AIBU to wonder about names in the past.

[Wiseplumnet]

AIBU to ask if anyone has noticed this, and if they do, what the reason for it is. I am in my 60's, so my grandparents were all born in the 'Edwardian' era and not one of them were called by their actual names. Some of them were so different from their given names, not diminutives like Dottie for Dorothy but more like Nora for Gladys! Names bearing no relation to first or even middle names. My Grandfather was called James John but every called him 'Bertie'. I have come across this in other families too. I thought I would ask a bigger group ( ie mumsnet) to see if anyone else has noticed or pondered this. I think I got too much time on my hands 😂

I have heard of situations where if you're Sarah and you turn up for a job as a maid in a household where there's a Sarah already, you become Laura or Agnes to avoid confusion. But there would have been no need to use that name in other settings, with family, with another employer. But on the other hand I've seen households where there were multiple members of staff called Mary or Jane.

I'm not so sure that employers worried too much about what their housemaid or cook was called.

My grandmother and her sister (born early 1900s) always went by nicknames. They thought their names were very old fashioned, so as modern young women in the 1920s they chose to use nicknames.

More likely to be the housekeeper/ butler that cared than the upstairs folk.

Thanks that’s really informative and interesting

You've made me remember this OP. Could be worse!

My gran was Ivy all her life. Was strange to hear her feared to Dorothy at her funeral. Born in 1915

My friend is called Kay, a diminutive of Kath after a family member known as Kath/Katie/Katherine. When my friend researched her family history and discovered Kath was Maria Eleanor at birth.

I had a relative who was known as Phoebe, but was Susanna, then there was Jack who was really William, Janet who was Beryl and Thomas who was Charles.

My Dad was known by a shorter version of his middle name
My Grandad was Dick short for Richard, we had an Elizabeth known as Nellie too

My great granny (born approx 1880) was called Gertrude, but known as Bob from being a very small child. Her sisters all had normal nicknames (Dot for Dorothy etc) but her daughter, my granny was called Winifred but known as Molly all her life.

My mother and aunt were always called by their middle names. During the 30s I believe it was fashionable to give a first name but not use it except officially.
Growing up we knew a family of four born in the 10s and 20s; none of them were known by their given name.

Absolutely not true full stop.

Ah, those were the days when nicknames really were nicknames and not just abbreviations....

I think it's so cute. My Great Grandad was John but he was always called Jim. I had a Great Aunt called Teenie. I knew someone who's DF is called Puss. Whilst at a push my name could kind of be a shortened form of my legal name it's not really.

We've also got form on one side of my family for using middle names as first names. The other side without fail always uses the right name even if it's long and can be shortened.

That’s not true.

My ancestors on my mother's side all changed their uncommon German surname to an Anglicised version during WW1 to avoid persecution. Different branches of the family used two slightly different spellings of it, and some changed back again afterwards but some didn't. There are currently four different spellings, and everyone in the UK with that surname is related to me in some way or other. Makes for fairly easy research.

Bit better than some of my others, where many of them had not only a very common first name but a common surname as well, which has proved to be a slight nightmare, especially in London.🙄

Yes, similar.

My grandma was expected to name her first daughter after her SiL ( who she didn’t like).

She did as was expected ( in fact she didn’t even do that as my grandad registered the birth and used his sister’s name anyway).

My grandma used my mum’s middle name, rather than her first name.

So her birth certificate says Gladys but her marriage certificate etc says Ava. That sort of thing makes tracing family histories really hard.

It's also a bit of a nuisance for probate purposes when someone has a random selection of one, two or three of their possible forenames on their birth certificate, marriage certificate, will and house deeds, believe me.

I'm aware that this would be controversial, but in the same way as registrars are allowed to refuse nutty parents who want to call their babies Wheeliebinmoonscreamer&3"96=d@ and tell them to come back with something more sensible, I would give the same powers to refuse any parents wanting to use a name that's already in the family - as far out as cousins - unless it belonged to somebody at least two generations older who has since died.

I would have them gently but firmly explain to the parents what the purpose of a name is, and why its primary function is to be able to distinguish individual members of a family from each other. If they like the idea of the family sharing a single name - well, that's exactly what surnames are commonly used for.

This is also often quite astonishing!

https://x.com/ActualNames1

DH has his father's Christian name name (which he hates) but was always called by his middle name. He has to use his first name for official things, hospital etc. There was absolutely no family history of this name, but MIL's brother was called it too, so unfortunately DH was lumbered. When I was pregnant with my first child my MIL was desperate for it to be a boy so we could use the same name. Fat chance. What was even funnier was she'd also decided on a middle name which had the same middle initial as DH, so there would have been two people the same. Luckily I had girls!
Re Margaret being Peggy, I think it was first Meg, then Meggy, then Peggy.

That's a very good point, actually. How do wills even work when multiple people in the family have the same name? Do you have to state "I leave X to my Grandson John William Roberts - the one who (at the time of writing this will) lives in the bungalow on the corner; and not my other Grandson, also John William Roberts, who works at the bakery, but may have changed his job or retired by the time this will comes into effect" ?!

There are a lot of people with common names, 1st cousins, brothers, sisters, nieces and nephews. People use middle names or “other” names to differentiate. For example a man called John might have a dad called John and a son called John. So Dad John goes by John, Man goes by his middle name George and then son goes by Johnnie.
My (very Catholic) Grandmother was Margaret Mary Elizabeth, her sisters were Margaret Mary Sarah and Margaret Elizabeth Sarah. So I have a Nan called Peggie, and two great aunties called Sissy and Maggie.

Army/RAF often nicknamed people.
Nothing to do with security. Often by surname, and often to do with someone famous:

Bailey = Bill
Miller = Windy
Rogers = Ginger
Partington = Parts (especially when a Private)
etc.

I don't think many kept using them when they came out of the services.

Of my Edwardian relatives, the only one who didn't use their given name or a diminutive of it was my granny who decided to go by her second name because she preferred it.

That's pretty much what happened to my late husband, born before the war.

He was given a family forename - I suspect against his mother's wishes - and she called him something completely different.

@didntlikeanyofthesuggestions "Everyone was given fake names in the Second World War for security purposes. Most of them stuck."

I've never heard such nonsense. My parents were adults during WW2 and so were aunties, uncles and a whole host of relations and friends and I myself was born just 10 years after the end of the war. Absolutely nobody was given a fake name. Imagine the herculean feat of changing every single person's name in the UK and then issuing new identity papers, passports, driving licenses and god knows what else. And to what end? How would that would have improved security? The only exception would've been spies parachuted into enemy territory.