Comments on: Names From… John Tyler, 10th President of the United States

By: esmesqualor

esmesqualor — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 17:34:29 +0000

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!

By: appellationmountain

appellationmountain — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 04:12:29 +0000

Oh, I think there have always been nameniks out there. They just didn’t have the internet.

By: Paige

Paige — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:33:52 +0000

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!

By: appellationmountain

appellationmountain — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 15:24:25 +0000

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.

By: Baby Name Brainstorm

Baby Name Brainstorm — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 06:36:32 +0000

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’.

By: Paige

Paige — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 05:02:47 +0000

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?

By: Lola

Lola — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 03:29:03 +0000

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!

By: appellationmountain

appellationmountain — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:41:46 +0000

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.