I have never found it much use to rely on those 'patterns'. In my experience, for every example that fits I can find a couple that don't. For one thing, even if they may have tried to follow it, children often died young, so it didn't work out very well. But I think it is true that they were usually named for *somebody*. I do find that each family of mine has two or maybe three main names of males that they used over and over: my FRANKs were Jacob or Daniel, sometimes Peter, for generations on end. Now the immigrant was Jacob and his father back in Sinsheim was Peter and although I don't know where Daniel came from, once it came, it stuck. So when we get down to my greatgreat grandfather, whose older brother was duly named Daniel, suddenly out of the blue we have a Henry. So I think, "Henry??? My Franks are never named Henry." Eventually the penny drops - his maternal grandfather was Henry DIETRICH and those Dietrichs did go in for Henry. This is in the 1700s and early 1800s. And even then, in families that had 10 or 12 children, it is my impression that by the end they were just using the widely available names. But most of mine did not have very many. By the mid-1800s all bets are off in my experience and names started to get rather, er, fanciful. The sons of the above Henry, born in the 1830s and 40s, were named Henry Jr, Uriah Elijah(!), William Harrison (presumbably for William Henry Harrison the president), Rufus, and Penrose (my ggf). I don't know where any of those came from (except Henry and Harrison) and I used to suspect their mother was a Penrose but I have since learned that this name was rather in fashion as a given name at the time. No idea why. Jan Diana Quinones wrote: > > Why was the first name was always constant - such as Johann? > Well, the first born son usually carried the name of the father's > father. > The next born(s) usually had their second name by which they were called > and the first name that of their grfather or a saint. e.g., Johannes > Schmidt, first born > ( John Smith). > Johan George Schmidt, another son, would be called by George and the > Johan dropped. Usually the first born son was named after the father's > father. Thus Johannes (in this case) , would be the name of the > father's father. I know I am redundant, but maybe the point is taken! > Great list!! > > ==== PENNA-DUTCH Mailing List ==== > You have a friend in Pennsylvania... > > ============================== > Create a FREE family website at MyFamily.com! > http://www.myfamily.com/banner.asp?ID=RWLIST2