|Subject:||Junior versus II???|
|Author:||Marieke van Camp (guest, 188.8.131.52)|
|Date:||September 23, 2002 at 4:25:29 AM|
I've seen the ''Junior versus II'' question in the FAQ of this site, but I still don't fully understand it.
Does the child only need to have the first name in common with any close relative, in order to be called II or III and so on? For example, if the child is called John Robert, and its father is called John Charles, then it is appropriate to name the child John Robert II and its father John Charles I?
Or do both the first names and middle names have to be in common in order to be called Jr. or II?
I hope someone will please explain this to me.
Thanks a bunch! :)
|Because this message is archived you cannot respond to it.|
|Messages in this thread:|