Don't assume Jr. and Sr. are related to each other in 18th century and before

+14 votes

Didn't realize this until today:

Which cites in part:

  • For a classic dissertation about these terms and others, see George E. McCracken, "Terms of Relationship in Colonial Times" in The American Genealogist, 55 (1979): 52-54.

And see also the related page:

It's so easy to assume modern conventions when researching, nice to be reminded of this here and it explains Robert Woodson, Jr., son of John Woodson, Sr., which I was scratching my head about earlier today!

WikiTree profile: Robert Woodson
in Genealogy Help by William Foster G2G6 Pilot (111k points)
edited by William Foster
@Ellen, seems your edits removed all the external links.  Was that intentional?
AARGH! No, it wasn't intentional. That happened when I edited your question from my Android smartphone. I've encountered this bug before (and I reported it), but I forgot that I shouldn't edit G2G content with links when using my phone.
I restored two of the links I broke. (Were there others?) You have my apologies.
No problem, just didn't want to change it back without understanding.

1 Answer

+4 votes
Very helpful.  I knew that at some point, but I tend to forget to apply that while researching.
by Edie Kohutek G2G6 Mach 8 (86.4k points)

Related questions

+4 votes
2 answers
+1 vote
5 answers
+7 votes
2 answers
327 views asked Sep 7, 2019 in Genealogy Help by Chase Ashley G2G6 Pilot (253k points)
+6 votes
3 answers
165 views asked Dec 2, 2018 in Policy and Style by Stormy Faw G2G5 (5.1k points)
+2 votes
1 answer
100 views asked Jan 11, 2020 in Policy and Style by Helmut Jungschaffer G2G6 Pilot (551k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright