Dear Swistle:
Do you think names can be haunted — or at least have good vibes/bad vibes?When I was pregnant with my daughter, Margot, I brought up Arthur as a possible boy name with my husband. He vetoed it without giving it much thought, and we selected another boy option at the time (which I no longer like).
However, since we had our daughter, Arthur just keeps coming up for me as a solid boy name (we are not pregnant now but hope to be soon). Part of it is that I’ve been having trouble coming up with boy name that compliments Margot’s sound and feel as well as I think Arthur does.
I always joke about Arthur when we discuss names casually, and my husband has not outright vetoed it this time around, so I keep bringing it up. I will say I’m not 100% sold on it, just like it very much and can’t think of a better option.
Then, open to other possibilities, I decided to go through some family genealogy records, and was looking through the names of my grandma’s siblings (12 of them). I was not familiar with all of them because many of them were born in Italy and were much older than my grandmother, who was born in the U.S. and was among the youngest in her family.
Well, I was shocked to see that my grandmother had not one but TWO brothers named Arthur, both who died young. One died as a young child in Italy and another died in infancy in the U.S. I never remember her talking about them, because they died before she was born. I don’t know the circumstances surrounding these deaths, other than the knowledge that infant mortality was common at that time.
My first instinct was that I could not use the name, because it means the name somehow has “bad vibes” — or might doom a new child to a negative outcome. But I brought it up to my husband and a good friend, and they both said, this is more reason to use it! This name is trying to be used, it has more meaning now, etc. Another friend, however, said, no, no, no! She couldn’t use it, and I feel that way sometimes, too.
So now I am left with a husband who is more open than ever to this name I’ve been lobbying for, but I’m unsure myself. I will say this grandmother was particularly special to me, and her mother’s name (Margarita) was a partial inspiration for Margot (or more like an affirmation that this was indeed the right name).
Grandma’s name was Edna, which I just couldn’t get myself to love enough to use, but I have thought of Ed-variations for boys that have some similar qualities to Arthur, like Edwin. But my husband’s last name (which we will use) is a two syllable name that ends in -en, so I tend not to like a lot of boy first names that share this pattern. I don’t know why, but I’m not into Edward. Maybe just too familiar.
What are your thoughts? Is this family tree a “sign” that I should use Arthur — especially since I keep coming back to this in my mind the last several years? Or a sign that it’s time to move on? I know many people use the names of deceased relatives, but this feels a little different.
If suggesting alternatives, I’ll just note that I love more vintage/literary/romantic sounding names. Hubby is open to lots of styles, but seems to like clean, but snappy sounding names, with a more modern-leaning feel. I think we hit the right balance with Margot – and maybe Arthur too?
We like Everett for a middle name, even though it is trendy, as this is in his family history and I think it goes really well with Arthur. Arthur Everett – en.
Short answer: no, I don’t think a name can be haunted.
A name certainly can develop bad associations for a particular person. If I date a terrible person and he leaves me needing extensive therapy, probably his name is always going to give me an unpleasant feeling even if I encounter it on someone else who is a completely nice and excellent human being. And when people write in and say, “Can I use this name even though it’s the name of my estranged relative who did some terrible thing that scarred the entire family?,” I advise against it: I don’t like the idea of giving a name to a child KNOWING other people will shudder about it.
But that is not what we’re dealing with here. Thinking of a few people in my own family tree who had sad/premature deaths (a great-aunt who died as a teenager of a sudden illness; another great-aunt who died as a child of an illness that is now preventable with a vaccine; an uncle who died in infancy; a great-grandmother who died in her forties during a routine surgery), I find their names very usable—and in fact, as your husband does, I feel it makes the names MORE usable. Thinking on it further, I’d say this: death in itself, even early/sad death, may increase the reason/motivation to use the name; it’s the person’s actions while alive that can be a dealbreaker.
I admit it gives me pause to hear that TWO brothers named Arthur both died. I think that mix of unusual elements might be what gives it that hint of fairy tales and curses. Is it the same for you? That is, if your grandmother had lost one brother named Arthur, would you feel less uncomfortable? And yet I still don’t believe a name can be haunted, or that the fates of two other users of this name would affect your child’s own fate.
I think in the end it’s going to boil down to individual, subjective feelings, and in this case I mean yours and your husband’s: everyone else might have brief feelings or reactions, but likely nothing with a deep-down lifelong impact. Your husband feels positively about using the name, so now we turn to you. Do you find that you are trying to talk yourself INTO the name, or OUT OF the name? Do you find yourself hoping we’ll say not to use it, or hoping we’ll dismiss the concerns? Do you find that you are TRYING to feel uncomfortable about it (i.e., feeling as if it OUGHT to bother you), or do you find that you are trying NOT to and yet still having trouble shaking it? When you think of the name, do you get an automatic little rush of happiness, or an automatic little shudder?
If you find you are trying to reason your way out of being bothered about it but you still ARE bothered, then it may be that this name is just not going to work. If instead you are persisting in liking the name but worry that it ought to feel weird or that it might BE weird, then I say brush off those concerns and use the name. I think it’s sweet to honor those relatives and to keep the name in the family tree.
To sum up: I do think a name can give particular people an unpleasant feeling because of associations they have with that name, but I do not think a name can be in itself some sort of bad-luck charm, or that a name could doom a child to a bad end. Nor do I think finding deaths in a family tree is a sign that you SHOULD use the name, or that the name itself is trying to make you use it. I think in the vast majority of cases, choosing a baby name is an activity devoid of supernatural influences or effects.
In this case, where you have plenty of time, I’d advise leaving Arthur on the list for now and seeing how you feel about it as time goes on and as other name candidates are considered. From my own point of view, it is certainly okay to use the name, and in fact appealing—but what will matter is how you personally feel about it.
Name update:
Dear Swistle:
I am the person who originally posted, “Can a name be haunted?” while considering names for a future baby boy. Well, I am now pregnant with an actual baby boy (due in Dec) and wanted to share an update (and get some final feedback?).When we learned we were pregnant with a boy, we spent a few months looking through a ton of name possibilities, but have kept coming back to Arthur. I definitely think it’s The Name and my hubby has come fully around to it too. It’s funny because now that I’m considering it for real, I am not worried about negative connotations and it doesn’t feel spooky at all! It just feels right.
One of the things that helped me come around was one of your readers sharing that in Jewish tradition, the meaning of the middle name could help offset a first name associated with a deceased individual. For whatever reason, this helped me feel “in control” of the meaning of the name as a whole.
Another reader had suggested Wells as a good first name match with Margot, but at the time, I didn’t love the name on its own merits (or as a first name) and didn’t make much of the comments.
Recently, as I dug into the middle name options a bit more (and re-read the post on your blog), it struck me that Wells = the initials of all of this baby’s great grandfathers (Wilbur, Elmer, Lyle and Stanley)! What!? And the connotation with well-being, spring/stream (of life?) has made it seem almost too perfect for this particular situation. It also works really well with our last name.
I just wanted to share because I was really struggling with boy names for a long time and had so many other options for girl names that made me much more excited. I never thought I’d get to “love” with a boy name and second child, but here we are!
We are reserving space to change our minds if the name just doesn’t seem right for the little guy, but Arthur Wells is the tentative plan.
Thanks so much for the part you played in helping us sort this out!
I agree there is something that seems almost unfinished and unfulfilled around the name “Arthur” in your family tree…. for some this would be almost a romantic notion to use it (to bring life to the many Arthurs passed). I also love the variation of Ed as Edison. I think Arthur Edison has a lovely ring to it.
All the above being said, I think I would also have pause using Arthur, less because I think there is any bad vibe around it and more because I am crazy and would attribute anything bad happening to him to me naming him Arthur (when in reality it would have no correlation). So because I would find a way to make myself feel guilty, I’d probably use Arthur as the middle name (but that’s just me!).
Arthur Edison is a great name! But it won’t go well with the last name, unfortunately. Arthur Edmund (as someone else suggested) might.
I am a sentimental fool, but another way to look at it is to think about how sad your great grandmother probably was to lose two sweet little boys named Arthur and how pleasing it would be to know that someday she would have a great great grandson with that name? It is a pretty near coincidence! I hope you go for it :)
My husband and I had a name on our list that was pretty near the bottom of the list. Then while browsing his family tree one day I found he had a great uncle with that name who died fighting in one of the world wars. It moved the name up on our list, and now a couple other things have moved it up more so it’s our #1 choice. I think finding it in your family tree is a positive. And your great grandmother must have loved the name so much to use it twice. It’d be great if you finally got a healthy little Arthur!!
Since they used it twice, I wonder if it might be the name of a family member even further back on the family tree.
Morbid though it seems, I think it was common practice to name children after their deceased siblings, so the second Arthur was likely named for the first. I had two great aunts named for older sisters who died in the Spanish Flu epidemic…luckily both survived to adulthood.
I see where you’re coming from, and might feel the same way in your shoes! But from this distance, I think it’s easy to justify using Arthur, if you still love the name if/when a little boy arrives.
The Arthurs you found in your family tree (1) are not direct ancestors, and (2) were never personally known to your or your grandmother. That does not make them any less important as family members–but, as you pointed out, infant mortality rates used to be much higher; if you were to rule out the names of every person on your family tree who died young, including siblings of ancestors (and why stop at just three generations?), then you would probably need to rule out an awful lot of very good names.
Plus, if I’m reading correctly, your discovery of these great-uncles came AFTER you fell in love with the name Arthur for a hypothetical son. It was never meant as an honor name, and it does not seem as though anyone but you is positioned to realize it’s a family name at all–so I think you can give yourself permission to view what you’d be doing as giving the name a fresh start. If your hypothetical Arthur were to have a different surname than your great-uncles did, then (as a bystander), I’d view the names as nearly as unrelated as names that simply shared an initial or some of the same sounds.
Also–you mentioned that one Arthur was born in Italy. I’m wondering if his name was actually the Italian version of Arthur? If so, the distance is even greater and more comfortable. :)
Oh–I meant to throw out my one alternate suggestion, given that you seem to like names with the strong AR sound: Carter. It’s got a bit of a vintage feel but is snappier/trendier at the moment, and is one of my favorites! (Sadly, I can’t use it because my kids will have a surname that rhymes with Garden.)
That’s a great option, and has the right sounds to blend well with Margot. But, something about it feels like someone else’s kid, if that makes any sense at all. I like it a lot, but can’t imagine having a child with the name.
The idea of a Margot and Arthur sibset makes me swoon!
Is there any possibility that the name Arthur was given, at least to the second Arthur, after it was clear he wouldn’t survive? You said he died in infancy. If he was given the name Arthur to carry on the memory of his older brother, and then also died suddenly, sure, I’d say that’s a bit eerie. But honestly, if it bothers you, is there anything anyone can say that will make you change your mind? Because there is a way for your son and everyone else in your family (if you haven’t already told them) to never know about this connotation, only that ‘it’s a family name.’ But if it haunts you, it’ll haunt you.
If you can be swayed to forget this or at least not let it follow the way you feel about your future son’s name, then maybe keep in mind that expression that name nerd often apply to matching first initials ‘two is a coincidence but three is a pattern.’ Not saying you want to wait and find out if it’s a pattern, but that twice really is a coincidence, and as previous posters have already referred to, that generation had high infant/child mortality rate.
Edmund, Edgar, Edric…?
Oooh… how about Dean? Margot and Dean. But does Dean not play well with the -en?
Good luck. I bet you wish you’d never looked through the genealogy. Although, better now than after he’s born and named?
Yes! Dean is an anagram of Edna!
This name is already in the family (in this generation). :/-
Hadn’t thought of that, although that’s what my great-grandfather did when he named Grandma Gerald. Great-grandma wasn’t supposed to have any more children and Grandma was their 3rd or 4th girl, but she was early and tiny, born in December, so I don’t think they really expected her to live and he really wanted to name one of his kids after his best friend. (Scrappy little bit is now nearly 90).
My great great grandmother was a twin, and they were born very early and not expected to survive, so they were named variation of the same name. (Think Anne and Anna). Both survived to a nice old age! I think our views on naming have changed a lot over the generations.
OP: if it is haunted for you, then it is haunted, no matter what anyone else feels or thinks. And if it isn’t haunted for you, same thing. Arthur is a great name, but there are other great names too. Maybe we need some really strong pro and con comments in here, and you might find yourself vigorously agreeing or disagreeing! :).
I know you said you didn’t like the name Edward, but what about Eduardo? It’s a fresh sounding spin in the name Edward, and I think it sounds great with Margot.
My parents are very religious in a very legalistic sense–they’re not superstitious in the least–but they have both been pretty adamant that the name “Thomas” is not so much haunted as cursed. Both of my parents have a brother named Thomas as does my grandfather, and each of those three men have had very hard lives with many many personal struggles–intellectual disabilities, shaken baby syndrome, long criminal records, drug addictions, alcoholism, mental illness, traumatic spousal deaths, young deaths, etc etc etc. That said, when my parents first started talking about baby names the first thing they agreed on was that no child of theirs would be named Thomas, and I have no cousins named Thomas, either, on either side, both sides which love using family names. So that’s been my experience.
Use Everett as a first name!!!!
I saw that you might like a name suggestion that contains an “ed” but doesn’t end in an “en” and needs a snappy modern form to go with a more classic form. I needed the same things and we ended up with Frederick! You can Euro it up as Frederic or Fredrik and perhaps sway your husband with the hip nickname Fritz. Margot and Fritz? So so great!
It is great. Hubby says VETO. :)
Well, your great-grandparents used the name a 2nd time, even after their own son called Arthur died. I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t some other connection to the name that might have helped them feel compelled to use it a 2nd time? Is there an even earlier Arthur in your family tree somewhere? Or perhaps they meant for Arthur #2 to be a namesake for the 1st Arthur? If there is a way you can find out, perhaps that will help you decide if Arthur is usable for you or not.
I very nearly named my 2nd son in honor of an uncle who lived only 1 day. It would have been meaningful for my grandparents & I liked the name (alas, husband did not care for the name or any of its nicknames). So I would vote for you to use Arthur.
If you just can’t bring yourself to use it, have you considered Edmund as an “ed” alternative? A bit more of a stretch would be Theodore, with Ted or Teddy as a nickname. Theodore & the “ed” names are not related, but the nicknames Ted & Teddy are commonly used for both.
My grandmother-in-law had two baby brothers die in infancy. Both were Karl. I found this utterly bizzare, so I asked why they got the same name. She was appalled that I didn’t know that, in Norway, a first son was always named after the paternal grandfather… as many tries as it takes. Infant mortality was common, so the deaths were handled in a more matter-of-fact way than today.
She was surprised we weren’t planning to name our first son after my father-in-law. (We used her maiden name instead as his middle, and -whoa!- the years did flow!)
I still kind of like Karl, but my side of the family had an unpleasant Carl… so like Swistle wrote, it’s what one does in life that makes a name unusable, not death itself.
I’m not sure from your letter if you still love the name Arthur. I don’t think the possible family connection or the fact that your husband has come around to it are reasons to feel obligated to use a name you no longer love. But if you do love it, I don’t think the distant family relations to it is a reason not to use a name you love. I think you should just leave Arthur on your list and who knows what will happen between now and when you need a boys name.
In the mean time, I think Oscar, Edmund, Elliot, Jude, Jasper, Walter, Sebastian, and Simon are all handsome brother names for Margot.
I love using family names, and for me the discovery of the family connection would make the name more appealing. However, this is a very personal thing. My emotional focus is more on the connection to beloved family members than on the fact that they died (or that they died as children). We all die, eventually, but family love and family history endures. As others have said, the deal breaker for me would be the name of someone who for whatever reason was painful or harmful to the family.
If you don’t go with Arthur and want to honor an Edna, how about switching the sounds around to get the nickname Ned/Neddie and then working backward to get to Edmund or Benedict if you don’t like Edward?
Arthur is great, but if you can’t get over the “but…” factor…..
I’m here to vote for Edgar- just met a nice young millennial today wth the name and I was bowled over by how fun it was to say/hear!
And another poster had Edric- I forgot I knew a boy in college by the name! Very witty, funny, friendly guy… great name. And he went by the full Edric all the time.
(And I like the Everett-double E initial with both options 100%)
Might also suggest:
Cyrus or Silas
Dennis (where has this name been?)
Gilbert
Linus
Wesley
At one time it must have been more common to reuse names of children who did not survive within the same family unit. In my extended family, there were 4 sisters (ages 8 and younger) who all died within days of each other of diphtheria back in the 1800s. Their parents reused 3 of the 4 sisters names for daughters who were born later (and I’m guessing would have used the 4th if they had birthed another daughter). I’ve seen the practice of reusing names within the same family unit several times in doing my family history. I’ve always assumed that the practice was meant to be an honor.
I bet the Italian born one was named Arturo, and maybe even the American born one. In that case Arthur would be similar, but not quite the same. Like Carlos, Karol, and Charles.
It was not Arturo, which I was surprised by. I did not know Arthur was used in Italy. The other siblings born in Italy (most of them) had very Italian names (as listed in the family tree), with these Arthurs mixed in. Then, they chose American names popular at the time for the children born in U.S. (Edna, etc).
Cool!
I would be totally comfortable using Arthur, but if you aren’t that’s understandable.
What about Edmund to honor your grandmother?
I also really like Walter with Margot.
I have a personal experience! I like family names, and wanted to use family names from all “sides” of my children’s family. Only issue is my father-in-law is the kind of person who never tells a story about a member of his side of the story without mentioning how they died, sometimes kind of graphically. But there was a name from his side that I really loved, attached to a person who was by all accounts admirable in every way, but died tragically. I decided to power through, despite some slight fears about haunting. Four years later, A) the name is firmly attached to my daughter, and I rarely think of it in the context of family history and B) to the extent that I do think about family history, I think about the positives narrative that I’ve created around it, not the tragic one that’s solely focused on death.
Thanks for this. I mean, of course. If the kid turns out healthy and lovely – you’re going to feel like the past is the past. :) Why can’t I get myself 100% there?
Oh…one more suggestion. Maybe go another two or three generations back in your family tree as well? If your great-grandmother used Arthur twice, there’s a decent chance she was naming her children after a brother, and uncle, or some other relative. Which could add to the sense of warm feeling and family connection, while diluting the feeling of tragedy. Certain names knock around family trees for centuries, and that would be a great tradition to pick up again.
I like this suggestion, but unfortunately I have no way of knowing. Maybe I could pretend this was true.
USE IT USE IT USE IT! Think of how happy your great-grandmother would be to know that people are still saying her beloved boys’ name. :)
My great-grandmother lost two of her 13 babies: Josephine and Victoria. She named another baby after them: Josephine Victoria. My grandmother named 3 of her kids a variation of the names. Two boys had the middle name Joseph and one girl was named Victoria. Two of my sons are also named after them (and my dad and my aunt). They are named Joseph and Victor. I love those names, I love the people connected to them, and I love how happy that would have made my grandmother and great-grandmother. It’s a beautiful honor! Not haunted!
In Jewish families, you often name a baby after a deceased relative. And if that relative died young, you add the middle name “Chaim” for a boy or “Chaya” for a girl – which means “life” (to bestow them a longer life). You could perhaps then look for a name that means Life to use along with Arthur?
Beautiful idea. Thank you.
I’m the original poster – just reacting to all the amazing thoughts. Wow! You all are super wonderful and thoughtful.
A few comments: I do love Arthur, and found myself wishing for you all to make it feel good for me to use it. It just feels like I was getting “vibes” about it before I even found out about all this. I don’t know the original reason for re-naming a second son, except that the older brother was already deceased and that seems to be a custom. I don’t have any more information about further back in the family tree.
Karyn’s comment really sums up my quandary: ” All the above being said, I think I would also have pause using Arthur, less because I think there is any bad vibe around it and more because I am crazy and would attribute anything bad happening to him to me naming him Arthur (when in reality it would have no correlation).”
I’m crazy in the same way. It’s about preventing future guilt. So there’s that. But I maybe want to power through anyway?
Love some of the other name suggestions, but hubby has nixed them all (Frederick, Walter, Edgar). These go old man for him real quick. :)
I got chills when I read the last comment about looking for a middle name that means “life” – I feel like this is an amazing solution. I’ll definitely sit on that idea for a while, and start searching to see what the possibilities are.
Everett means “brave as a wild boar” so maybe that’ll do, too. Ha. :)
Thanks everyone!
I just posted a comment of a similar story in my family below!
Everett also contains the word “Ever” … this could be the Arthur forEver, I think it works.
:) Nice!
Just thought I would comment as something similar happened in my family, but they were closer in relation than the question asker’s story. My Grandma had a daughter named Lorraine Ann, she was her third daughter and she died in infancy after falling out of her highchair ( this was the early 40s we are talking about). My aunt (the oldest daughter), named her first daughter Lorraine Ann. My father was born much later (he is 13 years younger than his closest sibling). The freaky part (to me) is that my mom’s name is Lorraine Ann!! Just a weird coincidence, but I always found it so interesting.
Anyway, I think you should atleast keep Arthur on your list! It is fabulous with Margot. I also like Edmund for you.
The British royal family are notoriously superstitious about the names Arthur and (I think) David funnily enough. The Queen has veto rights over names and apparently won’t allow either of those names as first names. I think there’s also some hesitation about having another King Arthur.
What about Wells?
We have a Wells. We were surprised how many people have commented on how his name feels so modern compared to our other kids names. We were going for the old, classic yet uncommon type of names for all our kids. Apparently Wells is so uncommon people feel that it’s actually quite modern. I wonder if this would be a nice mesh between your love of old and your husbands love of new??
Plus Margo and Wells. To me, that is an amazing sib set in my mind. Margo was definitely a name we considered. Margo and Wells. Sigh. I actually love this.
Ditto
I meant to say this in my original post, but Margo has the same feel as Wells, an older classic name with a modern feel. Still love the set together!!
Right on, Swistle. I also think there’s no wrong answer here. Rest assured that if you use Arthur, that child’s personality will quickly erase the creepy vibe. And will rewrite a sad chapter of family history.
A lot of us have nutty rituals we use to feel safe during pregnancy and in those first years of a child’s life. I still check my 3 y/o daughter’s windows every night. She cannot open the windows. They just happen to be low to the ground and screened in an extremely flimsy way. Checking makes me feel better, although I know it’s just a garden variety obsessive-compulsive behavior. I know other families with elaborate ladder systems for fires, parents who dislike baby gates because what if there’s a fire and the fireman trips, etc. My MIL still doesn’t like to see my daughter walk with a sharpened color pencil.
Another thing to consider is that stuff happens to each child. If baby’s first croup will be blamed on the name Arthur, then it’s okay to just admit that the name freaks you out and choose a different one. We all have distorted thought, particularly as we endure pregnancy and motherhood! On the other hand, if you want to persevere and desensitize yourself to the name, go for it! It will get better!
Ha! True. This is a good reminder that even if we get the name “right” we’ll find other reasons to worry. :)
I sincerely wish we could reduce anxiety by picking the right name! Wouldn’t that be fabulous!?! That might be why name giving is such an important ritual, right (saint names, names of beloved relatives, etc). Whatever you do will be the right thing.