ACADEMY OF SAINT GABRIEL REPORT 2842 http://www.s-gabriel.org/2842 ************************************ 08 May 2004 From: Ursula Whitcher Greetings from the Academy of Saint Gabriel! You asked whether is an appropriate name for a man living in Roman Britain between the fourth and sixth centuries AD. We'll begin with some background on Roman naming customs, discuss each part of the name and its pronunciation separately, and end with some suggestions for combining name elements. In the early Roman Empire, most citizens used a tria nomina or triple name, which consisted of a praenomen (given name), nomen (gens or clan name), and cognomen (originally a personal nickname, but later inherited within a branch of a gens). By the third century, this style of naming had fallen out of fashion. The praenomen disappeared from use, and two-element names became the norm. By the fourth century, 90% of men and women in the Empire were identified by a single name (derived from a cognomen); by the fifth century that number had risen to 95%. The remainder used a nomen plus cognomen, or, in a few cases, a single name plus a patronymic byname [1, 2, 3]. Thus, a two-element name consisting of nomen and cognomen is appropriate for your period, though a single-element name is more likely. Between the fourth and sixth centuries AD, the spoken form of the Latin language changed a great deal, so we'll give several different pronunciations for each name we suggest. In particular, Latin case endings such as <-us> disappeared from pronunciation in Britain by the end of the sixth century. is a French name derived from the Roman cognomen , which derives in turn from the nomen . A graffito on a Roman British pottery fragment from Leicester mentions a gladiator named . [4] At the beginning of your period, we believe was pronounced approximately \LOO-ky@s\, where \y\ is pronounced as in , \k\ as in , and \@\ represents the sound of 'a' in and . (This sound is called schwa.) During the second half of the fifth century, the \k\ became a \g\ sound, yielding the pronunciation \LOO-gy@s\. At some point during the sixth century, the last syllable disappeared and the \oo\ vowel changed to the \u"\ of German 'to fill', where represents a 'u' with an umlaut or pair of dots above it. Thus, by the end of your period, we believe this name would have been pronounced \lu"g\. [7] We found a Romano-British at Colchester. [5] At the beginning of your period, we believe was pronounced \loo-KYAW-n@s\. During the second half of the fifth century, the pronunciation changed to \loo-GYAW-n@s\. At the end of the fifth century and beginning of the sixth century, the name was pronounced \loo-GYOH-n@s\, where \OH\ represents the vowel in . By the end of the sixth century, we believe the name was pronounced \lu"-GYOHN\. [7] is a fine cognomen for a man living in Roman Britain. A man named set up an altar at Caerwent in 152 AD; later, the name was borrowed into British, becoming Old Welsh and Middle Welsh . [6, 8] We believe that at the beginning of your period, was pronounced approximately \roo-MAW-n@s\. During the second half of the fifth century, the pronunciation changed to \roo-MHAW-n@s\. Here, \MH\ represents a nasalized version of the sound of 'b' in Spanish 'a wolf' and of 'v' in Spanish 'a grape'. To make this sound, set yourself to say \b\, but relax your lips slightly so that the air can escape between them with a sort of buzzing sound. (It's rather like blowing out a candle, except that your vocal cords are vibrating. Since the sound is nasalized, some air should also escape through your nose.) By the end of your period, we believe this name would have been pronounced \ru"-MHOHN\. [7] As we noted above, a man living in Roman Britain during your time period would be most likely to use just one name, so using simply , , or would be the best recreation. The nomen and cognomen combination is also a fine name for a Romano-Briton. Since and are both cognomina, is less likely; however, we believe it is possible that a man usually known as could have acquired the nickname . We hope this letter has been useful. Please write to us again if any part of it has been unclear, or if you have other questions. I was assisted in researching and writing this letter by Talan Gwynek, Tangwystyl verch Morgant Glasvryn, Mari neyn Brian, Maridonna Benvenuti, Aryanhwy merch Catmael, Arval Benicoeur, Adelaide de Beaumont, and Juliana de Luna. For the Academy, Ursula Georges 2 May 2004 References: [1] Kajanto, "The Emergence of the Late Single Name System" in _L'Onomastique Latine_ (Paris: Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1977). He notes an exception: "In the inscriptions of the Roman magistrates of senatorial rank in CIL, VI, we find one or more gentilicia followed by one or more cognomina still in common use in the 5th century AD. Polyonymy rather than single name was characteristic of the late nomenclature of the Roman nobility. It was not until the 6th century that even the aristocrats began to bear single names." [2] Andrew Robert Burn, "The Romans in Britain: an anthology of inscriptions" (Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press, 1969). [3] Arthur Ernest Gordon, _Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions_ (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1958-65). He confirms the pattern noted by Kajanto, including the use of longer names among higher-ranking officials. [4] Anthony Birley, _The People of Roman Britain_ (London: B T Batsford, Ltd, 1979), p. 121. [5] Birley, p. 123. [6] Birley, p. 128. [7] cf. Kenneth Jackson, _Language and history in early Britain; a chronological survey of the Brittonic languages, first to twelfth century A.D._ (Edinburgh, University Press, 1953). [8] Jackson, pp. 289, 307.