View Message

Subject: Re: Junior vs. II
Author: Daividh   (guest)
Date: May 31, 2001 at 9:48:22 PM
Reply to: Re: Junior vs. II by Mike C
Arthur has it figured right, and Nan, IMHO, is 98% right. The only point she makes that I'd question is that when an elder kicks off, a "III" could become EITHER a "Jr" or a "II".

To me, "Jr" implies there was never anyone of the same name extant concurrently with the "III" except the father. The "II" leaves open the possibility there were predecessors to the father.

I know -- debatable, nitpicky point, from a former "II" who never used it. Actually, Major, Magnus, and Minor (like same-named boys in a Brit public school) would be classier. But why bother?

Messages in this thread: