SURNAMES.
I have to thank many of your readers who have favoured me with private letters on this subject since the printing of the prospectus of my Dictionary of Surnames in your columns; and before troubling you with a string of Queries, I would briefly refer to two or three points in the kind communications under this head in "N. & Q." of May 1. E. H. Y. will find the question, surname or sirname, slightly touched upon in my English Surnames (3rd edit., vol. i. p. 13.), and argued at length in the Literary Gazette for Nov. 1842, in a correspondence originating out of a notice of the first edition of my book. I think the balance of evidence is in favour of surname; that is, a name superadded to the personal or baptismal appellation, which applies with equal propriety to the sobriquets given to monarchs and distinguished men, and to the hereditary designations of people of humble rank. Alexander Mitchell, your groom, is no other than Alexander the Great; and Bill Rowse, your errand-boy, is the namesake of the Red King who fell in the New Forest; the only difference being, that the plebeians inherit their second name from their ancestors, while the magnates enjoy theirs by exclusive right. I do not think, therefore, that the distinction contended for by E. H. Y. is either necessary or desirable: indeed I consider sirename as a mere play upon a mis-spelt word. In saying this, I would by no means disparage your excellent correspondent, whose communications I always read with pleasure I might add, that the distinction of "nomen patris additum proprio," sirename, and "nomen supra nomen additum," surname, is by no means new.
I cannot quite agree with E. S.'s suggestion as to the desirableness of omitting the names derived from Christian names, this being one of the most interesting branches of my inquiry. I have already shown that from ten to thirty family names are occasionally found to proceed from one baptismal appellation; and at least half a dozen of the names to which E. S. calls my attention for explanation are so derived. To the termination -cock, occurring in so many names, I have already given attention, and the result may be seen in Eng. Surn., vol. i. pp. 160. to 165., both inclusive.
To the surnames derived from extinct or provincial words designating employments, I am paying considerable attention; but although I am tolerably well acquainted with our mediæval writers, and their glossarists, there are many names ending in er (generally having in old records the prefix le), which have hitherto baffled my etymological skill.
W. L.'s remarks support the statements made in Eng. Surn., vol. i., p. 38. et seq., to show that family names have scarcely become hereditary, in some parts of England, even now, in the middle of the nineteenth century. Without occupying your valuable space unduly, I would now submit the following Queries:—
1. What book gives any rational account of the origin of the Scottish clans, and their distinctive or family names? I know Buchanan's work, but it gives very little information of the kind desired. Any authentic particulars regarding Scottish names will be acceptable.
2. What is the real meaning of worth, which forms the final syllable of so many surnames? I have seen no less than six explanations of it, which cannot all be correct.
3. Are there any works (besides dictionaries) in the Dutch, German, and Scandinavian languages which would throw light upon the family names of this country?
4. What is the best compendious gazetteer or topographical dictionary of Normandy extant?
5. Is anything known of a collection of surnames made by Mr. Cole, the antiquary, in the last century? It is mentioned in Collet's Relics of Literature, 1823.
6. Can any reader of "N. & Q." explain the following surnames, which are principally to be found so early as the reign of Edward I.?—Alfox, Colfox, Astor, Fricher, Grix, Biber, Bakepuz, Le Chalouner, Le Cayser, Le Cacherel, Trelfer, Metcalfe, Baird, Aird, Chagge, Le Carun, at Bight.
Mark Antony Lower.
Lewes.