U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-26-2013, 03:18 PM
 
10,148 posts, read 13,838,845 times
Reputation: 4567

Advertisements

John Doe was born in 1916 and died in 2004.
John Doe, Jr. was born in 1937 and died in 2007.
John Doe IV was born in 1960.

Why is there no John Doe III?
Not a puzzle, don't know the answer.

Could John, Jr. have had twins and one was the 3rd and one the 4th?

John, Jr. birth and death dates are verified as correct.
As are John Doe (the John Doe assumed to be John Doe, Sr.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-26-2013, 06:49 PM
 
Location: Canada
3,675 posts, read 2,482,456 times
Reputation: 4734
Perhaps John Doe IV had an older brother, John Doe III, who died as a baby before John Doe IV was born.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2013, 10:21 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,498 posts, read 26,089,700 times
Reputation: 26457
Perhaps the John Doe III is the son of a different son of John Doe, Sr.?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffix_(name)

"Alternatively, "II" is used instead of junior. A notable example of this is U.S. President Barack Obama, who was named after his father, and whose birth certificate shows Barack Hussein Obama II.[1] However, the relative may also be an uncle, cousin, brother, or grandfather. The suffix "III" is used after either Jr or II and like subsequent numeric suffixes, does not need to happen in one family line. For example, if John and Bob Gruber are brothers and if Bob has a son before John, he will call his son John, II. If John now has a son, his son is John, Jr. As time passes, the III suffix goes to the first born of either John Jr or John II. This is how it is possible and correct for a Jr. to father a IV."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2013, 10:40 PM
bjh
 
Location: Memphis - home of the king
26,094 posts, read 22,785,932 times
Reputation: 119716
Quote:
Originally Posted by cdnirene View Post
Perhaps John Doe IV had an older brother, John Doe III, who died as a baby before John Doe IV was born.
Possibly.

Or maybe they ahve the wrong John Doe IV. Maybe he's not related to I and II.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 08:13 AM
 
10,148 posts, read 13,838,845 times
Reputation: 4567
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjh View Post
Possibly.

Or maybe they ahve the wrong John Doe IV. Maybe he's not related to I and II.
It's the right John IV. That is part of his name and confirmed.
There may have been a mistake on the birth certificate. Maybe it had III but the 2nd two II's were slanted and looked like a V.
He is related to I and II, the name is not so common.
John Doe was used to protect the family's privacy.

The birth years of 1916, 1937 and 1960 are all appropriate time frames for parenthood.
Jr. born when Sr. was 21, and John IV born when Jr. was 23. Nothing out of the ordinary on ages when born.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 11:19 AM
 
10,148 posts, read 13,838,845 times
Reputation: 4567
A family member has said that John Jr. born 1937 was actually the III.
(the Jr. was a nickname)

So, the one born in 1916 was John II (John Jr.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2013, 06:56 PM
 
Location: 5,400 feet
2,199 posts, read 2,272,314 times
Reputation: 2840
Quote:
Originally Posted by howard555 View Post
A family member has said that John Jr. born 1937 was actually the III.
(the Jr. was a nickname)

So, the one born in 1916 was John II (John Jr.)
My FIL was always called junior because he and others presumed that he had the same name as his father. Research has shown he was wrong and not a junior.

Also, I have several ancestors with same names, but few bothered to attach juniors, 3s or 4s. I have to keep careful attention to dates when researching them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2013, 04:14 AM
 
Location: Pacific NW
6,415 posts, read 10,037,563 times
Reputation: 5779
That it's more modern makes somewhat of a difference. In earlier times, calling someone Jr. and Sr. did not necessarily mean they were related. It meant one was older and one younger. That can be misleading in the records.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2013, 08:55 PM
Status: "happy again, no longer catless! t...." (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Cushing OK
14,421 posts, read 16,686,996 times
Reputation: 16425
With child mortality so high, it was not unusual for children who died to have their later siblings named the same. One line in my family literally has a 'John' in each generation who grew up. Several have three children named John. When they died the next boy was John.

Harriet Beacher Stowe wrote Uncle Tom's Cabin after the lost of a beloved todder, connecting her loss with the loss of a slave woman's child. Her next son was named the same as the lost child. I think the idea in that time was to honor the dead by giving their name to a child who might live.

I wonder if the numbering is added simply as a way to differenchiate when children were born for record keepers rather than them be actively used.

Today we tend to not rename another child after a deceased one because its too much grief. But then, the death rate of children was so high they had to learn how to cope since it was more than likely there would be at least one in a typical family.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2013, 01:25 PM
 
Location: Palm Coast FL
1,046 posts, read 1,988,286 times
Reputation: 1437
Could there have been an earlier John Doe? The Srand Jr titles change as people die. They don't stay with you for life. JR could have been III but become Jr when his grandfather died.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top