RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => Topic started by: dhalaughlin on Sunday 04 October 15 17:30 BST (UK)
-
Would anyone care to speculate on a possible origin for the middle name of my gg grandfather Robert "John" Laughlin. Robert John is one of an unbroken lineage of at least seven Robert Laughlins in our family up to the present day. I believe he may be the first to have received the middle name John. He was born c. 1842.
I have found the Scottish naming tradition to be a very helpful (but not absolute) guide to research when applied. Indeed our seven Roberts were all first born sons named after their paternal grandfathers, with perhaps the exception of the earliest one - because we don't know if he was the eldest son or who his father was. I have a nephew today who is the most recent of these seven. He is the eldest son of my eldest brother and named after his grandfather, my father.
I have read anecdotal information on the use of middle names within Scottish traditions, but this has almost always referred to surnames used as middle names? How about the use of forenames as middle names? I have read somewhere that sometimes the child is given a middle name after the forename of the minister officiating the baptism. I think I already checked and eliminated this as a possibility in this case. I need to double check! But I do not think so.
So what are the other possibilities, by some loose historical convention, practiced in the early to mid 19th century? We do have John Laughlins in our anecdotal tree perhaps as siblings and cousins. In fact there is a chance that the referenced Robert John's g grandfather may have been John. One question I have is what happens if grandfather and g grandfather are both living at the time of birth? Would both names be adopted, i.e. grandfather and g grandfather's forenames?
I am sure there are some theories or loose conventions out there applying to early to mid 19th century. I seem to see more women with middle forenames - Mary Jane or Margaret Anne for example. I realize this is murky and ambiguous area, but I would appreciate any rules, theories, thoughts or speculation that may be out there. I have never seen a good discussion on this topic (of forenames as middle names). Thank you in advance for any guidance!
-
You haven't mentioned the women in the family.
No Johns on the mother's side?
It is possible you will never find a logical answer; I know I have several such anomalies, and am still scratching my head and wondering why the parents did that!! ::)
-
Thanks for your response. I have had more of a dialogue on this topic in the Ireland Forum (County Londonderry). The maternal grandfather was a Robert as well. From anecdotal evidence there may have been a paternal g grandfather also alive at the time of birth. We don't know. So possibly a Robert (grandfather) and a John (g grandfather).
I did a little further research and read several articles where it appears that except for Germany and the aristocracy middle names we quite rare in Europe and the US until the 19th century. In the US they were almost nonexistent until after the American Revolution. I assume there was a similar timeline amongst commoners in the British Isles.
Our Robert John's father was a person of no particular importance (weaver/labourer) and born in 1811. He was only "Robert" for sure. Robert John's grandfather would have been born well before the end of the 18th Century (we know he was also Robert), so we suspect our known Robert John b. 1842 was the first in our lineage to acquire a middle name. Also, the officiating minister at his baptism was a Francis Porter, so he wasn't given a middle name after Rev. Porter either. Our best guess at this stage is that he may have been given the middle name after the paternal g grandfather.
Thanks again for the further discussion. I have found a knowledge of naming traditions to be very helpful and fruitful in my research, so hopefully others may also benefit from this discussion.
-
For what it's worth - which is not much, as I am talking England not the Celtic regions, but.........
from a couple married in 1603 to 1750 ish, ONLY one forename is given to all the people on the tree. (40 in number.)
2 babes bap around 1780 are given a middle name which is the surname of forbears.
In the following generation, (early 19 c) 7 out of 8 siblings have only 1 given name, but the youngest in the family is given 2.
From the mid 19th century every child has 2 forenames.
Hope that helps. ::)
-
Thanks mowsehowse. That seems to validate the studies I have read. There seems to have been a slow shift in the use of middle names between the end of the 18Th and beginning of the 19Th centuries. As the 19Th century waxed the use seems to accelerate and it became quite common by mid century.
I read a pretty detailed statistical article on the use in America, but I can't locate it any longer. Almost no middle name use before the Revolution, except amongst some gentry. Then it picked up after the Revolution with many choosing middle names from the Founders, the most popular of course being George. Of course many also chose a family surname as a middle name, to establish the connection.
So far everything I have learned supports that our known Robert John was the first in our paternal lineage to receive a middle name. Thank you for your personal analysis.
Here is one of the articles: http://www.genfiles.com/articles/middle-names/
-
My pleasure, and thank you for the link.
It is valid to mention that, of the two bap with a middle (surname) around 1780, one was illeg and given his father's 2 names before mother's surname, and the other was named for a deceased older sister, and also given their mother's surname as a middle name, presumably to differentiate.
All the best.......
-
Old Post but here's some input. In certain areas of Scotland (Fraserburgh, Peterhead, Banff, Buchan, Buckie for example and the West Coast - Gaeltacht), because names repeat through a family based on a typical if not rigid naming pattern (first son - pat. g/father, first daughter - mat. g/mother etc), there is a custom, or practice of referring to people by two first names.
So you get Donald John, John Angus, Angus Brendan, Davie Robert, Margaret Anne, Jean Mary, Agnes Ishbell etc.
And of course, you get Big Davie, Young (or Wee) Davie and in Gaelic there is the byname by descriptor, Domhail Dubh or by job, (Donald the Hotel, cf Padraig Post) different Alexanders might be variously Sandy, Young Sandy, Eck, Eckie, Auld Alec. This - especially the nicknames/ vareity of diminutives within a family might - is especially true of women's names, so there is Maggie, Peigi, Meg, Magret, or Ishbel, Tib, Tibby, Bella, Belle plus any other descriptors. Even now one might speak of Harbour Kate, bicycle Kate, Margaret's Kate etc.
Separately there was also the practice in some parts where land owners and also tenant farmers were known by the land they owned/worked, so Lord John Gordon (in the ballad, Glenlogie) is also known as Glenlogie while the other character in the ballad, Jeannie Melville, is also referred to as Jeannie of Bethelnie, and in the 70s/80s, soap, Take the High Road, one of the characters, Tam Kerr was known as Inverdarroch from the farm he worked. In another ballad, Belle is known as Bogie's Bonnie Belle, from her father's land/farm.
Yes, there is/was also the tradition of using the child's grandparent's (or mother's) maiden name as middle names, alongside this (but maybe in different areas of the coutnry).
Sometimes this developed into people being known as (J[ohn]) Forbes Meldrum, or (A[llan]) Grant MacDonald; though not among women. Neil Munro's novel, "The Daft Days" starts from a point of confusion where the relative coming to stay from Chicago, Lennox, is presumed to be a boy child, not a girl.