The Osceola times., 1881-02-26
HISTORY OF NAMES.
BY JAMES PARTON.

At Bedloe's Island, in New York har-
Dor, there was company of United
States Infantry stationed some time ago,
which had in it six men by the name of
Smith. | heardthe roll of this company
called one morning and when the SER
geant came to the Smiths, the ceremony
proceeded thus:
"Smith /. Here. Smith 9. Here.
Smith 3. Here Smith I. Here. Smith
5. Here. Smith o. Here"
This had an odd sound, and still more
peculiar was it to hear a good looking, re-
spectacle soldier spoken to and spoken
of as "Smith g." Ii reduced poor Smith
to an unhappy insignificance, for which
there was no justification.
There is really no necessity for the
continuance of this army of Smiths; a
name which has become so common as
to be in some places no designation at
all. The "Smith 6" aforesaid was named
Henry Oscar Smith. Now, by simply
changing the order of his names, and
calling himself Henry Smith Oscar, or
Oscar Smith Henry, he would have ac-
quired name. 1t is high time that
something was done to reduce the multi
tude of Smiths, and | can think of no
better plan than the one just mentioned.
Because man happens to have Smith
among his names he is not obliged to
put it last. The Earl of Derby is named
Smith, but seeing in the London Direc-
| tory that his country is already blessed
with a considerable number of Smiths,
he has the good sense to sign his name
"Derby."
The ancient Greeks for ages submitted
to even greater inconvenience; as, in
deed, all the primitive races seem to have
done. In old Athens, Smith had not
even John to help itself out with, for
the people had but one name apiece.
Socrates was Socrates and nothing else
| Demosthenes was only Demosthenes.
As the eldest son usually received the
name of his fathers father, this would
have been more than inconvenient, but
for a way the lively Greeks had of giving
apt nicknames. Thus, Demosthenes car
ried all through his life nickname which
he acquired in boyhood-Batalos, which
means suffering The most eloquent of
orators was known among his fellow
citizens by the name of Demosthenes
Sufferer.
Among the Greeks, the father claimed
the right of naming all his boys, and he
usually gave to his eldest the name of
his own father; to his second son, the
name of his wifes father; to his third
son, the name of one of his wife's rcla-
tions; and to his fourth, the name of his
own maternal grandfather. The mother,
it appears, named her daughters on
similar principle. On the tenth day of
a Greek child's life a sort of christening
festival was held, when the name was
given; and the act was accompanied by
religious service and feast, Just as il is
among Europeans at the present day. All
the friends and relatives of the family
were invited; sacrifice was offered to
the gods, and the affair concluded with n
repast.
The Romans did better than the Greeks
in the matter of names. Every noble
Roman had at least three names, like
Marcus Tullius Cicero. Cicero was the
name Of his family; Tullius was the name
of his tribe; and Marcus was his own per-
sonal name.
= The great mass Of the people, however,
probably had but one name, suggested bv
the occupation, or by some personal pc
culiarity as rough boys now call one an
other Short, Red-head and Long-lees
We perceive in the New Testament that
the Jews Of the same period commonly
had but one name. There was man
whose name was John" In some cases
something was added to mark the in
dividual, as Saul of Tarcus. Indeed,
throughout the Bible, there are few per-
sons mentioned who had more than one
name; from Adam and Eve to the proph-
| cts, and from them outward to the apos.
ties.
This custom of giving but one name TO
each individual, explains why there are so
many John Smiths in the New York di-
rectory. As late as the year 1900, the
| inhabitants of England, noble and simple,
| had each but one name, and the names
in common use were very few in num-
ber.
The Rev. c. w. Bardsley, an English
| clergyman, who has minutely investigated
the subject of English names, and written
two interesting volumes upon it, men
tions that, in the year 1900, out of one
hundred Englishmen, there would be an
average of twenty Johns and fifteen
| Williams. Next TO these in point of fire.
I quency, We're Thomas, Bartholomew,
Nichalas, Philip, Simon, Peter, Isaac,
Richard, Robert, Walter. Henry, Guy
|
names, the three reigning favorites were
Matilda, Isabella and Emma; next to
these, Cecilia, Catherine, Margaret and
Gillian; all Of which except the last are
still familiar TO us.
Each person having but one name, and
the number of Thames in use being SO few,
it was thing of necessity to use more
particular designations. Hence arose
John the Smith, John the Carpenter, and
the rest.
Ii was the more necessary in former
centuries TO add something to a mans
name, because our foretathers were over
fond of family names, and it was not an
uncommon thing for father to name all
ofhis sons alike. Many evidences OF this
are TO be found in old wills and registers.
| The following is an extract from n will of
l545, showing how different Johns in the
same household were distinguished:
| Alice, my wife, and Old John, my son,
to occupy my farm together till Old John
marries; Young John, my son, shall have
Brenlays land, plowed and sowed at Old
Johns cost"
In this family there were three Johns
for the farmer was also OF that name. A
parish register Of 1859 mentions that
John and John Picke" were baptised
A few days after, it was recorded that
"the same John and John" were buried
There was one instance in that centur,
of certain John Barker who had three
sons all named John, and two daughters
both named Margaret This strange Gus
Gus prevailed in the highest ranks. for we
see that the Lord Protector Somerset had