View Message

[Facts] Germanic name suffix not noted (archaic) ?
In doing genealogical research, I've come accross a practice that appears to have been popular in the 17th and 18th centuries (maybe earlier, who knows). I'll give an example and then pose my question.One particular family (from which I appear to descend):Johannes Spader (b ~ 1671) married a Sophia Koppel (born roughly the same time)They had 8 children that I'm aware of, however only the first 4 are significant to my inquiry.They were:
1) Johann Henricus Spader - b 2/16/1692
2) Johann Wilhelmus Spader - b 5/6/1695
3) Johann Daniel Spader - b 10/3/1697
4) Johann Wilhelm Spader - b 10/4/1700After, ignoring the first name (saint name?) I'm wondering about the "-us" suffix on the actual name they used that differentiates Child 2 from Child 4. I do not have the death date of Wilhelmus and, therefore,do not know if this particular family group practiced the (now) odd custom of reusing a sibling's name if the first child died young. It seems, though, that this particular usage was meant to suggest a difference between two living children, with the not-so subtle distinction of the suffix.Any thoughts?
vote up1vote down

Messages

Germanic name suffix not noted (archaic) ?  ·  John Hausmann  ·  6/10/2002, 9:07 PM
Re: Germanic name suffix not noted (archaic) ?  ·  Mike C  ·  6/11/2002, 2:39 AM
Re: Germanic name suffix not noted (archaic) ?  ·  Barb  ·  6/11/2002, 8:49 PM