“1640, May 7. Baptized Johnamaria, ye son of Frances Ansloe, and Clare his wife.”—Cant. Cath.
Here again is the inevitable Maria, but so inwoven with John, that Lord Coke’s legal maxim could not touch the case. It is the same in the following example:—
“1632, ——. Married John Pell to Ithamaria, d. of Henry Reynolles, of London.”—Lower, “Worthies of Sussex,” p. 178.
One of the most strange samples of conjoined names is this:
“1595, April 3. Joane, whome we maye call Yorkkooppe, because she was ye basterd daughter, as yt is comonlye reported, of one John York and Anne Cooper.”—Landbeach.
Here is a double conjunction; John and Anne forming Jo-ane, and York and Cooper, Yorkkooppe. The first is neat, the second clumsy: but, doubtless, the clerk who wielded the goose-quill deemed both a masterpiece of ingenuity.
The following is interesting:—
“1616, July 13, being Satterday, about half an hour before 10 of the clocke in the forenoon, was born the Lady Georgi-Anna, daughter to the Right Hon. Lady Frances, Countess of Exeter; and the same Ladie Georgi-Anna was baptized 30th July, 1616, being Tuesday, Queen Anne and the Earl of Worcester, Lord Privie Seal, being witnesses: and the Lorde Bishop of London administered the baptism.”—Vide R. E. C. Waters, “Parish Registers.” 1870.
III. Hyphened Names.
It will be noticed that so far the two names were both (saving in the case of Aberycusgentylis and Jockaminshaw) from the recognized list of baptismal names. About the reign of Anne the idea of a patronymic for a second name seems to have occurred. To meet the supposed legal exigencies the two names were simply hyphened. We will confine our instances to the register of Canterbury Cathedral: