Elder?
I ask as my son, myself, and my dad --and dead grand-dad-- all have the same first and last name. I’m a 3rd if that helps.
It goes:
Senior
Junior
III
IV
And so on, with the very first “John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt” being termed “John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, Sr.” upon the birth of a son and the decision to name the little tyke after his dad; the son is therefore “John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, Jr.” and his son (if he decides to maintain the tradition) is “John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt III”. Note that therefore no one is born a “senior”; the title is bestowed retroactively, as it were. If the name skips generations, I believe “I” and “II” would be used–John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt I is father to Ralph Schmidt, who names his boy, John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt II, after the boy’s grandfather. I think the same also applies to uncle-nephew pairs.
Some people claim that when John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, Sr., dies, everyone else re-sets–John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, Jr. becomes John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, Sr. and John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt III becomes John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt, Jr. Ignore these people, as what they propose makes no sense whatsover.
I’m a “III” and used that suffix while my dad “Jr” was alive but seldom use it not that he’s gone. At one point in my early adulthood there were three of us in the same phone book so it helped reduce confusion.
“Trip” short for Triple. I wouldn’t really want to be IV.
Miss Manners (Judith Martin) is the only person I’ve ever heard advocating the “everyone moves up” rule. I suspect it comes from the idea (presumably misguided) that, since no one is born a “Senior,” all such suffixes are merely labels of convenience, and that all men in the family are actually named simply “John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt” on their official records. IOW, “Junior” and “Senior” are simply synonyms for “the older one” and “the younger one.” Since it would be presumptuous to assume that anyone had confused you with your 20-years-deceased great grandfather (and a bit silly to refer to him as “the older one” when he’s dead) it makes sense in that context to limit the system to those still living and likely to be confused.
In actuality, birth certificates, drivers licences, etc., all have spaces for suffixes (though “Sr.” still won’t appear on a birth certificate, obviously) and you’re inviting extraordinary legal, financial and business difficulties of you ignore them or use them inconsistently when they apply.
Bill Gates III, the founder of Microsoft, is the fourth person in his family to be called William Henry Gates. His father, who is now called Bill Gates, Sr., was called Bill Gates, Jr. until later in his life, so at least some families follow the practice Miss Manners described (see Bill Gates Sr. - Wikipedia. and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gates_family).
Well, Miss Manners and Yours Truly. You are *only *Ferd Berfel III if your father and grandfather are still living (or if you are a member of the Berfel Royal Family or the amazingly famous Berfel acting clan).
Once Grandfather Berfel dies, you become Ferd Berfel, Jr. Otherwise you will eventually wind up with Ferd Berfel XVIII.
Isn’t that the point of these naming schemes?
Plus, I can’t imagine how much confusion there would be when the suffixes shifted. Everyone at work knows your full name as John Jingleheimer III and now you want to be known as Jr. and 10 years later, you’re going to change it again to Sr.?
I knew a family who had a fifth generation boy with a family name. They called him Nickle.
I would have been a IV if I had been born a boy. My grandfather later said it was a good thing I wasn’t since, “we’re not rich enough for you to be a IV.” 
That was the whole point–the changing of the guard, a passing of the torch and all that. It was supposed to be a meaningful family moment when someone died and Jr. became Sr., and III became Jr.
These days with the sheer amount of data collection, if people follw the “move up” scheme, it is going to cause horrendous confusion on credit reports and such.
I knew someone who named her son Jon Jones II because she didn’t want him to be nicknamed Junior. He wound up with the name Tooey. Trey is a common nickname for the IIIs.
It’s not the point of them at all, but still, you really never seen anyone who is past IV, and those are rare. If a family has a tradition of naming the first son after the father, and the suffixes are actually part of the name you should eventually end up with John Jingleheimer X and XX
Do most people use those suffixes at work when the other suffix-holders don’t work for the same company or at least in the same field? In my experience, Sr., Junior, II or III are used when both are likely to be known by the same people- either socially, they work for the same company or in the same field, belong to the same organization or because both are well known. I’ve known plenty of people at work with same-named sons and same-named fathers , but I’ve only known one who sort of used the suffix at work. He apparently used it on the personnel paperwork, which automatically meant that his computer entries would have that name, but he did not use it when writing memos, reports ,etc.
Oh and about the data collection- if different birth dates and SSN’s aren’t enough to keep them straight, using or not using a suffix won’t make a difference.
This is absolutely correct. I have to keep an eye on my credit report as they still get my dad and I confused. Even though they should pick up on a credit card with AMEX that was opened before I was born, they don’t.
Any ways, I elected to not put him down as anything like Jr, Sr, IV, etc. on his birth certificate. Because, if you do, as I learned from being a Jr., you have to use it all the time or it throws the credit bureaus off. I was curious for informal titles.
FYI: He’ll be called by his middle name.
Well, I know a family that had three generations of Bobs (at least), I don’t recall them ever using Jr. or Sr. 1st gen was Big Bob, though that could have had more to do with his weight. 3rd gen is known as Re-Bob 
Here’s how it works, and what Miss Manners is trying to get across:
[ol]
[li]A man is named Casey Jones.[/li][li]Casey Jones has a son, Casey Jones, who is known as Casey Jones, Jr. The man named Casey Jones, the father, is still Casey Jones.[/li][li]Casey Jones, Jr. has a son named Casey Jones; he is called Casey Jones, III. The grandfather is still just Casey Jones.[/li][li]The first man, Casey Jones, dies. His wife becomes Mrs. Casey Jones, Sr. Casey Jones, Jr. is now called Casey Jones, and Casey Jones, III is now called Casey Jones, Jr.[/li][li]The stationary is passed down.[/li][/ol]
Now you know.
My Dad’s name is James William Smith.
My brother’s name is James Edwin Smith.
My son (a teenager) is named James William Smith.
When my son works for the family business my payroll-executing sister makes his paycheque out to
James William Smith Jr.
I’ve never mentioned it to her, but does this sound correct? My Dad also receives paycheques, so perhaps this is simply a way to avoid confusion.
It’s how it’s done in Spain, but then, we also don’t consider the addendums to be part of the person’s name - it’s a secondary identifier like, say, Doctor; you’ll never see it in a business card or company listing. People only use it when there’s a possibility of confussion. Say that a family has three generations of Roberto Pérez; on a business card or listing, the second name will separate them; in an informal context and if they don’t have nicknames, people will use the generational identifier.
So when I write my history of the Casey Jones family, I can continually refer to each of my subjects as Casey Jones, Sr., depending on what year I’m writing about?
“In 1924, Casey, Sr., boarded a boat to New York… Then, in 1974, Casey, Sr. rewrote his will to leave his pen collection to his son… In 1992, Casey, Sr. inherited the pen collection, which in 2020, was passed down again to Casey, Sr. Finally, in 2041, Casey, Sr. wrote a biography of his father, Casey, Sr., in which his father spoke of the excitement of his forefather, Casey, Sr., as he arrived in New York so long ago.”
What I want to know is why this only seems to be done in America. If I see a name like John Jingleheimer III, I immediately assume he is American. In Britain, people are sometimes informally referred to as “John junior”, but never as part of the name, and I don’t think I’ve seen Roman numerals used.
Anyway, surely the solution to stop names like Frank Furtlefarmer LXXIV is to go for a “Plan B” name every four or five generations, to reset the numbering?
Do it whatever way you want. I know a III that used the term ‘cubed’. I also know several Juniors who switch to using their middle name or a nickname and skip the Jr. altogether.