Names From… John Tyler, 10th President of the United States
I specifically remember one occasion in school, many years ago, when I picked up and began reading a book on the presidents of the United States, which in addition to listing info about each man’s terms in office gave the names of their spouse(s) and child(ren). When I got to John Tyler, I was a little stunned. With two wives, Tyler had fifteen children, many of whom with interesting names. Without further discussion, I give you John Tyler’s children’s names.
1.Letitia Christian Tyler (1st wife)’s children with John Tyler are Mary through Tazewell.
2. Julia Gardiner Tyler (2nd wife)’s children with John Tyler are David throughPearl.
- Mary
- Robert
- John
- Letitia
- Elizabeth
- Anne Contesse
- Alice
- Tazewell
- David Gardiner
- John “Alex” Alexander
- Julia Gardiner
- Lachlan Gardiner
- Lyon Gardiner
- Robert “Fitz” Fitzwalter
- Pearl
The names in bold I thought were unusual/cool.
*NOTE: As I was researching the Tyler kids, I found that several of the daughters died young, a few of them in childbirth, and that many of the sons became doctors or surgeons. Curious.
Also, its odd that the first son Robert was in fact alive when the second son Robert was born and named. While I’ve heard of presidential parents naming their kids after their older siblings who have died, I have never heard of people doing it when the namesake was still living. Though the second Rob did go by Fitz, it still strikes me as not a very good thing to do to your children’s feelings of individuality.
Which are your favorites? Me, I’ve always liked Elizabeth, John, Robert, and Julia. But my favorites from each gender from this list are Pearl and Letitia for the girls, and Lachlan and David for the boys.
WDYT? Do you like this sibset, or was it wrong of the Tylers to pick such different names for their children? Which names are your faves?
appellationmountain said,
January 9, 2009 at 4:41 pm
Very interesting list! I wonder if the double Robert is because they were honoring two different men. Today I doubt parents would do that. Well … except for George Foreman.
I think the idea of naming children as individuals is relatively new, especially for boys and most especially for firstborn sons. David, for example, was Julia’s father’s name and Mary was John’s mother. (President Tyler was a junior himself, so his son John would’ve been the third.) I assume Tazewell, Lyon and Fitzwalter are all family names. And honestly, I love family names so much that I don’t mind when the names themselves are a little odd.
Lola said,
January 10, 2009 at 3:29 am
In a brood that size, individuality sort of flies out the window, My mother was the youngest of 8 and that was big enough that my Babci herded them into “girls” and “boys” and that was enough to keep them together! Verity’s got it pegged. Individuality in naming is a rather new concept, something I doubt even my grandparents thought at all about.
Letitia, Anne Contesse & Alice are my favorites from the girls and Double Robert, Double John & Lachlan from the boys. I love the zip of the Fitz- names but seeing as how Fitz- used to denote born illegitimately, I don’t know if I could bring myself to actually use one. But wow, Fitzwalter makes me heart pitterpat!
Paige said,
January 10, 2009 at 5:02 am
I didn’t even notice the double Johns!
The fact that individuality is so recent made me think about it… what time period exactly do you think it became commonplace to not just name your child after yourself or one of the top 5 names, but your favorite name?
Baby Name Brainstorm said,
January 10, 2009 at 6:36 am
It’s a very curious group indeed. It’s also interesting that so many of Julia’s children inherited her middle name (was it her maiden name?) but some did not. Pearl is quite the odd one out sitting on the end there without a middle name. It’s like she got a star-baby name like like ‘Cher’ or ‘Madonna’.
appellationmountain said,
January 10, 2009 at 3:24 pm
I think the idea that we’re always free to choose our children’s names from a nearly infinite list is very recent.
If I look at my own family, my mother’s Italian clan followed a strict pattern until around the 1960s. My dad’s family was never so formal, and gave their daughters fashionable names throughout the 20th century. But firstborn sons usually received a family name, and a few of the girls’ names were passed down, too.
Then again, there have always been innovators – the Puritans, the Victorians. And any family tree will have a few curiosities from way back when. So while there’s no dividing line, I still think the kinds of conversations we have about names are probably a 20th century phenomenon, if not even post-World War II.
Paige said,
January 10, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Gardiner was Julia’s maiden name, and it is strange that only some of her kids got it and some, like Pearl, did not.
Thanks for you’re insight on modern naming, Verity: now all I can think of is what we etymologists would’ve done for fun before WWII!
appellationmountain said,
January 11, 2009 at 4:12 am
Oh, I think there have always been nameniks out there. They just didn’t have the internet.
esmesqualor said,
February 6, 2009 at 5:34 pm
What an ecclectic group of names! I could never have that many children, but sometimes I long to just so I can name them all! Out of this list I love Mary, John, Elizabeth and Alice, and I like Robert, Letitia, Anne, David, Alexander, Julia and Pearl. And I can’t help thinking how awful it is to give two of your children the same name, even if one goes by something entirely different. Surely having your own name is a birth right!