A Lister queried: I have been told that in the 1600 to 18000's that Junior & or Senior after a gentleman's name, did not necessarily mean that they were father & son, but that 2 men of the same name in a community were used Sr. & Jr. only to denote the elder & the younger. Response: No doubt there will be dozens of responses to your query. Yes, and yes. I think one has to corroborate with other records to determine whether Jr. was indeed the son of Sr., or whether one man was older than the other, and that is all. Sometimes, Jr. and Sr. can also be cousins. I find instances of both uses in my Williams family. When you have so many John Williamses in one locality, some differentiation has to be made. I research Williamses of colonial times in the Nutbush Creek area of Granville Co., NC. There was John Williams, Sr., his son John Williams, Jr. There was John Williams SD [son of Daniel], who even used that name when he relocated to South Carolina. There was John Williams, son of William, but evidently the family called him Jackie. He didn't live long enough to have trouble with his name, but if he had he may followed his cousin John SD and used John SW [son of William]. John Williams, Jr. later used the suffix *Esq.* because he became a lawyer, a judge, a jurist, etc. (land speculator). One thing about genealogy--you have to keep studying, attending as many seminars as you can, etc. And travel, and dig around in dusty and sometimes unfriendly courthouses. And photocopy, photocopy, photocopy! And joining a genealogy society in your neighborhood is a great way to learn things. (But you may have to volunteer your services!) E.W.Wallace