ACADEMY OF SAINT GABRIEL REPORT 2399 http://www.s-gabriel.org/2399 ************************************ 27 Dec 2001 From: "Brian M. Scott" Greetings from the Academy of S. Gabriel! You asked whether there is a time and place before 1601 where the name is historically appropriate. Since is an English surname and you had already expressed an interest in an English setting, we looked no farther afield. The earliest forms of the surname that we've found are spelled with : 1205, 1242, and 1296. [1] It isn't until the 14th century that we find spellings with : 1327, 1327, 1375. [1, 2] In the 16th century the most common form in our sources is , with the variants and . [3] Finally, we found one instance of , in 1545. [4] The given name does not seem to have been used in England until the late 12th century, and it remained rare for at least another hundred years. [5, 6] Until sometime in the 16th century it seems to have been strictly a written form of the name, a conventional Latinization used in official documents; the vernacular English form of the name was . [7] The name became increasingly popular in the late Middle Ages, until in the 16th century it was one of the ten most common feminine names in England. [8] Starting in the 16th century, however, there are also clear examples of the given name in English-language records. [9, 10] Some of these may be early instances of the use of Latin as an independent name, a practice that became quite common in the 18th century. [6] Others are known to be spelling variants of , the Hebrew source of Latin and Greek , because both names are used for the same person. Although the name only came into use in England around the middle of the 16th century, its popularity grew very quickly, and by the early 17th century it had become one of the more common English feminine names. [11, 12, 13] Thus, it is likely that often represents even when there is no proof. In any case there is no doubt that the name was in use in England in the later 16th century, though was much more common. To sum up, the name , in that spelling, is definitely compatible with the second half of the 16th century. It is much more likely to have been written , however. Finally, the given name was much more common than , and is correspondingly even more representative of 16th century English naming. [14] Catriona inghean Ui Bhraonain, Adelaide de Beaumont, Arval Benicoeur, Aryanhwy merch Catmael, Blaise de Cormeilles, Dietmar von Straubing, Julie Stampnitzky, Mari neyn Brian, Ursula Georges, and Will Dekne also contributed to this letter. We apologize for having taken so long and hope that this letter has nevertheless been useful. Please don't hesitate to write us again if any part of it has been unclear or if you have other questions. For the Academy, Talan Gwynek 27 December 2001 ===== References and Notes: [1] Reaney, P.H., & R.M. Wilson. A Dictionary of English Surnames (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); s.n. . [2] Franklin, Peter. The Taxpayers of Medieval Gloucestershire (Dover, NH: Alan Sutton, 1993); pp. 30, 82. [3] Howard, A.J., & T.L. Stoate, eds. The Devon Muster Roll for 1569 (Bristol: T.L. Stoate, 1977); pp. 2, 90, 93, 100, 102, 136, 139, 209, 247. [4] Bardsley, Charles. A Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames (Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Company, 1980); s.n. . [5] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit., s.n. . [6] Withycombe, E.G. The Oxford Dictionary of English Christian Names, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988); s.n. . [7] The evidence for this is necessarily indirect. Names in the earliest post-Conquest records were usually thoroughly Latinized, and given names continued to be Latinized in most official documents for several centuries. Beginning in the 13th century, however, bynames were often left in the vernacular, allowing us a glimpse of the actual spoken forms. The name was rare enough not to have produced many bynames, but we do find the byname 'Dame Anne' in 1327. We also have parallel evidence for other names, showing, for instance, that the Latinized and represented spoken and , respectively (Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. s.nn. , , ). Originally was pronounced \AH-n@\, where \@\ stands for the sound of the in and . During the course of the 14th century it lost the second syllable and came to be pronounced \AHN\. The modern pronunciation goes back to about 1600. [8] Smith-Bannister, Scott. Names and Naming Patterns in England, 1538-1700 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997); pp. 196f. [9] Garrett-Pegge, J. W. A Transcript of the First Volume, 1538-1636, of the Parish Register of Chesham, Buckingham County (London: Elliot Stock, 1904), Facsimile Reprint: (Bowie, Maryland: Heritage Books, Inc., 1993); pp. 55, 57, 73. [10] The Parish Registers of St. Michael, Cornhill, London, Containing the Marriages, Baptisms, and Burials from 1546 to 1754. Partly edited by Joseph Lemuel Chester. The Publications of the Harleian Society: Registers, Vol. VII (London: 1882); Christenings, years 1548, 1574, 1586, 1589, 1593. [11] Withycombe, op. cit., s.n. . [12] Brooke, J.M.S., & A.W.C. Hallen, A. W. C. The Transcript of the Registers of the United Parishes of S. Mary Woolnoth and S. Mary Woolchurch Haw, in the City of London, from their Commencement 1538 to 1760 (London: Bowles & Sons, 1886); S. Mary Woolchurch Haw, Baptisms, 1577, has an instance of . [13] Smith-Bannister, op. cit., pp. 197ff. [14] The Academy is concerned primarily with the authenticity of names and armory, but if you wish to register any form of this name with the SCA College of Arms, you should be aware that the name has previously been returned for being too similar to the name of the opera singer Annie Louise Cary (1841-1921): http://sca.org/heraldry/loar/2000/08/00-08lar.html Nevertheless, clause V.1.b.ii (Number of Name Phrases) of the SCA College of Arms Rules for Submissions appears to allow just this degree of similarity: http://www.sca.org/heraldry/laurel/rfs.html