1700`s early 1800`s now. I have a couple of possiblities and would like to try to link them with names.

If not, any advice on the best way to try to decide/eliminate would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks so much, Marilyn

Really don't think there was a set order. Some families would name after the paternal side first others would name after the maternal side. Some would name boys after the paternal side and girls after the maternal side. Really no set pattern.

Often a child born would be named after a deceased sibling from one side of the famliy

I think it varied according to which part of the country you were in. In Scotland the eldest son was often, but not always, called after his father.

I have grandparents, born in the Birmingham area, where eldest son is called after paternal grandfather, eldest daughter after paternal grandmother, and the next two after parents.

The Welsh branch and the Derbyshire branch have no children called after any ancestors!

No doubt other posters will have other options.

Thanks for advice, just thought, so far back that maybe there may be an amost definite clue in the names.

Thanks for replying

Marilyn

Try this site

http://arms2armor.com/Genealogy/names1.htm

This is the Scottish naming practice but don't take it as being "carved in stone"

Scots often named children by following a simple set of rules:

1st son named after father's father

2nd son named after mother's father

3rd son named after father

1st daughter named after mother's mother

2nd daughter named after father's mother

3rd daughter named after mother

I agree with Margee. That generally fits with my tree especially for the 18th and 19th century. In the 20th century I have seen middle names added for "fondness" or respect for a cousin or other near relation.

None of my ancestors (all English) followed any sort of naming pattern......obviously independently-minded.

Scottish families tended to have stricter ideas.

Thanks for info everyone, looking back over my tree, some people are named after relatives, but mostly are not. I have got definite proof with certificates and parish records though so at least, so far, I am on the right track.

Please see http://www.genesreunited.co.za/boards/board/genealogy_chat/thread/737444

Thanks for that Joy, very helpful.

Margee - that's what my family followed... made it easier to find some of my lot, especially the Smith line! Every one of the sons had a daughter, named Margaret D* Smith! (not giving away info about living people, they were born 1880-1900).

Anyone else have females with "unfortunate" names? Obviously the grandads were getting upset because no grandsons came along to be named after them. So the poor girls got female versions of male names....

Some are fine, like Roberta, Georgina, but I've got some doozies ~ some examples ~ Andrewetta, Davidina, Ewanetta, Gideona, Douglasina........ the prize goes to Archibaldina.

I now know why there were so many old ladies called Ina in the town I grew up in in Scotland.

But! The Scots are very good at giving a child a name (on birth certificate) and calling them something else.



: :-D

I've got a Fanny Bald in my tree. :-)

My mum had a friend called Nora Bone!!! True as I sit here..........