Daily independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 188?-1915, 1891-01-15
WHEN NAMES BEGAN.
How Somo OF Our Ancestors Received
Their Pntronymics.


Their Pntronymics.
Single names were most common 4
thousand years ago, says the Davenport
DemocratrGazette. AS is the case with
our Bucks and Brights in the oxen line,
our Dams and Jcrrys in the horse-stalls.
or our Jip and Tigc in the kennels, so
then it was with man and woman kind
"a single name was all-sutlicient In
the time of King Henry l., about eight
hundred years ago, double names be-
came rather fashionablc-so much so
that Robert, his natural son, objected to
marrying the wealthy heircss of pow
erful lord because Ghs had but q single
name. From this time on the fashion
changed, and in the time of Edward I.
on act of Parliament rendered it oblig-
atory to take on the double namS-the
family namc, or two names of some
sort. Hence sprang up such names as
Henry Fitz Randolph Q1enry, son of
Nandolph), Hugh Fitz Henry, Henry
titz Henry, etc. With such as had no
clearly defined family tics location or
occupation was usad to help out, hence
John attic Wood (John tAtwood), Will
lam attic Water (Atwater), Thomas Of
tn" Woods, William atte Bachuse lat
Bakehousc now William Baker,, Mar.
garet bon Coeur (good heart, now Mar
garct Bunl1cr), Walter attc Shepyarde
(now Walter Shcpherd), John Scott was
from Scotland, John Walsh wns from
Wales, Thomas Moore was of Moorish
descent, and Peter Dane was from Den
mark, and so on, almost every name
being q revelation of it's owners loca-
ton, condition or occupation.
Then were the Smiths (thc smitcrs of
metals) most numerous; then sprang ND
the Buffers (bottlcrs), the Hunters and
Porters, the Brewers, the Cooks and the
Clarlls (clcrics); but with oil these
names and double names no triple or
double Christian names appeared for
hundreds of years later-cycn until
America brought one forth in the per-
con of one Jonas Longford Redwood, of
Rhode Island. in TI0G, and England Sir
Coplcstonc Warwick Barnficld in 1877.
John w. Bunyan- or Christopher X.
Columbus, John Thomas Calvin-sl1ch
ramcs were happily unlsncwn-arl.t the
bare idea Of such added stuff seems as
outrageous as to now allude to the Hon.
Abraham Lincoln. .-E
There is good reason in double names,
but the interposing and piling up and
spelling out your William Malzcpeace
Thackerays. Louise Chandler Morltons,
Charles Dudley Warmers seems weak
en- instead of strengthen the PERSONS
name. Besides, bad habits arc cu1nu-
lativc. and already there appears upon
the literary horizon some uadrupedal
namcs-so to GpcaI-in imitation of
brute popularity Is there 10 way of
stopping j.? If British Parliament
could legislate up to the dual omen
clature can not an American Congress
reduce this many-namc. cra2c to proper
standard? Long family pamcs arc
nuisance at best. but. como to tack on n
long Christian namc and put lot moro
long nance between names, it becomes
positive tribu1ation-putting the pen
slaves ont of al patience with their
ovcrburdcncd ownc.U. If tho name
unit might be placed ntJohn Smith. and
for every added syllable double tclc-
graph ond Postal faLc were lawfully
imposed, these rrcrCstcrous, long
drawn signatures would soon bcr'- ,tuccd
to the bc3tcr shapo of Jllius, Caesar,
Pontius Pilatc, Martin Luthc- and good
old Andrew ia cltson.