SURNAMES.
(Vol. v., pp. 290. 326.)
Variations of surnames occur much later than the close of the fourteenth century, the period cited by your correspondent COWGILL. I have seen a document of the date of Charles I., which names one Agnes Wilson, otherwise Randalson, widow of John, son of Randal Wilson; thus showing that the patronymic was liable to vary in every generation, even in the seventeenth century.
This is still the practice in the hill country of Lancashire, bordering upon Yorkshire, where people are seldom known by a family name. The individual is distinguished by the addition of the father's or mother's Christian name, and sometimes by the further addition of those of forefathers for a generation or two, as in the designation of Welshmen in times past. The abode sometimes varies the style.
As an example, I may mention that a few years ago I sought an heir-at-law in a town on the borders. I was referred to a man called "Dick o' Jenny's;" he being the son of a second marriage, the mother's name was used to distinguish him rather than his father's. Pursuing the inquiry I found the first wife had been a "sister of ould Tommy at top of th' huttock;" her daughter had married "John o' Bobby," and "John o' Bobby's lad" was the man I wanted. When I had made him out, it was with some difficulty that I ascertained (though amongst his kindred) that he bore the family name of "Shepherd."
W. L.
I perceive that your correspondents COWGILL and J. H. (p. 290.), and MR. MARK ANTONY LOWER (p. 326.), make use of the word surname to signify "the permanent appellative of particular families."
Now, I have always considered that the English language, in this as in many other instances, possessed two words which, though alike in sound, were very different both in origin and meaning:—surname, i.e. sur-nom, the name added to the common appellation, for the purpose of distinguishing an individual; as Rufus, Cœur de Lion, Lackland, in the case of our early kings: and sir-name, or sire-name, being that which in recent times, and in most countries, every one born in wedlock has inherited from his sire, and which is the subject of the articles in "N. & Q."
As I do not suppose that your correspondents, the last of whom is of considerable authority on this subject, have used the term unadvisedly, I am anxious to know the grounds on which they would disallow my theory.
E. H. Y.
I am glad to perceive that MR. LOWER has on the stocks a systematic Dictionary of Surnames. For the reason stated by him, it is neither desirable nor possible that it should include all English surnames. The majority derive their origin from places or districts of limited dimensions, and to enumerate them would be an interminable and very thankless task. MR. L. has therefore judiciously determined to exercise his discretion on this class of cases. Nor are the names derived from Christian names generally worth insertion, for every Christian name has, in some form, been converted into a surname, either with or without alteration. Those which originate in extinct or provincial employments and trades will supply an instructive and interesting collection, such as Tucker, Challoner, Tozer, Crowder, Berner, &c.; and will also afford scope for glossarial illustration.