Traditional naming patterns

[coombs]

Naming patterns can be very handy but of course not everyone did adhere to them. You cannot always assume that Joseph Smith son of Hepzibah and Kerrenhappuch Smith named any of their children Hepzibah and/or Kerrenhappuch. But naming patters have helped me break down brickwalls myself. They tended to be very common in the North of England, as it was nearer to Scotland.

[Ayashi]

I have Jones in Wales... it certainly helped me to have Walter son of Theophilus son of Walter son of Theophilus, but then his father had the poor form to be called William.

[coombs]

Lucky to have less common forenames in ancestors with very common surnames. Such as Theophilius Smith. Makes a change from the endless John's, Williams, Thomas's and James's in the trees. Or Elizabeth's, Mary's, Ann's and Sarah's.

My ancestor was the son of a Matthew and Margaret and he named his eldest son Matthew and eldest daughter Margaret.

[dowdstree]

Lots in my family who adhered to naming traditions. There are a couple of exceptions of course including my grandmother who was named Euphemia. She was their third child so plenty of family names they could have given her. Perhaps they just liked it.

Another thing that crops up in my family tree in the 1800's is when a child - boy or girl - dies and the next child of that sex is given the same first name. It can be very confusing to begin with.

Dorrie

[Drayke]

Another thing that crops up in my family tree in the 1800's is when a child - boy or girl - dies and the next child of that sex is given the same first name. It can be very confusing to begin with.

Dorrie

If you think that's bad... I'm not sure whether it is a naming pattern in the mid 1500's or just pure laziness of not being able to invent new names but looking at some wills, I'm finding a lot of "to my son John the elder" and then in the same will "to my son John the younger". One even went to new bounds by not only doing it to his poor sons but also to his daughters naming 2 the same - Margaret. This all despite the testator only having ever one wife and the others not being his godchildren.

Additionally, in your stated case that has proved helpful in my research as quite often it seems that the determination they have in using that name proves to be either the grandparents name or an ancestor they were adamant to keep.

[coombs]

My ancestors had 2 sons both alive at the same time called Edwin, one born 1840 and one born 1843, and the 1840 one lived to 1898. Edwin Auber and Edwin Gore Auber. Edwin Gore born 1843 was known as George.

[Ayashi]

I think I heard at one point something about a three generation lease of a bit of land... if you'd made an agreement to pass your land to your son Bob, you wanted to make sure there was definitely a Bob to hand it to!

I did have one (parallel) family who, due to some terrible bad luck, ended up with four Williams and three Marys.

I also had one census with two living daughters called Anna. It confused me for a long time until I found their (late) christenings- Hannah and Anne!

[clayton bradley]

My Lancashire ancestors were very keen on naming patterns till about the 1870s when it started to break down but my Norfolk ancestors were not. Cromwell single-handedly changed the previous naming pattern by making baptisms non sacramental. Before that children were called after their godparents, who might, of course, be relatives, but might equally be the local landlord, who would then leave them a cow or a shilling in his will. George Redmonds says in his books that usually two Johns in the same family meant two mothers, so Drayke's comment is interesting, cb

[Drayke]

George Redmonds says in his books that usually two Johns in the same family meant two mothers, so Drayke's comment is interesting, cb

That's what I assumed at the time until I found out he had only one wife. Just confusing to no end researching it. Perhaps he got sick of calling his other children by name for dinner and came up with the prefect solution, just call John and Margaret and they all come.