Naming customs
Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper
-
Gjest
Naming customs
Dear Todd,
That's a remark lightly made.
In the Belgian, Dutch, German, the Lower Lotharingian area this was
(starting in the 11th century) more than a trend. It was a fact. It was
still there in the 15th century. High up aswell as at the lowest level.
Only the reality of children dying young prevents us from seeing it
everywere. Younger born sons were give the names of the deceased elder
brothers to preserve the name of the elder generation (grandfathers,
uncles) who had to be named, thus obscuring the natural order of
naming.
Dutch en German continental naming customs at that and later times
indicate that the
1e son is named after the paternal grandfather,
2e son named after maternal grandfather,
3e son named after father.
The same goes with daughters. When the family on the mother side was
more prominent one was inclined to name the firstborn son and daughter
to her side of the family. Youngers sons and daughter who were
predestined to follow a religious future were often named after an
uncle or aunt in a monastery/nunnery. When both the grandfathers bore
the same Christian name another characteristic name from the familily
whose turn it was to be named would be choosen.
The naming of the third son after the father has been many times a
start for a succession of generations with the same Christian name,
when the two elder brothers died before gaining maturity or legitimate
offspring. Did you never wonder why some generations seem to take more
years in between? The sons who stepped in their fathers footsteps were
the LUCKY ones, younger sons with deceased elder brothers.
Picture the following chart. There are many places in which a missing
(elder and correctly named) child can be pictured.
Gilbert count (in Hainaut)
....I
Reinard I, count in Hainault, duke of Lotharingia
__I__________________
Gilbert duke..Reinard II x N.N. daughter of Lambert
..............____________I____________
..............Reinard III.......Lambert I
...............I.......__________I_____________________
Mathild x.Reinard IV..Henry..Lambert..Reinard..Mathild x Eustace
d.of....I..............................................I (s.of Baldwin)
Herman..I..............................................I..c.of Boulogne
of.EnameI........................._____________________I________
.......Herman.....Ida of Ardenne.x.Eustace II.....Lambert of Lens
..................d.of Godfrey...I
...............__________________I_________
...............Eustace III.....Godfrey......Baldwin
The counts of Holland are another fine example:
.............Dirk I
................I
.............Dirk II x Hildegard of Flanders, daughter of count Arnulf
.....................I
..................Arnulf x Liutgard of Luxembourg, d.of count Siegfried
................_________I_________
................Dirk III..Siegfried
..............__I____________
..............Dirk IV..Floris I
.........................I
.......................Dirk V
.........................I
.......................Floris II x Petronilla of
Lotharingia.....................I d.of.duke Dirk and sister of
duke............................I.duke Simon
.........................._______I_____________________
......Sofie of Rheineck x Dirk VI.....Simon......Floris
...d.of Otto..__________I______________________________________________
..............Floris III x Ada of Scotland..Otto..Dirk..Baldwin..Robert
...______________________I____________________________________________
...Dirk VII..William I x Aleid of Gelre, d.of c.Otto...Floris..Baldwin
...............________I_____________________
...............Floris IV.....Otto.....William
...............__I____________
...............William II....Floris
.................I
...............Floris V
...............__I_________________________________
...............William...Otto...Dirk...Floris...Jan
Many examples more were this came from.
So why could this naming rule not happen in England? Has anyone ever
bothered to look at it this way?
In the Lacy family one sees a Roger, Richard, Eustace and Geoffry as
sons of John fitz Richard. All those names can be marked as ancestors
and relatives of John and his wife Alice. Thus naming did occur. Maybe
not recognisable in the right order but then again one must not throw
away the possibility that there have been children on the right place,
dying young, that onscure the naming order.
There have undoubtly been exceptions to the rule. Personal reasons
usually. Some persons seem to be named after a godfather (the feudal
lord of the father), higher up in the hierarchy.
Hans Vogels
Initial post:
From: volucris@chello.nl
Date: 30 Sep 2005 00:20:36 -0700
Subject: Re: Evidence re. the identity of Alan Fitz Roland'as first
wife, _____ de Lacy
To:
Roger de Lacy, constable since 1191, would have named his eldest son
John after his own father, right?
A.
His son Robert is later (before 1232) a knight and mentioned after his
elder brother Roger of Chester (before 1232, knight). This Robert is
now seen mentioned as a royal witness in 1205. That makes him minimal
14 (or 12) years old. That makes Robert being born min. 1191 (1193).
Being a younger son of Roger, this would make the elder sons John and
Roger being born in or before 1190 (1192).
Dutch en German continental naming customs at that time indicate that
the
1e son is named after the paternal grandfather,
2e son named after maternal grandfather,
3e son named after father.
If this custom can be observed in Medieval England aswell this would
indicate that the second (surviving) son Roger of Chester is actually
named after his maternal grandfather or after his own father. From this
last point of view one might assume a additional son who died young
between John de Lacy en brother Roger. That takes the marriage of
father Roger (de Lacy) into the period 1185/1190.
B.
The son Robert in 1205 is not the younger son with that name observed
in a charter of before 1232. That indicates that he died shortly
thereafter as his brother John followed in his fathers foodsteps. John
being the name that the eldest son would have received. If this
(younger) John de Lacy must have been born in 1192 his elder brother
Robert must be born before him, say 1191. That would make him 14 years
of age in 1205, fit to testify. According to his Christian name this
Robert (not alike his grandfather or father) must have been named after
his maternal grandfather. That assumes an elder brother John who died
as an infant. Lets say for the sake of an argument that this elder John
is born in 1190. That would place the marriage of Roger the Lacy in
1189.
Conclusion:
Either way Roger the Lacy (fitz John fitz Richard) must have married in
the eighties: 1185/1190 or 1189.
Regarding giving testimony at a young age
Children in the age period 7-13 years could be present (and could
confirm) when their parents (or guardians) preformed deeds or
transactions. But they were still under age. There are many examples
that when coming of age, earlier under age confirmations were not seen
legal by the contestants. Belgian and German examples show that mostly
the age of 14 years is a turning point (being the minimal marriage age
for men). So if one shows up in a witnesslist one might rightly assume
that the person was minimaly 14 years. In Holland (and other areas) the
age of 12 years was used. It kind of depend on the Law/Custom that one
was inclined to follow, or how high up one was in nobility.
Hans Vogels
That's a remark lightly made.
In the Belgian, Dutch, German, the Lower Lotharingian area this was
(starting in the 11th century) more than a trend. It was a fact. It was
still there in the 15th century. High up aswell as at the lowest level.
Only the reality of children dying young prevents us from seeing it
everywere. Younger born sons were give the names of the deceased elder
brothers to preserve the name of the elder generation (grandfathers,
uncles) who had to be named, thus obscuring the natural order of
naming.
Dutch en German continental naming customs at that and later times
indicate that the
1e son is named after the paternal grandfather,
2e son named after maternal grandfather,
3e son named after father.
The same goes with daughters. When the family on the mother side was
more prominent one was inclined to name the firstborn son and daughter
to her side of the family. Youngers sons and daughter who were
predestined to follow a religious future were often named after an
uncle or aunt in a monastery/nunnery. When both the grandfathers bore
the same Christian name another characteristic name from the familily
whose turn it was to be named would be choosen.
The naming of the third son after the father has been many times a
start for a succession of generations with the same Christian name,
when the two elder brothers died before gaining maturity or legitimate
offspring. Did you never wonder why some generations seem to take more
years in between? The sons who stepped in their fathers footsteps were
the LUCKY ones, younger sons with deceased elder brothers.
Picture the following chart. There are many places in which a missing
(elder and correctly named) child can be pictured.
Gilbert count (in Hainaut)
....I
Reinard I, count in Hainault, duke of Lotharingia
__I__________________
Gilbert duke..Reinard II x N.N. daughter of Lambert
..............____________I____________
..............Reinard III.......Lambert I
...............I.......__________I_____________________
Mathild x.Reinard IV..Henry..Lambert..Reinard..Mathild x Eustace
d.of....I..............................................I (s.of Baldwin)
Herman..I..............................................I..c.of Boulogne
of.EnameI........................._____________________I________
.......Herman.....Ida of Ardenne.x.Eustace II.....Lambert of Lens
..................d.of Godfrey...I
...............__________________I_________
...............Eustace III.....Godfrey......Baldwin
The counts of Holland are another fine example:
.............Dirk I
................I
.............Dirk II x Hildegard of Flanders, daughter of count Arnulf
.....................I
..................Arnulf x Liutgard of Luxembourg, d.of count Siegfried
................_________I_________
................Dirk III..Siegfried
..............__I____________
..............Dirk IV..Floris I
.........................I
.......................Dirk V
.........................I
.......................Floris II x Petronilla of
Lotharingia.....................I d.of.duke Dirk and sister of
duke............................I.duke Simon
.........................._______I_____________________
......Sofie of Rheineck x Dirk VI.....Simon......Floris
...d.of Otto..__________I______________________________________________
..............Floris III x Ada of Scotland..Otto..Dirk..Baldwin..Robert
...______________________I____________________________________________
...Dirk VII..William I x Aleid of Gelre, d.of c.Otto...Floris..Baldwin
...............________I_____________________
...............Floris IV.....Otto.....William
...............__I____________
...............William II....Floris
.................I
...............Floris V
...............__I_________________________________
...............William...Otto...Dirk...Floris...Jan
Many examples more were this came from.
So why could this naming rule not happen in England? Has anyone ever
bothered to look at it this way?
In the Lacy family one sees a Roger, Richard, Eustace and Geoffry as
sons of John fitz Richard. All those names can be marked as ancestors
and relatives of John and his wife Alice. Thus naming did occur. Maybe
not recognisable in the right order but then again one must not throw
away the possibility that there have been children on the right place,
dying young, that onscure the naming order.
There have undoubtly been exceptions to the rule. Personal reasons
usually. Some persons seem to be named after a godfather (the feudal
lord of the father), higher up in the hierarchy.
Hans Vogels
Initial post:
From: volucris@chello.nl
Date: 30 Sep 2005 00:20:36 -0700
Subject: Re: Evidence re. the identity of Alan Fitz Roland'as first
wife, _____ de Lacy
To:
Roger de Lacy, constable since 1191, would have named his eldest son
John after his own father, right?
A.
His son Robert is later (before 1232) a knight and mentioned after his
elder brother Roger of Chester (before 1232, knight). This Robert is
now seen mentioned as a royal witness in 1205. That makes him minimal
14 (or 12) years old. That makes Robert being born min. 1191 (1193).
Being a younger son of Roger, this would make the elder sons John and
Roger being born in or before 1190 (1192).
Dutch en German continental naming customs at that time indicate that
the
1e son is named after the paternal grandfather,
2e son named after maternal grandfather,
3e son named after father.
If this custom can be observed in Medieval England aswell this would
indicate that the second (surviving) son Roger of Chester is actually
named after his maternal grandfather or after his own father. From this
last point of view one might assume a additional son who died young
between John de Lacy en brother Roger. That takes the marriage of
father Roger (de Lacy) into the period 1185/1190.
B.
The son Robert in 1205 is not the younger son with that name observed
in a charter of before 1232. That indicates that he died shortly
thereafter as his brother John followed in his fathers foodsteps. John
being the name that the eldest son would have received. If this
(younger) John de Lacy must have been born in 1192 his elder brother
Robert must be born before him, say 1191. That would make him 14 years
of age in 1205, fit to testify. According to his Christian name this
Robert (not alike his grandfather or father) must have been named after
his maternal grandfather. That assumes an elder brother John who died
as an infant. Lets say for the sake of an argument that this elder John
is born in 1190. That would place the marriage of Roger the Lacy in
1189.
Conclusion:
Either way Roger the Lacy (fitz John fitz Richard) must have married in
the eighties: 1185/1190 or 1189.
Regarding giving testimony at a young age
Children in the age period 7-13 years could be present (and could
confirm) when their parents (or guardians) preformed deeds or
transactions. But they were still under age. There are many examples
that when coming of age, earlier under age confirmations were not seen
legal by the contestants. Belgian and German examples show that mostly
the age of 14 years is a turning point (being the minimal marriage age
for men). So if one shows up in a witnesslist one might rightly assume
that the person was minimaly 14 years. In Holland (and other areas) the
age of 12 years was used. It kind of depend on the Law/Custom that one
was inclined to follow, or how high up one was in nobility.
Hans Vogels
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
Will,
You should read an digest the information before rushing to react.
Look better and you see for instance a Siegfried as a second son named
after his maternal grandfather. A Simon after his uncle as the name
Dirk was spoken for trough his grandfathers wore both bore the name
Dirk. And his brother Floris, as third son named after father. See
younger son Otto named after his maternal grandfather. Must I carry on?
There are many examples.
I made remarks aswell with regards to"
"Only the reality of children dying young prevents us from seeing it
everywere. Younger born sons were give the names of the deceased elder
brothers to preserve the name of the elder generation (grandfathers,
uncles) who had to be named, thus obscuring the natural order of
naming. "
and
"The same goes with daughters. When the family on the mother side was
more prominent one was inclined to name the firstborn son and daughter
to her side of the family. Youngers sons and daughter who were
predestined to follow a religious future were often named after an
uncle or aunt in a monastery/nunnery. When both the grandfathers bore
the same Christian name another characteristic name from the familily
whose turn it was to be named would be choosen.
The naming of the third son after the father has been many times a
start for a succession of generations with the same Christian name,
when the two elder brothers died before gaining maturity or legitimate
offspring. Did you never wonder why some generations seem to take more
years in between? The sons who stepped in their fathers footsteps were
the LUCKY ones, younger sons with deceased elder brothers."
Putting this new view to test will provide you a possible unprecedented
insight in the generations of the Medieval nobility. It gives answers
when before you wondered why some generations were say 20/25 years and
others 30 or more years wide.
Greetings,
Hans Vogels
You should read an digest the information before rushing to react.
Look better and you see for instance a Siegfried as a second son named
after his maternal grandfather. A Simon after his uncle as the name
Dirk was spoken for trough his grandfathers wore both bore the name
Dirk. And his brother Floris, as third son named after father. See
younger son Otto named after his maternal grandfather. Must I carry on?
There are many examples.
I made remarks aswell with regards to"
"Only the reality of children dying young prevents us from seeing it
everywere. Younger born sons were give the names of the deceased elder
brothers to preserve the name of the elder generation (grandfathers,
uncles) who had to be named, thus obscuring the natural order of
naming. "
and
"The same goes with daughters. When the family on the mother side was
more prominent one was inclined to name the firstborn son and daughter
to her side of the family. Youngers sons and daughter who were
predestined to follow a religious future were often named after an
uncle or aunt in a monastery/nunnery. When both the grandfathers bore
the same Christian name another characteristic name from the familily
whose turn it was to be named would be choosen.
The naming of the third son after the father has been many times a
start for a succession of generations with the same Christian name,
when the two elder brothers died before gaining maturity or legitimate
offspring. Did you never wonder why some generations seem to take more
years in between? The sons who stepped in their fathers footsteps were
the LUCKY ones, younger sons with deceased elder brothers."
Putting this new view to test will provide you a possible unprecedented
insight in the generations of the Medieval nobility. It gives answers
when before you wondered why some generations were say 20/25 years and
others 30 or more years wide.
Greetings,
Hans Vogels
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
In a message dated 10/1/2005 11:12:21 AM Pacific Standard Time,
volucris@chello.nl writes:
the Belgian, Dutch, German, the Lower Lotharingian area this was
(starting in the 11th century) more than a trend. It was a fact. It was
still there in the 15th century. High up aswell as at the lowest level.
Your examples do not show the pattern you allege.
In the example of the Dirks all we see is that "Dirk" is carried forward.
These dirks might be named for their father, grandfather, great-grandfather,
who knows?
It's not obvious from what you've shown.
volucris@chello.nl writes:
the Belgian, Dutch, German, the Lower Lotharingian area this was
(starting in the 11th century) more than a trend. It was a fact. It was
still there in the 15th century. High up aswell as at the lowest level.
Your examples do not show the pattern you allege.
In the example of the Dirks all we see is that "Dirk" is carried forward.
These dirks might be named for their father, grandfather, great-grandfather,
who knows?
It's not obvious from what you've shown.
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
Dear Will,
Please read my posts. Spell the letters and the komma's if you have to
but leave God out of the picture.
I did not write that the naming custom rule is omnipotent. I have given
the areas and the timeperiod were it to my knowledge can be observed.
Cheers to you,
Hans Vogels
Please read my posts. Spell the letters and the komma's if you have to
but leave God out of the picture.
I did not write that the naming custom rule is omnipotent. I have given
the areas and the timeperiod were it to my knowledge can be observed.
Cheers to you,
Hans Vogels
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
In a message dated 10/1/2005 12:12:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
volucris@chello.nl writes:
I have an argument for you.
If God answers my prayer, then that's because God likes to be good to us.
If God doesn't that's because I'm being tested, or my prayer is flawed.
So you see, no matter what the outcome, there is an answer.
You answer to why we don't see this pattern absolutely is that, it must be
there are missing children who died young. That is a flawed approach. No
matter what examples I bring to contradict your assumption, you can say "Oh there
must be missing children". So you see, your form of argument is not scientific
in that it cannot be tested.
That is why there is no point in trying to test it. You always have a
fall-back position, the old "missing children" approach. That doesn't fly by me.
It's pointless because there is no way to convince you unless you give up that
position.
Will Johnson
volucris@chello.nl writes:
"Only the reality of children dying young prevents us from seeing it
everywere. Younger born sons were give the names of the deceased elder
brothers to preserve the name of the elder generation (grandfathers,
uncles) who had to be named, thus obscuring the natural order of
naming. "
I have an argument for you.
If God answers my prayer, then that's because God likes to be good to us.
If God doesn't that's because I'm being tested, or my prayer is flawed.
So you see, no matter what the outcome, there is an answer.
You answer to why we don't see this pattern absolutely is that, it must be
there are missing children who died young. That is a flawed approach. No
matter what examples I bring to contradict your assumption, you can say "Oh there
must be missing children". So you see, your form of argument is not scientific
in that it cannot be tested.
That is why there is no point in trying to test it. You always have a
fall-back position, the old "missing children" approach. That doesn't fly by me.
It's pointless because there is no way to convince you unless you give up that
position.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
The examples of the counts with the known wives (and their fathers
name) and the names and order of their children within the household
are clear to me but you won't see.
You point your finger to the places not mentioned. Did you delve in the
genealogy of the counts of Holland? No, you just comment on what I
type, on what I leave out. I thought it more helpfull to show you and
Todd the places were is was in plain view.
How's your Dutch and German? I can try and round up a couple of
articles and send you of copy of those. It's a bit silly to retype
things or to translate the parts into English just because some
American chooses to play Thomas the Unbeliever. It's a bit like asking
me to put in writing 25 years of absorbing knowledge from literature.
Cheers,
Hans Vogels
name) and the names and order of their children within the household
are clear to me but you won't see.
You point your finger to the places not mentioned. Did you delve in the
genealogy of the counts of Holland? No, you just comment on what I
type, on what I leave out. I thought it more helpfull to show you and
Todd the places were is was in plain view.
How's your Dutch and German? I can try and round up a couple of
articles and send you of copy of those. It's a bit silly to retype
things or to translate the parts into English just because some
American chooses to play Thomas the Unbeliever. It's a bit like asking
me to put in writing 25 years of absorbing knowledge from literature.
Cheers,
Hans Vogels
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
Eudes (Odo), Count of Champagne d 1037 married Bertha de Bourgogne, dau of
Conrad and Elfigifu (see http://www.thepeerage.com)
They had two sons Stephen and Thibaud
Stephen himself had a son Odo
While Thibaud had three sons Hughes and Odo by an unknown mother
And Stephen Henry by Gersende de Maine
However Thibaud's father-in-law was named Heribert, not Henri and not Stephen
either.
So we really see quite a hodge-podge of naming here, certainly not a fixed
rule by which the eldest son is named for his paternal grandfather and the
second for his maternal grandfather.
This is just one example which breaks this alledged rule.
Will Johnson
Conrad and Elfigifu (see http://www.thepeerage.com)
They had two sons Stephen and Thibaud
Stephen himself had a son Odo
While Thibaud had three sons Hughes and Odo by an unknown mother
And Stephen Henry by Gersende de Maine
However Thibaud's father-in-law was named Heribert, not Henri and not Stephen
either.
So we really see quite a hodge-podge of naming here, certainly not a fixed
rule by which the eldest son is named for his paternal grandfather and the
second for his maternal grandfather.
This is just one example which breaks this alledged rule.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
In a message dated 10/1/2005 12:57:10 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
volucris@chello.nl writes:
What you have not given, is actual, specific, detailed, verifiable,
scientific example which can be tested. That is why I brought up my counter-argument
to show what sorts of theories are scientific, and which sorts are not. Any
theory which allows a deux-ex-machina "out" is not a scientific theory at all.
As to your Dirk example, I would point out that for the majority of these
people, the wives names and ancestry are not known and so this example falls
apart without knowing these details.
Will Johnson
volucris@chello.nl writes:
Please read my posts. Spell the letters and the komma's if you have to
but leave God out of the picture.
I did not write that the naming custom rule is omnipotent. I have given
the areas and the timeperiod were it to my knowledge can be observed.
What you have not given, is actual, specific, detailed, verifiable,
scientific example which can be tested. That is why I brought up my counter-argument
to show what sorts of theories are scientific, and which sorts are not. Any
theory which allows a deux-ex-machina "out" is not a scientific theory at all.
As to your Dirk example, I would point out that for the majority of these
people, the wives names and ancestry are not known and so this example falls
apart without knowing these details.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
Dear Will and others,
Also, at the early thirteenth century court
of the Spanish King of Aragon (1207) it is said that the Queen, Marie de
Montpellier having prayed for a son had twelve candles each consecrated to one of
the Holy Apostles lit when She went into labor and as the candle whose flame
burnt longer than the others had been dedicated to one of the Saint James
(Espanol Jaime) the boy (lucky lady) Marie gave birth to was named Jaime. He became
one of Aragon`s greatest Kings. He is ancestral to Queen Isabel of France,
consort of King Edward II of England.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
Dixmont, Maine USA
Also, at the early thirteenth century court
of the Spanish King of Aragon (1207) it is said that the Queen, Marie de
Montpellier having prayed for a son had twelve candles each consecrated to one of
the Holy Apostles lit when She went into labor and as the candle whose flame
burnt longer than the others had been dedicated to one of the Saint James
(Espanol Jaime) the boy (lucky lady) Marie gave birth to was named Jaime. He became
one of Aragon`s greatest Kings. He is ancestral to Queen Isabel of France,
consort of King Edward II of England.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
One of the uses of onamastics is to point towards potentially useful
sources.
For instance, in trying to ascertain the parents of a particular
ancestor on whom I had worked for some 20 years, a consideration of the
names he gave to his children - in the hope that he MAY have named his
first or second son after his own father, and his first or second
daughter after his own mother (and where the names of his wife's
parents were already known) - enabled me , after further research, to
focus my enquiry upon a married couple with those particular Christian
names; this ended in the identification of his father's probate
records, where the individual was clearly named and his family thereby
established. Given the common surname involved, and the fact that he
had moved some distance from the family home, I doubt I would otherwise
ever have resolved this.
As a pointer, this type of theorising therefore can be very useful, so
it is good of Hans to remind us of it, and invite us to put it to the
test as a potential tool.
Michael
sources.
For instance, in trying to ascertain the parents of a particular
ancestor on whom I had worked for some 20 years, a consideration of the
names he gave to his children - in the hope that he MAY have named his
first or second son after his own father, and his first or second
daughter after his own mother (and where the names of his wife's
parents were already known) - enabled me , after further research, to
focus my enquiry upon a married couple with those particular Christian
names; this ended in the identification of his father's probate
records, where the individual was clearly named and his family thereby
established. Given the common surname involved, and the fact that he
had moved some distance from the family home, I doubt I would otherwise
ever have resolved this.
As a pointer, this type of theorising therefore can be very useful, so
it is good of Hans to remind us of it, and invite us to put it to the
test as a potential tool.
Michael
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Naming customs
Dear James,
A great story, do you have a source for this?
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jwc1870@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: Naming customs
A great story, do you have a source for this?
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jwc1870@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: Naming customs
Dear Will and others,
Also, at the early thirteenth century court
of the Spanish King of Aragon (1207) it is said that the Queen, Marie de
Montpellier having prayed for a son had twelve candles each consecrated to
one of
the Holy Apostles lit when She went into labor and as the candle whose
flame
burnt longer than the others had been dedicated to one of the Saint James
(Espanol Jaime) the boy (lucky lady) Marie gave birth to was named Jaime.
He became
one of Aragon`s greatest Kings. He is ancestral to Queen Isabel of France,
consort of King Edward II of England.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
Dear Leo,
Not a good one. It may well have been in Ripley`s Believe It
or not. I purchased several compiled books of their Sunday syndicated
newspaper strips many years ago. Given the usual Spanish religious fervor I would not
be suprised if it were in fact the truth. Why not given that noble and less
than noble families named children after Kings, their consorts and various
feudal superiors just to get on their good side. not that such strategy was
universal or infalliable.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
Not a good one. It may well have been in Ripley`s Believe It
or not. I purchased several compiled books of their Sunday syndicated
newspaper strips many years ago. Given the usual Spanish religious fervor I would not
be suprised if it were in fact the truth. Why not given that noble and less
than noble families named children after Kings, their consorts and various
feudal superiors just to get on their good side. not that such strategy was
universal or infalliable.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Leo van de Pas
Re: Naming customs
I was curious as afterwards Marie needed all the holy intervention she could
muster, even by going to the pope, to remain queen has her husband had taken
a dislike to her and their child and wanted to make his brother his heir.
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jwc1870@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 6:57 AM
Subject: Re: Naming customs
muster, even by going to the pope, to remain queen has her husband had taken
a dislike to her and their child and wanted to make his brother his heir.
Leo
----- Original Message -----
From: <Jwc1870@aol.com>
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 6:57 AM
Subject: Re: Naming customs
Dear Leo,
Not a good one. It may well have been in Ripley`s Believe
It
or not. I purchased several compiled books of their Sunday syndicated
newspaper strips many years ago. Given the usual Spanish religious fervor
I would not
be suprised if it were in fact the truth. Why not given that noble and
less
than noble families named children after Kings, their consorts and various
feudal superiors just to get on their good side. not that such strategy
was
universal or infalliable.
Sincerely,
James W Cummings
Dixmont, Maine USA
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
In a message dated 10/1/2005 1:27:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
volucris@chello.nl writes:
Provide an example where the eldest son is named for the paternal grandfather
and the second son is named for the maternal grandfather. You said this "is
a fact" as you put it. So it should be quite simple for you to provide
examples in the dozens. I'm just waiting to see them. Otherwise your "fact" is
based on your own pre-conceived notions and not on actual known facts at all.
Will Johnson
volucris@chello.nl writes:
The examples of the counts with the known wives (and their fathers
name) and the names and order of their children within the household
are clear to me but you won't see.
Provide an example where the eldest son is named for the paternal grandfather
and the second son is named for the maternal grandfather. You said this "is
a fact" as you put it. So it should be quite simple for you to provide
examples in the dozens. I'm just waiting to see them. Otherwise your "fact" is
based on your own pre-conceived notions and not on actual known facts at all.
Will Johnson
-
Gjest
Re: Naming customs
In a message dated 10/1/2005 1:27:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
volucris@chello.nl writes:
Straw-man argument as we say in English.
We are not discussing "articles in Dutch" but rather the known genealogy of
known lines. Doesn't require vast amounts of verbage to outline a simple known
family that we all can investigate together.
Will
volucris@chello.nl writes:
How's your Dutch and German? I can try and round up a couple of
articles and send you of copy of those.
Straw-man argument as we say in English.
We are not discussing "articles in Dutch" but rather the known genealogy of
known lines. Doesn't require vast amounts of verbage to outline a simple known
family that we all can investigate together.
Will
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Naming customs
<WJhonson@aol.com> wrote in message news:15b.5a8459fd.3070913e@aol.com...
The view taken by Hans can probably be supported by many examples ofer
several generations - but that doesn't mean the custom was strictly observed
in the medieval era, much less at all times & in all places.
To take one family where the births are pretty well known, whose naming
practice would have been highly influential whether this followed convention
or not, chronologically and geographically close to the centre of the period
and of European culture, the Robertians & early Capetians:
Robert the Strong had two sons, Odo and Robert. His ancestry is not
definitely proved, but his father was almost certainly not named Odo like
the elder of his sons.
Odo's only recorded son was named Guido, not Robert after his father, but
this child's legitimacy is not certain.
The younger son was King Robert I, and his only son was named Hugo (bynamed
Magnus), evidently from a cognatic connection.
Hugo Magnus had three legitimate sons, the eldest named Hugo (Capet) after
himself and not Robert after his father.
Hugo Capet's only son was named Robert after the child's great-grandfather,
not Hugo after his paternal grandfather.
The younger sons of Hugo Magnus were named Otto and Odo Henry, both from
names in their mother's family - however, her father was Emperor Henry I so
that only the second name of her third son came from this source. Otto/Odo
came from her brother, Emperor Otto I.
Hugo Capet's son King Robert II had four sons, named in order Hugo after his
father (but also called Hugo Magnus, from Robert's grandfather), Henry after
his youngest uncle, Robert after himself, and Odo after his elder uncle.
Henry succeeded as king, and had three sons: the first was given the exotic
name Philip for reasons that had nothing to do with agnatic ancestry; the
second was Robert after the paternal grandfather, and the third was Hugo
Magnus after the paternal great-great-grandfather.
Philip named his sons Louis, another non-dynastic choice (from the heir of
Charlemagne), Henry after his father, and then Florius and Odo.
The sons of Louis were Philip, after his father, Louis, after himself, then
Hugo, Henry, Robert, Peter, and lastly another Philip.
It might be argued that the names of maternal grandfathers were less likely
to be used in a royal line than amongst the nobility, but there is no firm
ground for this when some cognatic names are used and exotic names are
brought in to break the hereditary patterns anyway.
I defy anyone to show a consistent set of rules in the names of this
pre-eminent lineage, or to explain away the anomalies in every generation on
the basis of infant mortality. If they didn't obey rules, why would their
courtiers and vassals be expected to do so rigorously?
Peter Stewart
In a message dated 10/1/2005 1:27:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
volucris@chello.nl writes:
How's your Dutch and German? I can try and round up a couple of
articles and send you of copy of those.
Straw-man argument as we say in English.
We are not discussing "articles in Dutch" but rather the known genealogy
of
known lines. Doesn't require vast amounts of verbage to outline a simple
known
family that we all can investigate together.
The view taken by Hans can probably be supported by many examples ofer
several generations - but that doesn't mean the custom was strictly observed
in the medieval era, much less at all times & in all places.
To take one family where the births are pretty well known, whose naming
practice would have been highly influential whether this followed convention
or not, chronologically and geographically close to the centre of the period
and of European culture, the Robertians & early Capetians:
Robert the Strong had two sons, Odo and Robert. His ancestry is not
definitely proved, but his father was almost certainly not named Odo like
the elder of his sons.
Odo's only recorded son was named Guido, not Robert after his father, but
this child's legitimacy is not certain.
The younger son was King Robert I, and his only son was named Hugo (bynamed
Magnus), evidently from a cognatic connection.
Hugo Magnus had three legitimate sons, the eldest named Hugo (Capet) after
himself and not Robert after his father.
Hugo Capet's only son was named Robert after the child's great-grandfather,
not Hugo after his paternal grandfather.
The younger sons of Hugo Magnus were named Otto and Odo Henry, both from
names in their mother's family - however, her father was Emperor Henry I so
that only the second name of her third son came from this source. Otto/Odo
came from her brother, Emperor Otto I.
Hugo Capet's son King Robert II had four sons, named in order Hugo after his
father (but also called Hugo Magnus, from Robert's grandfather), Henry after
his youngest uncle, Robert after himself, and Odo after his elder uncle.
Henry succeeded as king, and had three sons: the first was given the exotic
name Philip for reasons that had nothing to do with agnatic ancestry; the
second was Robert after the paternal grandfather, and the third was Hugo
Magnus after the paternal great-great-grandfather.
Philip named his sons Louis, another non-dynastic choice (from the heir of
Charlemagne), Henry after his father, and then Florius and Odo.
The sons of Louis were Philip, after his father, Louis, after himself, then
Hugo, Henry, Robert, Peter, and lastly another Philip.
It might be argued that the names of maternal grandfathers were less likely
to be used in a royal line than amongst the nobility, but there is no firm
ground for this when some cognatic names are used and exotic names are
brought in to break the hereditary patterns anyway.
I defy anyone to show a consistent set of rules in the names of this
pre-eminent lineage, or to explain away the anomalies in every generation on
the basis of infant mortality. If they didn't obey rules, why would their
courtiers and vassals be expected to do so rigorously?
Peter Stewart
-
butlergrt
Re: Re: Naming customs,A Tool Only
Good Morning Will et al,
I, too, use the old naming custom, but more as a tool not as an absolute,
nothing about humans is absolute, other than birth and death. I think the
term "scientific method" is bandied to much and in history and family
studies. I think the term "methodical sleuthing" might be more
appropriate.
I can say from experience that using the name of the 2nd son on the
suspicioned mother/wife did indeed HELP in a few particular cases by
verifying the mother's father and supporting documentation by the use of
this method.
I can also say that the MAJORITY of times it did not! Use it only as a
tool, nothing wrong with that!!!
There does seem to be with-in certain early time periods amongst certain
family groups, that patterns appear with regularity, with some variations,
and by studying the family, it can help, but that too is only a tool.
While understanding the neccessity of 'as correct statements'(i.e. the
rhetorical word 'FACT') as possibly to convey one's meaning to the
greatest number of individuals, one must be careful to not becoming to
caught up in verbage and see what the "intent" is/was and move forward.
Best Regards,
Emmett
I, too, use the old naming custom, but more as a tool not as an absolute,
nothing about humans is absolute, other than birth and death. I think the
term "scientific method" is bandied to much and in history and family
studies. I think the term "methodical sleuthing" might be more
appropriate.
I can say from experience that using the name of the 2nd son on the
suspicioned mother/wife did indeed HELP in a few particular cases by
verifying the mother's father and supporting documentation by the use of
this method.
I can also say that the MAJORITY of times it did not! Use it only as a
tool, nothing wrong with that!!!
There does seem to be with-in certain early time periods amongst certain
family groups, that patterns appear with regularity, with some variations,
and by studying the family, it can help, but that too is only a tool.
While understanding the neccessity of 'as correct statements'(i.e. the
rhetorical word 'FACT') as possibly to convey one's meaning to the
greatest number of individuals, one must be careful to not becoming to
caught up in verbage and see what the "intent" is/was and move forward.
Best Regards,
Emmett
-
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Re: Naming customs
In message of 2 Oct, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote:
<snip of superb disproof of a general rule>
This is getting close to a new version of the Cretan liar paradox:
"The general rule is that there are no general rules"
(I am rapidly coming to believe the truth of it nevertheless, or at
least in the field of genealogy.)
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
<snip of superb disproof of a general rule>
I defy anyone to show a consistent set of rules in the names of this
pre-eminent lineage, or to explain away the anomalies in every generation on
the basis of infant mortality. If they didn't obey rules, why would their
courtiers and vassals be expected to do so rigorously?
This is getting close to a new version of the Cretan liar paradox:
"The general rule is that there are no general rules"
(I am rapidly coming to believe the truth of it nevertheless, or at
least in the field of genealogy.)
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe tim@powys.org
For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org
-
Peter Stewart
Re: Naming customs
"Tim Powys-Lybbe" <tim@powys.org> wrote in message
news:7fe47db34d.tim@south-frm.demon.co.uk...
Yes, people are like that - i.e. not exactly like each other.
In a recent article in 'Foundations', chock-full of careless (and worse than
careless) errors, David Kelley made the peculiar claim that only "positive"
evidence from onomastics can be held to count, while "negative" evidence is
meaningless.
In other words, only when a recognised pattern of names is present can any
valid conclusion be drawn, such as (usually) linking that generation to a
particular ancestry or set of relationships that would be otherwise lacking
for evidence. Consequently, when a lineage is found to import names that
can't be explained by the immediate ancestry, this tells us nothing.
But of course it tells us that "positive" evidence can't be trusted either,
since if new names can be adopted on a whim at the expense of ingerited ones
this could just as well be happening with patterns of names.
When a feudatory wished to curry favour with his lord or lady, or anyone
else, or simply lay claim to some generally forgotten grandeur of pedigree,
the naming of offspring was an obvious way to get these messages across.
Once started, there is no reason to stop at one child.
Sometimes we are actually told that this happened, as with Bodo of
Metz-le-Comte, ancestor of the counts of Nevers, who apparently belonged to
a line of lords named Landric but was explicitly named after his godfather
instead of a blood relative.
Dogmatic statements have been made about consistency in name-stock within
kinship groups ever since the idea was first taken up, but these frequently
turn out to be ill-founded.
Even in the earlier medieval period when meaningful name elements were
joined together in Frankish practice, it can be foolhardy to assign this
sort of onomastic inheritance to bloodlines without other evidence. For
starters, we don't know enough about social mobility: sources clearly
indicate that names filtered downwards in socio-economic levels, but we are
not told - or likely to learn - the rate at which they also returned or
infiltrated upwards.
Peter Stewart
news:7fe47db34d.tim@south-frm.demon.co.uk...
In message of 2 Oct, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@msn.com> wrote:
snip of superb disproof of a general rule
I defy anyone to show a consistent set of rules in the names of this
pre-eminent lineage, or to explain away the anomalies in every generation
on
the basis of infant mortality. If they didn't obey rules, why would their
courtiers and vassals be expected to do so rigorously?
This is getting close to a new version of the Cretan liar paradox:
"The general rule is that there are no general rules"
(I am rapidly coming to believe the truth of it nevertheless, or at
least in the field of genealogy.)
Yes, people are like that - i.e. not exactly like each other.
In a recent article in 'Foundations', chock-full of careless (and worse than
careless) errors, David Kelley made the peculiar claim that only "positive"
evidence from onomastics can be held to count, while "negative" evidence is
meaningless.
In other words, only when a recognised pattern of names is present can any
valid conclusion be drawn, such as (usually) linking that generation to a
particular ancestry or set of relationships that would be otherwise lacking
for evidence. Consequently, when a lineage is found to import names that
can't be explained by the immediate ancestry, this tells us nothing.
But of course it tells us that "positive" evidence can't be trusted either,
since if new names can be adopted on a whim at the expense of ingerited ones
this could just as well be happening with patterns of names.
When a feudatory wished to curry favour with his lord or lady, or anyone
else, or simply lay claim to some generally forgotten grandeur of pedigree,
the naming of offspring was an obvious way to get these messages across.
Once started, there is no reason to stop at one child.
Sometimes we are actually told that this happened, as with Bodo of
Metz-le-Comte, ancestor of the counts of Nevers, who apparently belonged to
a line of lords named Landric but was explicitly named after his godfather
instead of a blood relative.
Dogmatic statements have been made about consistency in name-stock within
kinship groups ever since the idea was first taken up, but these frequently
turn out to be ill-founded.
Even in the earlier medieval period when meaningful name elements were
joined together in Frankish practice, it can be foolhardy to assign this
sort of onomastic inheritance to bloodlines without other evidence. For
starters, we don't know enough about social mobility: sources clearly
indicate that names filtered downwards in socio-economic levels, but we are
not told - or likely to learn - the rate at which they also returned or
infiltrated upwards.
Peter Stewart