Has there ever been someone named “________ the 20th” or something like that - that is, the same name used through 20 generations (the Sr., the Jr., the III, the IV, the V, etc.)?
The winner seems to be Prince Heinrich LXVII Reuss of Schleiz.
I don’t know why you stop at Heinrich LXVII, who had several sons named Heinrich, along with grandson and some great grandsons, including Heinrich XLV whose disappearance in a Soviet W.W. II prison camp may have spelled the extinction(?) of the Heinrichs von Reuss.
As implied by the fact that XLV was the great grandson of LXVII, the Reuss family didn’t use these suffixes as simple generation numbers. Nevertheless, I think you’ll need to go back about 22 generations from XLV to reach the first Heinrich, who decided to name all his sons after his liege lord, Emperor Henry IV. [cite: Wikipedia]
Because LXVII’s sons all had lower post-nominal numbers than he did.
The Reuss’s rebased their post nominal numbering at around the turn of each century. LXVII was born in 1789, towards the end of the eighteenth century, and his post-nominal reflects the large number of male-line family members already born in that century. They rebased the post-nominals for the next male to be born (who would have been a cousin of LXVII); he became Heinrich I. LXVII’s own sons were Heinrich V, Heinrich VI, Heinrich XI, Heinrich XIV and Heinrich XVI.
Nope, they’re not extinct.
Heinrich IV, Prince Reuss of Köstritz, died in 2012 and left the title to his son, Heinrich XIV, the current head of the house, who in turn has two sons: Heinrich XXIX (born 1997) and Heinrich V (born 2012). As his post-nominal indicates, the younger is the fifth Heinrich Reuss born in the 21st century, so the family is still going strong.
Numerals are used for deceased people pretty much only if the are kings, or otherwise so famous that there really is confusion about whom you are talking.
For everyone else, the rule is that numerals only apply to people who are living, so you are unlikely to see anything higher than a 5 in a living person. When the first dies, the second moves up and becomes the first, the third moves up and becomes the second (and if the first and second and father and son, with identical first an middle names, then they are “senior” and “junior”), and so forth.
^^Eh. . . . no. Not in the USA, at least, unless it’s some specific subculture that I haven’t encountered.
I don’t adhere to that rule. My birth name was “Firstname Firstmiddlename Secondmiddlename Lastname III”, and the fact that my father and grandfather are deceased isn’t going to stop me from using it. In the unlikely event that I ever spawn a male heir, he will be named “Firstname Firstmiddlename Secondmiddlename Lastname IV”.
You can make up whatever rules you like but if you are a Jr. when your dad dies you become a Sr. and if you’re a III you become Jr. ect.
That is not how it works with ANY of the people I know that have a suffix in their name. Can you imagine all the name changes that someone would have to go through? This is ludicrous.
The designation is not supposed to be on a birth certificate. It’s used to tell people apart with the same name. If you legally name someone Jr. then they don’t have the same name anyway. You might as well have named them George Jr. when their dads name was Peter.
Birth certificate applications in the US have a [place to record the suffix](Congratulations on your new baby! A son will have Jr. after his name if his first, middle, and last names are all exactly the same as the father’s.). This site explains it thusly:
And here is a link to a birth certificate application (PDF warning) from a Georgia hospital, which clearly shows a field for “Suffix”.
Technically, the rules of etiquette do specify that, upon the death of the senior holder of the name, all of the descendants get bumped up a notch. This rule is rarely used today, quite possibly because modern record-keeping would make it a friggin’ nightmare.
However, NO living male was EVER given the postnominal of “Sr.” Under the bump-up rule, when John Smith dies, his son, formerly John Smith Jr., becomes just plain John Smith, and his wife becomes just plain “Mrs. John Smith”. His mother, the late John Smith’s widow, becomes “Mrs. John Smith, Sr.”, to distinguish herself from her daughter-in-law.
I will say that US birth certificates are barely old enough to cover multiple generations so how they handle it is probably not the best source. But after doing a little research it is definitely not as cut and dried as I thought it was. I have found multiple articles supporting my idea that a Jr. becomes a Sr. upon the death of the senior but I admit this happens a lot less then I previously thought. I have found some suggestion that when the Sr. dies the Jr. drops from the son and I read an article on how when the Sr. dies he becomes the first; Jr. is the 2nd and so on. Now I’m more confused then ever.
I know someone who was born a “III”. III is actually on his birth certificate. He, however, ended up having daddy issues and went and changed his name to something else, ditching the “III” in the process.
Ms Hook once worked for a George Brook VI. I know he had at least one son so there may be a VII out there. Or an VIII since the possible VII is probably now in his late 30s.
Well, it IS the legal source. Now, there is no rule that I know of that says the suffix has to make sense - I could name my child Axlerod Fotheringay Humbolt VXIII and no one is going to check whether the appropriate number of A.F.H.'s existed prior, so a birth certificate record check won’t necessaryily help the OP.
Interestingly, though, the Social Security Administration does not use the suffix in assigning a SSN, only name, date of birth and parent names. I have no clue what they would do in the hypothetical case of twins born on the same day and given the same name with a different suffix - like John Jr. and John III.
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 (see Bill Gates Sr. - Wikipedia. and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gates_family).
That seems unnecessarily pretentious.
Here in Canada, it’s the same as indicated by RivkahChaya and BrotherCadfael.
If you tried introducing yourself as the Etc. Etc. the IVth here, you’d probably be met with a tight-lipped smile at best, and a sarcastic curtsy at worst.
This is the rule as our family has always followed/taught it. It’s especially important in our home area because almost everyone has our last names. Even within the clan nicknames there are multiple generations so you might Have Peter nickname, lastname III.
We have had a couple of reunions when there was a IVth in the mix, but I don’t think five generations alive at once has ever happened for us.
I agree.
Bolding mine. This is not true. If little John Smith III has come along before GrandPa dies, then he certainly becomes Jr., and his Papa becomes Sr.