So a while back I posted on the name [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m], and a significant amount of the feedback said they liked the name in sound but found it a little pretentious. So I kind of just gave up. But I still find myself coming back to the name over and over again.
It really has such a nice sound, and I like the history. (Also if people name their kids after [name_m]Alexander[/name_m], why is it more pretentious to use [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m], the name of his lesser peer? It’s sort of like how certain biblical names like [name_m]Isaiah[/name_m] and [name_m]Elijah[/name_m] are so commonplace but others like [name_m]Esau[/name_m] just sound alien to us. It all just has to do with the names that got popular).
But anyway my question is what about Tolemy? Does it seem uneducated or trendy, or just like a valid variation? The Italian version of the name is Tolomeo, so this is not too far off. It takes off the silent P so might be less pretentious, and takes away the mispronunciation problem a lot of people brought up.
And finally, disregard the names in my signature (I still like them, but they’re not the ones I’m thinking about currently.) Right now I like the sibset of [name_m]Atticus[/name_m], [name_m]Balthazar[/name_m], and [name_u]Roma[/name_u]. If I were to choose Tolemy, it would replace [name_m]Balthazar[/name_m] to make [name_m]Atticus[/name_m], Tolemy, and [name_u]Roma[/name_u].
I’d stick with [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m]. It’s an unusual name as is, although a nice one, and you won’t be doing it any favors by changing the spelling (which also damages its credentials as a classic name a la [name_m]Alexander[/name_m]).
Definitely keep the P. Without it, my assumption would be that the name giver didn’t realise there was a silent P and had just heard the name somewhere.
I like [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m]. Poo poo to anyone who thinks it’s pretentious. Having said that, I do prefer [name_m]Balthazar[/name_m].
[name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m] is better, and [name_m]Esau[/name_m] isn’t used as a name because he was a rejected son, and quite hairy (as the story was told to me). Pretentious isn’t necessarily a bad thing–some people make good on their pretentions.
I would keept the P. I dont like it when people misspell the original version because its more pleasing to the eye or it’ll make the name easier to pronounce.
I would keep [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m]. I think [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m] and [name_m]Atticus[/name_m] are a nice sib-set.
[name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m] is pronouced [name_m]TAHL[/name_m]-ə-mee while I’d pronounce Tolemy TOLL-ə-mee. So I find that cutting the silent P a little confusing if you still want the same pronunciation.
I think if you went with [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m] and [name_m]Zane[/name_m] I’d find [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m] odd or misplaced but with [name_m]Atticus[/name_m] I think it works. It really just depends on your style.
You could also consider [name_m]Bartolomeo[/name_m] nn Tolemy. [name_m]Just[/name_m] a thought as you seem to like both [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m] and [name_m]Balthazar[/name_m] and [name_m]Bartolomeo[/name_m]/[name_m]Bartholomew[/name_m] could be a nice way to combine both those names.
Well it seems that the P is here to stay. That being said, do you guys prefer [name_m]Balthazar[/name_m] “[name_m]Baz[/name_m]” or [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m] “[name_m]Tollie[/name_m]”?
Also which potential sibset do you prefer:
[name_m]Atticus[/name_m], [name_m]Balthazar[/name_m], and [name_u]Roma[/name_u]
or
[name_m]Atticus[/name_m], [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m], and [name_u]Roma[/name_u]
I prefer [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m] nn [name_m]Tollie[/name_m]
I love [name_m]Atticus[/name_m], [name_m]Ptolemy[/name_m], & [name_u]Roma[/name_u], although [name_m]Atticus[/name_m], [name_m]Balthazar[/name_m], & [name_u]Roma[/name_u] is a great sibset too.
sorry if that was long