History HubΒ permalink
Cry God for Harry
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
We know that in the play Henry the 5th, Will used the word Harry instead of Henry. But how far back does the changing of names go. Was William refered to as Wil? Richard as Dick? Just an idea to get what seems to be a stagnant board moving again.
-
Message 2
Posted by Allan D (U1791739) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
I thought 'Harry' was an English mispronounciation of the French form of 'Henri'. One of Henry VIII's ships was called "The Great Harry". As far as 'Dick' is concerned, in Shakespeare's "Richard III' the anonymous message that is pinned to the Duke of Norfolk's tent before the Battle of Bosworth reads:
"Jockey of Norfolk, be not too bold
For Dickon thy master is bought and sold."
where 'Dickon' obviously refers to Richard, but as to the origin your guess is as good as mine. -
Message 3
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
Grumpyfred
Presumably to his "intimates" William I was "Guillaume".. And the use of French versions of our "English familiars" endures.. I was initially flumoxed decades ago by a French TV documentary on the English King "Jacques le premier".. The French just did not acknowledge the name James.
As for the use of diminished forms, as these were Christian names the trend to "push the limits" may well have come during the late Middle Ages after the Black Death when there was something of a mood of testing Gods and Popes and other authority figures from the early Middle Ages.. Not totally unlike the tendency of rebellious teenagers to invent their own vocabulary when the authority figures of their own times have lost "street cred".
Such forms blend into "nicknames"- and Old Nick was the Devil.
Cass -
Message 4
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
I don't quite know when names from Hebrew and then Latin first became recognisable in their present forms. I think the Latin forms were always shortened - I know the name Philippa was changed to Philip generally; I suppose we went back to the full form when spelling became more standardized and people keen to pronounce things phonetically.
In the past, when the name base was much less than it is today, and people were given the same baptismal name as their fathers and grandfathers or mothers and grandmothers, then diminutive forms were essential to differentiate people. I imagine they go back to the Norman conquest really. Certainly by the 12thC Matilda was known as Maud.
In my book of Scottish family history research I was interested to see that in Scotland the [English?] registrars turned names into what they considered was the proper form, and in one family of four boys the parents had called them Iain, Eoin, Ewan and Evan (or similar variants) and the registrar wrote them all down as John! This may explain why so many parents in the past seem to have given children the names of an earlier dead child or simply seem to have given kids the same name.
But because John is so common as a name, variants have been very common indeed.
Cheers, Caro. -
Message 5
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
...and Old Nick was the devil Β
Old Nick comes from the name of that Italian devil, Niccolo Machiavelli.
Odd that the diminutive form of James is Jimmy - you'd think it would be Jack from Jacques. But Jack is the diminutive of John. I've never heard King James called King Jimmy or King John referred to as King Jack.
Yet both Elizabeth I and II can be Liz or Lizzy. And in her own time Elizabeth I was called Good Queen Bess, but never Betty! Then there's Bess of Hardwick - she is always Bess, never Elizabeth of Hardwick.)
Was Henry VIII ever really called Hal, I wonder - or is that a figment of Hal B. Wallis's lively imagination? Bluff King Hal, not Bluff King Harry. -
Message 6
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
John Falstaff (who is Jack to his mates) calls *Prince* Henry Prince Hal, but has a *King* Henry ever been called King Hal?
I'm wondering about Jack-in-the Boxes too - Falstaff calls himself a Jack-a-Lent - which I think was a puppet. But why call a puppet Jack?
Sorry, I'm rambling, but this is such an interesting topic! -
Message 7
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
Temperance
Is there not some devilish connotation with St. Nicholas? I remember being pretty horrified when our children were first taught the French children's Christmas song about St. Nicholas.. A very dark one in which 3 children who went out gleaning were butchered and turned into "cured" meat. And elsewhere (Netherlands) was it not normal for St. Nick to be accompanied by "blacked up" nasty mischevious "sprites".
Cass -
Message 8
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
I'm glad the subject received approval, as both this site and War and Comflicts seemed to be a bit dead. I am told that where as today, Andrew would be shortened to Andy, in the past Drew was more likely. We have names like Will Scarlet and Dick Turpin, but you have to wonder how John became Jack. My late Mother in Law was Margaret but like many other Margarets was known as Peggy. Over the last century, Taylors were always known as Pop. Some explain themselves. Millers became Dusty.
-
Message 9
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
Some of these abbreviated names are a bit bizarre, Molly and sometimes Polly for Mary, Dolly for Dorothy
It seems to be in the Celtic fringes that the name choices are as restricted as the gene pool. If you stood in Lewis and shouted "Murdo McLeod" you'd trampled in the rush of males from all over the island hence the 'Murdo mhor, Murdo beag, Murdo the shop, Murdo the boat' etc phenomena. -
Message 10
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
Grumpyfred
(a) I was particularly reflecting on the way that "Wars and Conflicts" has gone dead.. Is it the quiet before the storm? And a sign that some of the regulars there have decided that further dialogue is pointless.
(b) I think that Millers were "Dusty"- but those whose trade tended to leave them "White" were "Chalky".
But "what's in a name?"..
Just opening a "The Story of Surnames" (1965).. I read that surnames are uncommon things in the world's history, and in England date from the 13-14 centuries, at which point many existing names started getting used as surnames, including nicknames- one of 4 main sources of surnames.
(a) One group just took the Christian name and added "son"
(b) Another just took the place name or description
(3) Then there were the occupational names...
But surely all of those were rather bland and impersonal, and after all the Christian name was the name with which the baby was introduced to God
( E.M. Forster suffered from the vicar NOT naming him Henry after his very wealthy relative Henry Thornton.. The error was quickly pointed out in the Church on Clapham Common, which Henry Thornton had helped to make the centre of the Clapham Sect.. But the vicar said that God had been introduced to the baby as Edward, and he could not change it.. So EM used his second name Morgan to his friends and family)
The fourth category of nicknames had always been popular- either by those who held them or those, who bestowed them. So names that occur in the Middle Ages like Crypling, Handless, Onehand, Head, Neck. Mouth, Blind, Daft, Mutter and Stutter were not adopted as surnames.
The adoption of surnames and the increasing standardisation of "familiar" abbreviations of Christian names would appear to be part of the increased standardisation of society.
India for example did not have forenames. A friend of mine just took one of his personal names and put it down to be a British surname: and in schools where I taught we had lots of unrelated "Begums" until those interviewing the new girls finally discovered that "Begum" is just "Miss" placed after the personal name.
But I well remember running into an old friend/ colleague whom I had not seen for a few years, though I knew that he like me had become a father. I further knew that his son was William. So I asked him about his "Bill". He looked at me, paused and said "You mean William"..
It was only at the next meeting that I discovered why William was not "Bill". He was severely disabled and had never developed beyond the mental age of a few months old, and was unlikely to ever do so.
The use of diminutives directly to someone's face is not usually meant to indicate a diminshed view of them as a human being, quite the reverse.
I wonder how many languages reduce God to a three letter word.
Cass -
Message 11
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
I know my name (Celtic version) is McC. (Son of) and ann (Wolf) which mean I am a wolf cub. LOL
-
Message 12
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
I think the Latin forms were always shortened - I know the name Philippa was changed to Philip generally;Β
Philip is an ancient Greek name, Philippos meaning a friend of horses. Philos -friend and ippos-horse. Philipa is the feminine version of the name.
Five kings of Macedonia carried the name, including the father of Alexander the Great. It was also a common name amongst eastern Christians and had moved into western usage by the Middle Ages. -
Message 13
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
Grumpyfred
My book then would suggest that somewhere in your ancestors someone had some wolf-like characteristics... Are you a lean and rangy mover? Or do you have a tendency to bolt your food? Are you a species that has recently been re-introduced into Scotland?
Apparently 'lupus"= latin for wolf was a Christian name in early Norman England..Other animal surnames that survive include Fox, Brock (badger), Roe, Ram, Cock, Lyon, Hare, Stagg, Beaver, Coney, Martin (saint +animal), Otter, Bull, Colt, Hogg. Bore, Boar, Boor, Bor, Doe, Catt and Hound. And then there are birds and fish.
Cass -
Message 14
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
ID
Re shortened versions- I was familiar with Greek Cypriot names with only minor adjustments for female/male offspring and parents all sharing a common root- Georgios Georgiou.. But was there ever any common ground with the Russian orthodox tradition which makes novels like those of Dostovesky so difficult (for me at least) because the same person will be addressed with seemingly radically different names according to the way that the person talking to them "plots" them into the extended family.. I think it usually took me about 50 pages to work out that some multiple personalities were actually one person.
Mind you I recall being in the Building Society a few years ago next to a West African customer who was probably quite genuine in having forgotten which of her many names she had used to open her account. The lady at the till kept on passing pieces of paper back to her saying that it was not the name she had on her computer..
Cass -
Message 15
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
"Are you a species that has recently been re-introduced into Scotland?"
Not unless grumpyfred's patrimonial is McLosleathan, as far as I'm aware, but perhaps you know something I don't, Cass. I rather favour the reintroduction of wolves but I seem to be in the minority. -
Message 16
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
Haven't much time now so I'll just copy and paste a couple of interesting explanations found on diminutives such as Jack, Dick etc.
" During the middle ages, the letter R would often be swapped for either L or D: Hal from Harry, Molly from Mary, Sadie from Sarah, Robert: Hob, Dob, Rob, Bob and Nob, from Richard: Rick, Dick, and Hick; Bill from Will (which in turn comes from William), and Peg from Meg (which is derived from Margaret)."
"Before the 17th century, most nicknames had the diminutive ending "in" or "Kin", where the ending is attached to the first syllable: Watkin/Walter/Wat-kin Hobkin/Robert/Hob-kin or Thompkin/Thomas/Thom-Kin. While most of these have died away, a few remain such as Robin (Rob-in, from Robert), Hank (Hen-Kin from Henry), Jack (Jan-kin from John), and Colin (Col-in from Nicolas). " -
Message 17
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
ID
Your post reminds me of the gradual move towards a standard writing of English, that may well have been proceded by a similar move towards a standard pronunciation..
Thus in the seventeenth century - I once heard it asserted- that the "s" sound was printed as an "f". Hence Shakespeare may not have written "where the bee sucks their suck I".
Cass -
Message 18
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
ferval
I do not know where Grumpyfred's roots were, but -if I do not err- I think that he has intimated previously that he has been "all at sea" for much of his life.
Perhaps his ancestors were "sea-wolves".
As for the reintroduction of wolves into Scotland I am all in favour of the restoration of natural habitat.. But Dr Johnson said to Boswell that there is a great deal of desert in Scotland.. and I wonder just how great a project that might be.
I made a point of watching the programme last Autumn about the forests of Scotland, because the "nakedness" of much the landscape put me in mind of regions all over the world where men had counted their wealth and prosperity for centuries in their herds that they pastured on fairly marginal land, causing the gradual degeneration of the natural habitat so that not much grows other than relatively poor grasses and things like heather.
So I was interested to see that research has linked the death of so much of Scotland's native forest to a rising sea-level c 5,000 years ago that lifted the water-table so much that the native trees could not cope and died out, and with them important parts of the habitat.
On the other hand a previous programme from Springwatch had featured a fragment of ancient Scottish forest that had survived on an island because people had never herded there.. And there is that Scottish island where the locals built sea-defences against the sheep, that were limited to a strip around the shore- and had taken to eating sea-weed.
Now I believe that the Sea Eagle has been re-introduced and there is enough food in the sea and the food-chain that it supports.. But it would be cruel to re-introduce wolves without a food chain to support them and keep them away from people-- [the kind of problems that some Canadian places have had with polar bears in the depths of winter]
But I suppose that they turned parts of the Highland into "grouse-growing" places to provide "game" for hunting parties, the Victorian tourist industry inspired by Prince Albert love of Northern Climes similar to his own beloved native land. I am not sure, however, that the grouse really would be "game" for wolves.. I come back to Beatrice Webb's grandfather and the tragedy of living "like pigs in an orchard.."
Cass
Cass -
Message 19
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
Cass, there's a good argument for the reintroduction of wolves into parts of the country where the red deer population has expanded dramatically and so is having to be culled quite severely. The depredations of the deer are preventing the regeneration of the old Caledonian forest and so the affecting the wild life which inhabits it. The problem is of course keeping wolves away from sheep, attacks on people are remarkable rare. The reintroduction of the white tailed sea eagle has caused some problems with farmers blaming them for taking lambs but whether these are healthy lambs or dead or sickly ones is not clear.
The reintroduction of the beaver in Argyle has also been controversial and there's also the story that there are beavers living wild on the Tay having been released unofficially or perhaps having escaped.
I'd love to think of a time when we might have wild lynx in the forests and just maybe, bears. -
Message 20
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
Yes, ID, the sounds of 'r' and l' are very closely linked. I don't have the linguistic knowledge to explain this but something to do with where the tongue lies in the mouth when they are said. It wasn't just in the Middle Ages - it is still the case that the sounds are linked. In Maori, for instance, there is no 'l' - everything is 'r'. BUT many of the words they use with 'r' have an 'l' in other Pacific languages. Thus aroha - love/affection is aloha. There are a couple of anomolies in Maori, which is otherwise now a very homogenous language (probably helped by being made a written language quite recently. Not far from where I live is Waihola which really should be Waihora, but the southern Maori dialect did have an 'l' sound sometimes. Like RP in Britain, northern Maori has become the preferred sound. More than that, really, northern Maori is the only version now used.
We just don't use Polly and Molly etc so often because they have become unfashionable, though you will have noted a rise in the use of Molly in recent times.
Cheers, Caro. -
Message 21
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Wednesday, 27th April 2011
ferval
Thanks for that reply..
It does seem that the demise of the "hunting and fishing set" has left the ecosystem "short" of predators, and modern ecologists -as opposed to simple old-fashioned Darwinists- reckon that predators are beneficial to the overall interests of their prey- and vice-versa.
Of course this has been a learning curve. There was the Ascension Island experience. The island had been used as a nesting ground (literally as in many places in Western Scotland) for sea-birds that spend most of the year on the wing. Once ships started calling, some of the rats in their bilges jumped ship. The nesting birds were east prey. When people realised the damage the rats were doing, they introduced cats to kill the rats. But cats are not stupid. Cornered rats are dangerous things, so the cats joined in eating the birds.
Apparently there is now a rough stability because the cats and rats have got the island to themselves for c8 months of the year, and so their numbers can not grow sufficiently to wipe out the birds.
What seems to be crucial is to establish a clear territory- like an island to which some of the deer could be moved.. In other words the abundance of deer could serve the idea of reintroducing the wolves. But I am less sure that the wolves would be an answer to a wider problem.
Not really the same but down where my French family traditionally go to the Mediterranean at Easter just a few kilometres off-shore there is a Naturist island, and I see the tourist boats going over on a regular basis. A "wolf island" could be such an earner: though perhaps like the hamster that we bought for our daughter, is it not the case that wolves are "most interesting" in the dark?
Of course in another part of the South of France there are bears in the Pyrenees, and occasionally it is necessary to compensate farmers. But the intelligence and group power of wolves is perhaps the kind of thing that should be thought about.. As far as I know wild lynx like most cats (though not lions) tend to be quite solitary-like bears.
Cass -
Message 22
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Cass, my fathers side of the family trace their roots back to Ireland. I am told that this is why the first part of my name is spelt McC, which I am told is the Irish way. Where as a person of Scottish background would spell it Mac. Strangely my Grandfather was Irish, (RC) and my Grandmother Welsh (Chapel) There were 7 children from the marriage, and my Grandfather was a fireman aboard ship. So if he was at home when a child was born they were baptised Roman Catholic. If he was away the child was baptised Chapel. But my Father (Chapel) had us baptised C of E. Makes for interesting births deaths and marriages in our family.
-
Message 23
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Grumpyfred
Sorry if I have diverted this thread to surnames.. But it may well be that it is these names that became formalised and public that are most commonly recorded.
My book says that the Irish began to use surnames earlier than most other places in Western Europe- presumably because parts of the Roman Civilization like Christianity survived. Some Irish families have credible pedigrees from 400 AD, and princely houses have recorded surnames from the tenth century.
As for Mc and Mac, he points out that the Scots came from Ireland and that Irish Macs include the MacCarthy, Macnamara, MacMahon, MacGuiness, and MacDermot..But in his Scottish chapter Mr Pine comments that "Macs" have often adopted the name of a powerful man when they came under his protection- and therefore agreed to fight for his cause, so Mac lineages often do not go back further than turbulent times, when this kind of tactic was necessary.
Interestingly he points out that both Campbell and Cameron are derived from Gaelic words meaning some kind of physical deformity or disability.. something that has shaped the life of David Cameron.
Cass -
Message 24
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
But Cass, isn't this how most threads go. It's rather like conversation at a dinner party. We start off on one subject and it wanders round the table altering and expanding as it goes.
GF -
Message 25
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Grumpyfred
Well I would like to think so .. But there is a lovely French word "sortable" which means those people who are not impossible in company.. On the History MB- and elsewhere- I tend to be "not sortable".. as has been pointed out to me frequently enough here..
It is a question of scale.. I tend always to move away from small talk to big issues. And this can create problems like that faced by the towns/cities of the industrial revolution..
Initially the increase in the scale of what their life excreted was a valuable asset, and was sold to local farmers as such. But eventually places like Greenock found they had monster dunghills, and rather than an asset it was just a load of ........
Cass -
Message 26
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
OK, oh lofty ones, but while you gentlemen linger over your port, cigars and terribly serious topics of conversation
, may the ladies in the drawing room continue with their inconsequential chatter about the diminutives of common English names?
Apparently Edwards became Neds, Annes became Nans and Ellens became Nells when parents called their children mine Edward, mine Anne or mine Ellen. I have no idea, however, when Ted or Teddy came to be used for Edward.
The silliest diminutive in English must be Perkin for Peter. It has a real Beatrice Potter feel to it - a bit like being a medieval Squirrel Nutkin. I'm glad we've never had a King Peter - 'Cry England for Perkin, England and St. George' is just all wrong. -
Message 27
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
I think I mean Beatrix Potter - or perhaps Beatrice Webb.
We could settle for Trixie which is an awful diminutive. -
Message 28
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Temperance
Among the more unusual things I have been called, as a no-doubt annnoying younger brother at time, my brother just referred to me to his "peers" as "our nibbloe", which seemed to indicate "baby of the family"..
As for "Teddy", is there not some suggestion that it was initially Theodore Roovelt who his intimates called "Teddy", and his affection for a cuddle toy bear gave us "Teddy Bears".
Our children we named partly with Anglo-French phonetics in mind, though English people tend to distort Pascal with exaggerated mouth-openings and shuttings..His school mates tended to shorten it to "Pasc" or "Pas", though I note he signed his pictures during an graphic art phase "Pax which takes the name right back to its root.
Our daughter- who has not yet complained of it- got that nickname that was made up in the Eighteenth Century for Elizabeth Van Brugh.. Bessie/Nessie + Van + Vanessa.
In both cases, in the event of their not liking their first name [having gone through that phase in childhood] we gave them more bland second names- Anne and James. Neither to my knowledge has used either.
But the case of Cassius Clay surely highlighted the fact that the formal names that get given initially have a great deal to do with the Past- with inheritance and heritage that is often painful. Whereas names that people acquire tend to be earned for good or ill.
Hence when people started calling me Cass they explained that they could not decide whether it was because I was something of a Big Mouth, like Cassius Clay, or what they saw as a ladies man, like Casanova. But it was better than the things I had been called at school.
Coming back to Theodores and Teddys, or Victorias and Vickys surely many such names were just more familiar.. hence Tas' thread reminds me that Edward VII was "Bertie".. How many English monarchs have done a "Pope" and changed their name to a more Kingly one on their accession?
Back in the Cass days, my landlady, a Classics Double-First from Cambridge (like her by then defunct husband--"he just went out and walked under a bus") called her youngest daughter "Fish"- as we all did.
Cass -
Message 29
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Temperance
I am sure you know that Beatrice Potter became Beatrice Webb when she married..
Peter Rabbit as you say was Beatrix Potter's friend.
Cass -
Message 30
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
But was there ever any common ground with the Russian orthodox tradition which makes novels like those of Dostovesky so difficult (for me at least) because the same person will be addressed with seemingly radically different namesΒ
Sorry Cass, I can't help, mostly because I know absolutely nothing about Russian naming traditions!
my fathers side of the family trace their roots back to Ireland. I am told that this is why the first part of my name is spelt McC, which I am told is the Irish way. Where as a person of Scottish background would spell it Mac.Β
Here is a piece on Irish surname prefixes you may find of interest GF. Reading it just now I've also (inadvertantly) learnt why two of the surnames in my mother's Irish family, Maguire and Magennis, are both spelt Mag and not Mc or Mac. Something that has always been a puzzle.
-
Message 31
Posted by Temperance (U14455940) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
I am sure you know that Beatrice Potter became Beatrice Webb when she married... Β
I didn't!
What a messed up message - done in a mad rush. I meant 'Cry God for Perkin, England and St. George!'
Actually I'm not so sure Perkin *is* English. The only Perkin I've ever heard of is Perkin Warbeck and he was supposed to be Flemish. Peterkin is the more usual English diminutive form of Peter. But then we do have the *surname* Perkins (son of Perkin) of course.
There is a character in R.M. Ballantyne's 'The Coral Island' who has the delightfully innocent name of Peterkin Gay. -
Message 32
Posted by Silver Jenny (U12795676) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Cass, the Teddy Bear story came about because Teddy Roosevelt refused to kill a bear cub when out hunting. Steiff, a company which made toy furry animals, made a bear and it became a 'teddy' bear named after him. And their best selling animal.
-
Message 33
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Temperance
Well then I must apologise for my presumption..
It just seemed sort of implicit in your thread-- so I thought I would make it explicit.. I only discovered this from reading BW's "My Apprenticeship" followed by a biography of Beatrix P, though the Beatrice Potter had come into a biography of Joseph Chamberlain, who did see her quite seriously as a potential second wife and step-mother to his children.. It all ended with passionate letters from Beatrice that she begged him to destroy, and which he replied that he had destroyed as soon as he saw that they were written in such terms that she could not possibly have meant to commit them to paper..
Fairly soon afterwards he made a trip to the USA, and he found a less passionate lady to share his life.
"Making love" in those days was obviously complicated.
Cass -
Message 34
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Silver Jenny
Thanks for that.. We agree that was the start of Teddy Bears etc.. but was he the first Teddy.. And Teddy Boys surely were kind of "mock Edwardians"?.
Cass -
Message 35
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Roosevelt would not have been the first Teddy by any means, I am sure. There are Teds in literature long before that. One of Louisa M Alcott's Little Women series has a Teddy, for a start.
My OED says Teddy boys affect the dress of the Edwardian period and that is the main definition of them. The second (and apparently archaic one) is any rowdy young man in a group. I feel old, since I am certainly able to remember when that was really the only meaning anyone gave the term.
My new book on Scottish family history, which seems quite authoritative, but which I have lent to a friend so don't have here to quote, says it is common to think the two forms of Mc and Mac denote Irish or Scottish roots respectively, but that is not correct. I can't remember any more details though.
Cheers, Caro. -
Message 36
Posted by arty macclench (U14332487) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
I think it's fair to say that, while the roots of all Gaelic patronymics MAY have their origins in Ireland, 'Mc' in Scotland will likely represent Irish immigration of the last two centuries odd. 'Mac' in Scotland traditionally contracts to M'- in the south anyway.
Isn't Ned-Ted in the same class of diminutive as Moll-Poll, Meg-Peg- that is, playful nursery talk? -
Message 37
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Friday, 29th April 2011
<quote>Actually I'm not so sure Perkin *is* English. The only Perkin I've ever heard of is Perkin Warbeck and he was supposed to be Flemish. Peterkin is the more usual English diminutive form of Peter. But then we do have the *surname* Perkins (son of Perkin) of course.</quote
Temperance, I think the fact that the surname Perkins is relatively common indicates Perkin was quite usual as a diminutive. (Not sure why Peterkin appeals to you, but not Perkin.)
I think Peter IS only found in England after the conquest. My book, Christian names in Local and Family History says, "Examples of Peter occur in England from 1086 and by the 14th century it was popular in almost every part of the country...The vernacular form 'Pers' occurs regularly in by-names and surnames in 1377 - 81, sometimes alongside its Latin equivalent...in Ecclesfield, for example, an entry for 'Petrus filius Petri' is followed by 'Johannes Pereson'.,,The diminutive 'Perkin' or 'Parkin' was responsible for surnames such as Perkins and Parkinson, another reminder that 'Peter' was not the usual medieval pronunciation."
I wouldn't agree with whoever said that Ned, Ted, Moll, Poll, Peg or Meg are particularly nursery names. Possibly they began that way, but as I have said earlier, many forms of names were needed to differentiate people in earlier times. Even if they began life that way, that it not the case today. Meg and Ned and Molly and Polly at least are being used in birth notices as the given birth names for children, not just used as diminutives or nicknames.
Cheers, Caro. -
Message 38
Posted by arty macclench (U14332487) on Friday, 29th April 2011
Well, yes- it was me- and I meant nursery names 'in origin'. Apologies if that wasn't clear. The fact that these diminutives are now being chosen as given names only shows that people have lost touch with the origins of names, which seems to me a shame. It seems to me preferable to give the child a 'root' Christian name and let it shape around them as their personality and their relationships determine.
Wasn't there a thread somewhere on these very boards (or former boards) quite recently that touched on this very issue? -
Message 39
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Friday, 29th April 2011
The fact that these diminutives are now being chosen as given names only shows that people have lost touch with the origins of names, which seems to me a shame. It seems to me preferable to give the child a 'root' Christian name and let it shape around them as their personality and their relationships determine.Β
(Let's hope I've done the quotes better this time, and sorry for not remembering who that was - it's fiddly to go back and check.)
I doubt it always means that, though I do agree and think people should use the full name as the given Christian name. I do feel in many cases it is quite a deliberate choice though. Many years ago I asked in newspapers why people had given their kids the names they had (and got over 100 lovely letters back, some no more than a sentence long, others several pages) and a sizable number mentioned they wanted names that couldn't be shortened. (They weren't always that successful.)
I do feel it's a real shame when names are changed completely from their origins. I only made one real comment about possible names for my son's child (who is Toby - "had to find a name that wasn't known from kids we taught, and didn't like the long version of this"): I told them that if they named a girl Jorja (not that they would) I would faithfully write to Georgia. I think it is a dreadful shame to wreck the historic George part of this very nice name by sticking 'J's all over the place.
Perhaps not quite the place to say this, but we have had another (non-accidental) death of a baby recently here; these babies so often have names like Serenity and Angel or Star that you wonder if the parents are somehow trying to give the child properties they know it won't really have in reality. (Though perhaps it is just that many of these children are Maori and Polynesians are more imaginative with names than Europeans.)
Caro. -
Message 40
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Friday, 29th April 2011
Slightly off subject, I feel sorry for those children lumbered with names that date them (I've put that wrongly) Mums who either watched certain soaps or followed a girl or boy band. We had a number of children called Posh etc. More than one poor child was named after the wholeof a winning footbal team. (It happened a lot in Liverpool) You have people naming their child after the place they where conceived. (Very nice if it was say Paris, but not Brackly Court Bootle. I will explain that one day) Imagine being named after that railway station in Wales? Oh one for the future while mum is filling in the Birth Cert. Registra. "Name of Father?" Mother. "I don't know, I was on my mobile at the time.".
-
Message 41
Posted by Catigern (U14419012) on Friday, 29th April 2011
Anglo-Scottish border surnames suggets that, by the 16th century at the latest, 'full' names like 'Robert', 'Nicholas' and 'Richard' were being contracted without any -kin element being added, hence 'Nixon', 'Robson', 'Dixon' etc...
-
Message 42
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Saturday, 30th April 2011
ID, back to Philippa. I don't know Greek but was under the impression that the 'a' ending was Latin, even though Philip is from the Greek. But what I was meaning to say was that although the written form at the time was Philippa for women, the people just pronounced it as Philip for both men and women. And this was presumably the case for other names which had stuck an 'a' on to feminise it for written records. I don't know how Joanna was pronounced in earlier times, though. Or Roberta. Or Louisa.
-
Message 43
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Saturday, 30th April 2011
At what point did the 'ina' suffix arrive, resulting some infelicitous combinations like Robertina and Donaldina? I remember a lot on 'Ina's in my grandmother's generation, she was a Christina herself but always known as Chrissie, but I don't recall knowing the full name of most of them. The only one I knew was an aunt Ina, officially Robertina, whose surname was Burns!
-
Message 44
Posted by arty macclench (U14332487) on Saturday, 30th April 2011
Nicholas was a girl's name in Scotland in the 18th century
-
Message 45
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Saturday, 30th April 2011
I wondered about Nicholas and thought perhaps both boys and girls might have been referred to as Nichol; I must have read somewhere that they were both known by the same form
Robertina doesn't seem so bad, but I always felt Jamesina and Thomasina were rather forced. Christina is lovely. -
Message 46
Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Saturday, 30th April 2011
Then there was my cousin with the serious sun bed habit, Orangina and her heart stopping friend, Angina.
-
Message 47
Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Sunday, 1st May 2011
Hi Caro,
I'm sure we probably need the help with this (where is WOM when needed!) as I don't know Latin and only modern Greek. Even though much is still the same as Ancient Greek, there is much that is not. But, I do think, to find a reason for name suffixes in English it is important to look at their etymologies.
The a ending is the feminine form in Greek and the os ending is the masculine. Marinos/Marina, Christos/Christina, Philippos/Philippa, Nicholaos/Nicholetta.
As far as I'm aware, the a is also the feminine ending in Latin and the us ending is the masculine. Julius/Julia, Aurelius/Aurelia, Livius/Livia, Augustus/Augusta.
I don't know if the a endings were once dropped from female names in the English speaking world, but in their original Greek they almost certainly would not have been as the masculine and feminine rules in the language are/were quite strict, and in Latin also, I think. -
Message 48
Posted by CASSEROLEON (U11049737) on Sunday, 1st May 2011
In France the many of the Saint's names- and Holy Days that are used as names (Pascal) - have both masculine and feminine forms. Hence my wife's uncle Michel and his daughter Michelle.. I would imagine that this was quite common thoughout Christian world.. And the English prefix of "wo" to indicate a female of the species of man seems to suggest a wider custom of adding on bits to indicate female gender.
As far as names given at birth, however, it was probably the absence of bits that resulted in some babies being given girls names.. And the system of having names with both feminine and masculine forms proved handy on one Caribbean island where a few decades ago there were families whose daughters turned into men at adolescence. They all turned out to be descended from a woman who died c1830 and who had passed on a defective gene so that the foetal change that turns some foetuses into males was not brought about strongly enough, and the blast of testorerone at adolescence was much stronger in compensation. Fortunately it was a predominantly RC country and everyone had Christian names.
Going back to Dicks-- Was Dick Whittingdon always so-called?
Cass -
Message 49
Posted by Caro (U1691443) on Sunday, 1st May 2011
Might be a bit hard to work out what's what, ID, but quite a number of the WOM people are here:
Don't really know Greek to ask about this, though. Will try.
Cheers, Caro.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.