PDA

View Full Version : suffix use of Jr and Sr (for Junior and Senior)


Dinee
16 April 2007, 10:37 PM
My grandfather had the suffix of Sr. behind his name and his son has the suffix of Jr behind his name. Their first and last name were the same, yet their middle name was different.

I thought one had to have the same first, middle and last name in order to be referred to as a Jr. or a Sr.

Can anyone educate me a bit on this subject? :)

Thanks in advance!

Grampa Mike
17 April 2007, 03:58 PM
My grandfather had the suffix of Sr. behind his name and his son has the suffix of Jr behind his name. Their first and last name were the same, yet their middle name was different.

I thought one had to have the same first, middle and last name in order to be referred to as a Jr. or a Sr.

Can anyone educate me a bit on this subject? :)

Thanks in advance!
My father and I have the same 1st and last names and the same middle initial. We were never referred to as Sr. and Jr. My oldest son has the exact same name as my father so we referred to him as II. Don't know if that is correct, but it worked for us.

Ronald N. Gowe
17 April 2007, 06:57 PM
My son and I have the same first and surnames; middle names different. In the beginning it was "little Ron" and "big Ron". As he ended up 4" taller and 100 lbs heavier, that was no longer appropriate. When persons are talking of us, they now refer to Ron Sr. or Ron Jr. but only when it is neccessary to distinguish which one they are talking of. That is why I make it a point to include my middle initial when writing; we do not use the Sr. or Jr. when writing. He had golf shirts embroidered with his company logo on the right and included the Sr. after my name, on the pocket, for use at trade shows, etc. but not the Jr. on his shirt.

Tom Robinson
17 April 2007, 07:08 PM
My grandfather had the suffix of Sr. behind his name and his son has the suffix of Jr behind his name. Their first and last name were the same, yet their middle name was different.
There's no hard-and-fast rule. See Wikipedia for a good summary ('Social' part of the article).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffix_%28name%29

AE Palmer
17 April 2007, 07:30 PM
My grandfather had the suffix of Sr. behind his name and his son has the suffix of Jr behind his name. Their first and last name were the same, yet their middle name was different.

I thought one had to have the same first, middle and last name in order to be referred to as a Jr. or a Sr.

Can anyone educate me a bit on this subject? :)

Thanks in advance!

Normally the use of Sr. & Jr. is informal and can be considered to be relative in nature. Consider the following situation: John Allen Doe becomes JAD, Sr. when he sires a son named John Allen Doe, Jr. When John Allen Doe, Jr. sires a son (also named) John Allen Doe (3rd). Who is Sr.? the grandfather or the father?

Also note that the same names (first, middle and last) are the used in this context. Sometimes, however, families break the rules and do like yours - skipping generations with exact name duplicates.

Thus, my basic rule of thumb is: When one has a single set (Jr. & Sr.) the use thereof is straightforward enough, but for genealogical record keeping, I find the use of roman numerals (I, II, III, ...) to be more useful. (I have one string with 5 generations of males with the same name!)

RCarruthers
18 April 2007, 01:19 AM
I was RTC Jr until RTC died and then I became RTC and he became (since he wasn't around to object) RTC Sr

Patrick Vijgeboom
11 May 2011, 03:22 PM
it is unfortunate that Reunion does not have a field for this. When you place a suffix after a last name it become part of the last name.

Deb
11 May 2011, 03:30 PM
it is unfortunate that Reunion does not have a field for this. When you place a suffix after a last name it become part of the last name.Actually, Reunion does have a suffix field for Jr and Sr. It can be accessed in the Edit Person window...

TeriPettit
18 May 2011, 10:08 PM
I thought one had to have the same first, middle and last name in order to be referred to as a Jr. or a Sr.

That is the most usual rule for formal etiquette, but when examining source records such as censuses, newspaper references, etc., it is important to keep in mind that formal etiquette rules did not usually guide how such suffixes were used in practice.

In many rural or small town communities, it was common to use "Sr" to refer to "the older one by that name" and "Jr" to refer to "the younger one by that name", even if the Sr and Jr were not father-son. They might be uncle-nephew, or cousins, or even unrelated. It was very often just a way to help narrow down who you were talking about. In that context, if someone didn't commonly use their middle name or middle initial as part of their everyday handle, then the Sr/Jr suffixes were a more helpful discriminator than middle initials that most people wouldn't recognize would be.

Failing to take this into account may cause researchers to infer relationships that did not in fact exist.

(A related convention in some communities was to refer to someone by appending their father's given name as if it were their middle name. For example, there are a trio of cousins in my database who were known as Bill John Dehart, Bill Steve Dehart and Bill Tom Dehart, even though their formal names were respectively William Paul Dehart, William Jefferson Dehart, and William Madison Dehart. But William Paul was John's son, William Jefferson was Steve's son, and William Madison was Tom's son. By appending the father's name, everyone knew immediately who was being spoken of, whereas remembering their actual middle names would have been harder. The informal designations even appear on censuses and other records such as marriage licenses.)

Allsop
20 May 2011, 01:25 AM
Interesting discussion, but in the UK Jr and Sr is very rarely used, if ever (I have never come across it in native British). What is more common in speech at least, especially in our Public Schools, is the suffixes Major, Minor and even Minimus for siblings at the same school at the same time.

kmgenealogy
20 May 2011, 03:32 AM
My grandfather, RBH Stroop, had a son who was also RBH Stroop (same names) so he became Jr. They both went by "Hayes", one of the names, although, once us grandkids started appearing, we all called grandpa "PapPap". Another of my grandfather's son's then had a son whom he named RBH Stroop, III. He was called "Bud" or "Buddy". They were all alive at the same time for a period of time. After grandpa died, Hayes & Bud still used those names...it was what everyone knew them by.

Having the Sr., Jr., I, II, etc. after the same names does help in genealogy research. However, as mentioned, one has to be careful not to put everyone in the same family line. To me, it helps separate out generations, no matter what line.

S. Kennedy
21 May 2011, 02:06 PM
In many rural or small town communities, it was common to use "Sr" to refer to "the older one by that name" and "Jr" to refer to "the younger one by that name", even if the Sr and Jr were not father-son. They might be uncle-nephew, or cousins, or even unrelated. It was very often just a way to help narrow down who you were talking about. In that context, if someone didn't commonly use their middle name or middle initial as part of their everyday handle, then the Sr/Jr suffixes were a more helpful discriminator than middle initials that most people wouldn't recognize would be.



For more than 100 years researchers in my family have been stumped by the lack of a possible father for John Church, Jr. as no suitable John Church (Sr.) could be located in the area. Though not proven, it appears that John Jr was the son of a Samuel Church that died while John, Jr. was still a minor and he was raised by relatives where there were several Johns that were not Churches. The Jr. was likely used to distinguish him from these relatives. At the time middle names were very rare (colonial CT).