ACADEMY OF SAINT GABRIEL REPORT 2727 http://www.s-gabriel.org/2727 ************************************ ************************************************* * * * NOTE: Later research turned up additional * * information relevant to this report. * * See the end of the letter for details. * * * ************************************************* - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NOTE: This report was originally sent as a direct reply, and therefore is not as reliable as regular Academy reports. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Greetings from the Academy of Saint Gabriel! As you know from the note you've already received, the Academy is not currently accepting new clients. However, your question piqued the interest of a couple members: We can provide you a little information. We haven't checked all our resources, but a quick check of the best of them does not reveal any evidence that there ever was a name in medieval England. We wouldn't be particularly surprised if we had found such a name: It is a possible (though unlikely) 11th or 12th century Middle English rendering of the hypothetical Old English name . A parallel case is the Old English name , which is recorded in Latin documents of 1086 in various forms including <{AE}ldredus>, , , and (see E. G. Withycombe, Oxford Dictionary of English Christian Names, s.n. Aldred). (The symbol {AE} here represents the letter aesc or ash, which is written as an A-E ligature.) If had existed, it would most likely have become in the 11th or 12th century, but is not impossible. We can't recommend this speculation as the best re-creation, but it may meet the standards of the SCA College of Arms. The only circumstance in which we actually find something like as a name is a _surname_ recorded in 14th century. This surname ultimately derives from one of two other Old English given names <{AE}lfric> or <{AE}{dh}elric>. (Here {dh} stands for the letter edh, written as a backward '6' with acrossbar on the upper limb.) However, this spelling occurs only as a surname, not as a given name: It was common for surnames to evolved into spellings never used for the root words from which they derived. The most similar Middle English spelling of these given names that we found is , recorded in 1220 for a man who is elsewhere identified as (Reaney & Wilson, A Dictionary of English Surnames, s.n. Aldrich). Note that the final <-ch> in these names was pronounced \k\, not \tch\. So if your actual goal is to convince people that there was a medieval English name pronounced \ELD-ritch\, then we're afraid you're out of luck. You also asked when surnames of the form were used in England, as opposed to simply . Surnames based on the name of the place where someone lived are called "locative bynames". They were common in England both before and after the Norman Conquest. In written records after the Conquest, the preposition tended to be , though in English speech it was (pronounced \ohf\ rather than \uv\). Locative bynames without a preposition occur in some parts of England as early as the 11th century, but that was exceptional until the 13th century. The tendency to drop it was marked by the end of the 13th century in Sussex, by the early 14th in Surrey, and by the end of the 14th in London. The trend was later in the north: the preposition disappeared in York in the early 15th century and continued in occasional use in Lancashire as late as c.1450. (See Reaney and Wilson, p.xvii). We hope this information is helpful. Arval for the Academy 21 Jun 2002 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Correction, Arval, 20 Jan 2005: The written preposition was , not , as the letter originally read.