1. Home
  2. Parenting & Family
  3. Genealogy
photo of Kimberly Powell

Kimberly's Genealogy Blog

By Kimberly Powell, About.com Guide to Genealogy since 2000

Jr. or II?

Monday June 19, 2006
In the About Genealogy forum this week, a reader explains that she wants to name her son after her husband's great-great grandfather - a wonderful way to honor his ancestor! The question, however, is whether this would make their son a II - Jacob Miles Burnum or Jacob Miles Burnum II?

In my experience, the use of the term II generally indicates a son who has been named after a family member other than their father, such as a grandfather or an uncle. It is also sometimes used to identify the second male in a line of three with that name, although in that case Junior is usually the preferred term. As to whether it is required or not, I would tend to believe that it isn't. Terms such as Junior, II, III, etc. came into use to distinguish between two family members with the same name, generally implying that these family members are all still living. I believe in the case of little Jacob Miles Burnum, since the ancestor in question is five generations back in the family tree, it is really a matter of personal preference - the II being a formal way to indicate that there was a first, but not required since the great, great grandfather is long deceased.

I'm not an expert in naming etiquette, however, so here's what others have to say on the subject:

From Behind the Name - "Junior is used to distinguish a son with the same name as his father. The following conditions apply:

  1. The Junior must be a son of the father, not a grandson.
  2. The names must be exactly the same, including the middle name.
  3. The father must still be living.

'II' is used whenever any close relative, including for example a grandfather or a great-uncle, shares the same name as the child."

Of course, there are also many who argue whether people move up the ladder as family members die i.e. Junior becomes Senior when the father dies, and III becomes Junior. Some, such as Miss Manners, say that yes, everyone does move up a notch [Martin, Judith. Miss Manners’ Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior. Warner Books (1982)] , while others insist that your formal name, including the suffix, does not change. But that's a discussion for another day...

Do you have a comment or preference on the subject? Click on "comments" below and tell us what you think!

Comments

June 19, 2006 at 5:57 pm
(1) Scott Salberg says:

See here:

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

As to “moving up” — I would suggest against this. I have a friend who carries the suffix “IV” (4th). This is what appears on his legal documents, etc. His father was “III” and now deceased, and the two previous are also deceased, so my friend, if he were to “move up”, would be the 1st. That wouldn’t seem quite right, would it? There are some with the suffix of Jr. who don’t wish to be known as that any longer, and that is a matter of personal choice — if they don’t care for the system, they likely didn’t name a child after themselves. (You might take a cue from monarchs who take a suffix if they use the same name as a previous monarch.)

June 19, 2006 at 5:59 pm
(2) Scott Salberg says:

The link to Wikipedia above: you need to copy and paste into browser — the URL includes that whole line, including the parentheses around the word (name).

June 19, 2006 at 11:27 pm
(3) Homer A. says:

If everone moves up like that,then how
does their past records change?
Do we have to get the names on the
headstones changed for past generations
Personally I dont think past Aunts,Uncles,Cousins,Grandparents &
GGrandparents

June 20, 2006 at 10:22 am
(4) Raymond T. Wing says:

It is my understanding that in modern times, the Suffix “Sr.” “Jr.” “II” “III” etc. are part of a person’s legal name. As such, the name cannot legally be changed without (I believe) a court order. This process likely varies, depending on what state (or country) you live in.

June 20, 2006 at 7:44 pm
(5) Joanna Wallbillich says:

Genealogy speaking … it would be quite confusing if one were to “move up.” I have five Charles in one of my branches — I have them figured because I gave them Sr., Jr., III, IV, and V. I’ve seen many mistakes by other genealogists, sometimes the III is listed as Sr., other times the V is listed as Jr. My vote would be to keep the original name.

June 21, 2006 at 8:06 am
(6) phil w says:

I think using the name would be a fine way to honor the ancestor,but the fact that there are others in the line who could also use this name,would make it improper to use the ” II “.

January 18, 2008 at 12:23 pm
(7) Damien says:

Does any one know what a “Jr. II” is? How can one be a junior and the second at the same time? I saw this today on the Red Cross website, when registering they ask for a suffix and they have “jr II” listed as an option. What the hell is it?

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

Explore Genealogy

More from About.com

  1. Home
  2. Parenting & Family
  3. Genealogy

©2008 About.com, a part of The New York Times Company.

All rights reserved.