ACADEMY OF SAINT GABRIEL REPORT 2345 http://www.s-gabriel.org/2345 ************************************ ************************************************* * * * NOTE: Later research turned up additional * * information relevant to this report. * * See the end of the letter for details. * * * ************************************************* 30 May 2001 From: (Josh Mittleman) Greetings from the Academy of Saint Gabriel! You asked whether or is an appropriate name for a late 12th or early 13th century Anglo-Norman woman, and how it would have been rendered in Latin. You also asked for information about the name . This letter is a brief answer to your question. was a common name among the Normans in England in your period. This is the Latin spelling and may still have been the spelling used in Anglo-Norman French. The first instance we have of in England is dated 1284 [1]. In either spelling, the name was pronounced \AY-v@\, not \EE-v@\. The symbol \@\ stands for the sound of the in or . The surnames you've chosen are both fine for your period, and those particular spellings are among the forms we've found in medieval records. is recorded in this spelling in 1148 and 1220 and in the Latinized form in 1142, 1219, and 1221. Other spellings from your period include 1148, 1250, 1296, 1220 (where the apostrophe indicates an omitted letter). The spelling is recorded in 1086 and c.1150-60; other spellings include c.1155, 1278, and the Latinized c.1183 [2]. Either or is a fine name for the time and culture you want to re-create. Either surname would have been understood to identify your father, e.g. would have implied "Eva, Bertram's daughter". The Latin form of either name would simply have been a translation of that meaning: or . The ending <-i> in your father's name indicates that this is the genitive (possessive) form of the name. We have found just one example of , in a Latin text that identifies a man 1218 [3]. We believe that is the genitive (possessive) form of , which is in turn a Latinized form of a Norman name , pronounced \AY-v@-loon\. This name is a diminutive of , and would be a fine choice for your period. Another similar diminutive, , might also appeal to you [3]; it was pronounced \AY-v@-leen\ with the vowel \ee\ shorter in duration than it is in modern English words like . We hope this brief letter has been useful. Please write us again if you have any questions. I was assisted in researching and writing this letter by Maridonna Benvenuti, Talan Gwynek, Aryanhwy merch Catmael, and Juliana de Luna. For the Academy, Arval Benicoeur 30 May 2001 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - References [1] Talan Gwynek, "Feminine Given Names in _A Dictionary of English Surnames_" (SCA: KWHS Proceedings, 1994; WWW: J. Mittleman, 1997). http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/talan/reaney/ [2] Reaney, P. H., & R. M. Wilson, _A Dictionary of English Surnames_ (London: Routledge, 1991; Oxford University Press, 1995), s.nn. Bartram, Lambard. [3] Reaney & Wilson, s.n. Eveling. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Addendum, 7 Oct 2003 Greetings from the Academy of Saint Gabriel! In your period, 1150-1250, the name was pronounced roughly \law~m-BEHRT\, where \aw~\ represents a nasalized vowel \aw\. Arval for the Academy 07 Oct 2003