Genealogy Chat

Juliana - Not sure what you mean? As Crista pointed out on your other thread, the first two died: Richard Williams 1 - christened 25-May-1865 was buried 13-Oct-1866 Richard Williams 2 - christened 10-Mar-1870 was buried 11-Aug-1870 Richard Williams 3 - christened 17-Dec-1871 Obviously her parents were dead-set on having a Richard in the family - and, I can well understand that!!!

Thank you for the info, any suggestions about the Richard situation??? x

Infant mortality in the 2nd half of the 19th century was at about 125 deaths per 1000 births (i.e. 1 in 8). However, I don't think that this figure includes young children - only those that died as babies. The proportion dying before adulthood would therefore have been even higher. My maternal grandfather's parents had 9 kids, but only 4 survived childhood. As for re-using the names of deceased children for subsequent births, this was indeed very common. I have lots of examples in my tree, including my paternal grandfather, who had the same name as an older deceased brother.

Don't forget the 2 Mary Catherines too. Crista

Yes it was common to name a child after a child that had died but this amount does seem a bit extreme! There also seems to be a very high number of dead children in this family. maybe the ages are mixed up in the censuses?! Sarah

Was it traditional to name subsequent children after those who have died? Have found 2 Elizabeth Jane and 3 Richard Hosking with the same parents. Well Confused!!!! Juliana xx