Genealogy Chat

thanks to everyone for the helpful information and comments .... much better than trying to work it out on my own. janis

I read recently (sorry - as always can't quite remember where) that some poorer families couldn't afford the registration fees for births so would give a child the name of a deceased older sibling to avoid registering the new birth at all. Janet

Hi Janis, I think it hapened more often than we think. My husbands gr-grandma was Margaret Ann Burnitt, was only by pure accident, after sending for her birth cert, that we found a death entry for her in the next qtr! Found another birth for Margaret Ann Burnitt in the next year, sent for cert, same parents! Unfortunately, till all became clear, we had gr-grandad married to the dead one!!! Debbie

While doing a VRI lookup for someone of Quaker marriages in Bristol, I came across a bloke called Cornelius who called 4 sons after himself. VRI doesn't list deaths but I suppose the first three must have died. How sad.

i have this in my tree to, joseph died in infancy, the next boy five years later was called joe, just a different version of the name.

One of my families did it three times!!! - Mary - Mary Ann and Mary Elizabeth - I thought I was going daft until I realised that the first two poor souls had died in infancy. Sue.

It was common practice. It occurred several times in my family, on all sides. George

It was common practice when a child died young a subsequent child would be given the ame name in the hope that it might survive to become an adult. Sometime even when a child was still alive this would be done reasons being if the first child looked as if it would not survive or sometimes just because they were fond of that name. Taken from'Succeeding in Family History' by J Titford. I too have an example in my own family tree but the first child had died young. Penny

Hi Janis, I think this would be quite possible. My father, born in 1935, is named after his elder brother, Sam, who died when he was approximately 2. Can't imagine doing this myself, but then times were different then. Best to look for another birth record to be sure. Best wishes, Carol.

I think it is likely Sylvie

I have the correct record of a child christened in November 1888.She was named Eliza Jane after her mother. Her death was recorded the following 1/4, March 1889. 12 years later, the 1901 census household includes Eliza Jane aged 11 Would the parents really have given their next child the same name as the child that died the previous year ? Is there an error in the records ?