Genealogy Chat

see below

If your families are like mine, you probably have tons of William and Mary gt X many grandparents, children named William, Mary, Sarah, Thomas, John and Eliza. These children all marry and call their children William, Mary, Sarah, Thomas, John and Eliza. These children... so you end up with umpteen individuals with the same names. Whilst this is sometimes useful in checking that you have the right individual its ******* confusing, especially when you get William's daughter Mary and William's daughter Sarah both giving birth to another William in the same village in the same year. Ironic, as I imagine one of the main reasons for naming folk after relatives was to keep the name going and achieve immortality of sorts. Whereas, if they really wanted their descendants to know all about them, they should have ensured they had a unique name! nell

Tell me about it? I have one side of the family that are all either, William, Henry, William henry, Henry William, Thomas, John Thomas, Thomas James, and James, this is in every generation of the same family back to the late 1700's Roy

they drive you mad dont they, I now have a Duncan Duncan and a Buchan Buchan I ask you whats the point of that ???

I have a family called Mealing/Maling/Mealins/Melins etc. Siblings are William, Ann (my gt gt grandma), Charles, Sarah Ann, James, Stephen, Emma, Richard. William died in Broadmoor unmarried without issue. Ann had Emma, Robert & Joseph [twins with different names, but who died in infancy], Charles, Prudence Elizabeth [just to be different], and Sarah Ann. Charles had no children I've yet discovered Sarah Ann had Emma Ann [and stopped there because she was widowed] James had Sarah Ann, Mary, John, William, Emma, Stephen and Edward. Stephen had William, James, Richard and Eliza [named after her mother] Emma bucked the trend and only two of her 7 children are named after family - Charles and Emma. Richard also had a Charles and an Emma as well as Mary. So in two generations there are 5 Emmas and various other duplicate names.

Mind you my Norfolk Grays are very dreary William, John, Mary etc. with the exception of Octavian. The poor chap died at the age of 22 (though he left 2 children) but has been recorded as Octavian, Octivian, Octavius etc. So different isn't necessarily easier! nell

Mum's tree: John & Sarah have the following children - John Sarah, Ann & James. John jr marries another Sarah, Sarah marries another John. Ann marries a John too, so James finds a Sarah for himself too. They all name their offspring. John, Sarah, James, & Ann. Dad's tree: Ditto. Only way I can tell them apart is that mum's tree is 150 years of Ag lab's. Dad's were all fishermen. But this does NOT stop me from ordering certs to make sure I got the right John & Sarah.

Tell me about it! My Tweed family stayed in the Cambridgeshire village of Cheveley for hundreds of years so I thought it would be a good idea to do a mini one name study. Big mistake: Between 1840 and 1848 there were 9 William Tweeds born in Cheveley! In later censuses they of course get confused about their ages, some leave for a few years then come back to confuse me further and apart from one wheelwright and a coal miner (no not the Cambridgeshire coalfields, he moved to Durham:-) ) they were all ag labs. My apologies to any cousins who I promised the results of my study to, it will arrive one day but it took a little longer than expected lol

I have 7 William Jordan's in my tree, one in each generation. They all called at least one of their sons William. It was not always the eldest son. What amazes me is that, for the earliest 4 generations, although the other sons die childless or in infancy, it is ALWAYS the William that survives! How weird is that? Tina

My Grandad was the eldest son of an eldest son of an eldest son etc. thats 5 Robert Elvins in a row, maybe more.My Nan changed this trend by calling her eldest David Robert, I'm his eldest daughter and i've gone and named my eldest David Aelwyn after both his grandads. Its nice to come across more unusual first names, one of my ancesters called her youngest son Last, maybe she thought, after having so many children that she would not have any more after this one! from Caroline

My most common name appears 11 times, covering 6 generations. I gave up following the cousins after the first generation. Even a couple of wills couldn't help me sort them out. I've also got 5 generations of daughters named Ruth, continuing up till fairly recently. (It is a bit of a surprise to me that I wasn't named Ruth) All the daughters born to my gt grandfather, (all named after other ancestors), were all known by their second names. So anyone just looking for names on censuses will be OK, but if you were looking for your gt aunt Millie you'd have a job to find her, as she is registered as Ruth Amelia. You wouldn't believe just how many Ruth Amelias there were registered within 2 years of hers!