ACADEMY OF SAINT GABRIEL REPORT 3089 http://www.s-gabriel.org/3089 ************************************ 6 Dec 2005 From: Gunnvor Silfraharr Greetings from the Academy of St. Gabriel! You asked about the name for a woman of Anglo-Norman descent in the mid-12th century around 1135. You also asked about names for your children and husband. As we discussed in earlier correspondence, the given name is basically fine for your period, but this particular spelling is not the best choice: The earliest example we have is from 1273. The Latinized form , which we found in 1194 and 1198, is a pretty good indication of a vernacular in your period [1]. is pronounced just about like modern , with as in . We found an occupational byname meaning 'dyer' in your period: a document of 1148 records three men and a woman with the Latin byname 'dyer'. [2] Unfortunately, we can't tell what vernacular term is hidden behind the documentary Latin term, or even whether it is an English or a French term. It may even be that both are represented: two of the men bear Continental forenames brought to England with the Conquest, while the third man and the woman bear forenames of native English origin. The earliest known examples of the word (in any form) appear to be bynames and recorded in 1231 and 1235, respectively, about a century after your period. [3] Nevertheless, if any of the 1148 instances of does in fact stand for an English term, that term is most likely a 12th century form of the word . We lack the expertise to give an exhaustive account of reasonable 12th century spellings, but we can at least justify the spellings and for your period. [4] Here <3> stands for the Middle English letter yogh, which looks very much like the numeral <3>. It was used to represent several sounds, but here it stands for the sound of in . [7] Alternatively, Latin might represent an Old French term, perhaps something like the 1196 byname . [8] Finally, we found a few bynames for particular kinds of dyers attested in the late 12th century. The Old French byname 'the one who dyes with or sells woad' is recorded in 1185 and again in the 1190s, when it also appears as , , and . [9, 10] Around 1200 we found and for a madderer, i.e., one who dyes using madder [11]. Also around 1200 we found a woman named ; her byname means 'dyer in black'. [12] Thus, we have two early examples of women recorded with occupational bynames referring to dyeing. The example of raises the issue of gender in occupational bynames. Old English had several ways of forming agent nouns, i.e., nouns meaning 'one who does so-and-so', like modern English 'one who hunts', 'one who hunts fowl', etc. In addition to the suffix <-ere>, corresponding to modern <-er>, it had a suffix <-estre> that was used to form feminine agent nouns, e.g., 'female teacher' from 'to teach' and 'female dancer' from 'to hop, to dance'. This suffix survived into Middle English as <-ster>, though its sense changed in some dialects. In southern Middle English it remained primarily a feminine suffix through the 14th century, as in the citation noted above, while in northern Middle English it soon came to be used indiscriminately for both men and women. [13] In any event it is entirely possible that in your period there was a feminine alongside the mentioned above; it would have been pronounced roughly \DAY-es-tr@\, where \@\ stands for the sound of in and . [14] Other possible spellings are , pronounced roughly \DEH-ghes-tr@\, and , which might represent either of these pronunciations. (Here \gh\ stands for the voiced counterpart of the sound spelled in Scottish and German .) Old French was also capable of such distinctions; the feminine forms corresponding to and are and , respectively. We have few examples of women with occupational bynames in your period, and most of those are in Latin. After your period, however, it became increasingly common to use masculine Old French forms as women's bynames, at least in written documents. Thus, extrapolation suggests that in your period the correct gender was normally used. To sum up, the following names are all reasonable extrapolations from the evidence: Gilian De3estre Gilian {th}e De3estre Gilian Teinturere Gilian la Teinturere Gilian Blakiestre Gilian {th}e Blakiestre Gilian Waisdiere Gilian la Waisdiere (Here <{th}> stands for the letter thorn, which looks like a superimposed on a

so that they share a single loop.) You also asked about as a name for your husband, and a surname meaning "the napper" or "slothful". Your husband's choice, , is the standard written Latinization of the English name , pronounced roughly \MEE-l@\, and the Old French name , pronounced roughly \MEE-l@s\ [15]. For example, we found in 1150x1160 [16] and in 1148 [17]. was much more common than in the early records [18]. Some bynames that may appeal to your husband include "the sleeper" in 1212 [19]; "do little" in 1204 [18]; or ca.1110, 1148, from Old French meaning "slow, sluggish", which gives us the English word [19]. Thus names such as , , , or would be fine choices for your husband. The first two of these are vernacular French, while the last two are vernacular English; in the 12th century either context is reasonable. Your son's name, , was in use throughout your period, but this spelling was used in contexts where Latin was used (primarily written documents and university or church settings where Latin was spoken). We found one instance of ca.1150x1160 [20], and in 1148 we found eight examples of [21]. The name came to England via Old French . Our earliest vernacular citations are well after your period but still show this Old French heritage: 1273, 1284, and the pet forms ca.1248 and 1255 [22, 23]. Thus, it is extremely likely that and represent the usual spoken forms in your period as well; they were pronounced roughly \ah-lih-SAHN-dr@\ and \SAHN-dr@\. Surnames (or more precisely, "bynames") in 12th century England were generally literally descriptive rather than inherited. A son might share his father's byname if he followed the same profession or lived on the same manor, but bynames were not generally treated as inherited family names until quite a bit later. Minor children were probably almost always identified as their parent's children. Alexander the son of Mile and Gilian could have been called or ; and would have been identified in writing with an analogous Latin formula, e.g. [24], [25], . These patronymic and metronymic bynames could have remained in use when they became adults, or their acquaintances might have chosen new ones to describe them in more useful ways. It's not unlikely they would have been identified with different bynames in different circumstances: that was common in 12th century England. As we mentioned earlier, the original name your daughter preferred, , is not a good choice: we have researched it carefully, and found no evidence that it was used in England before the 17th century. For full details, please read our article: Concerning the Name Cordelia http://www.medievalscotland.org/problem/names/cordelia.shtml Since wasn't a good choice, you wrote that your daughter instead prefers a beautiful, preferably long name with a cute diminutive, and a byname suitable for a bard or a storyteller. We found several names in your period that might appeal to her [1]: Latin Form of Name Date Spoken Form of Name ------------------ ---------- ------------------- Amphelisia 1198 Amphelice Christiana 1154, 1199 Christian Emmelina 1154-89 Emelin or Emmelin Goldeburga 1160-65 Goldeburg Heilewisa 1160 Heilewis or Helewis Hugolina 1185 uncertain Letselina 1101-16 Letselin, Letseline, Lecelin, Leceline [26] Sueteluue 1197 (meaning "sweet-love") Sueta before 1200 Suete (meaning "sweet") Lufe ca.1095 Love (1208) (meaning "love") Tephania 1154-89 Tephan, Tephanie (the modern form of this name is ) Wuderoua 1170 Wuderoue or Wuderove (the herb-name "woodruff") Of these, , which means "sweet love", seems to have the best diminutive forms, using either the "sweet" or "love" portions of the name. is pronounced roughly \SWAY-t@\, is pronounced roughly \LOO-v@\, with \OO\ as in , not , and is roughly \SWAY-t@-loo-v@\, with secondary stress on \loo\. The pronunciations of the other names above are not always obvious; if your daughter selects one of these names, please write us again and we'll be happy to provide a pronunciation. We did, however, find a couple of 12th century bynames related to the idea of "bard" in the sense "musician": 1186 and 1176 "sing (like a) blackbird" [27, 28]. Another possibility is the byname "songstress" This word is attested in Old English and appears as a woman's byname in 1327, so a byname is possible in the first half of the 12th c. [29, 30]. We hope this letter has been useful. Please write us again if any part of it has been unclear or if you have other questions. We were assisted in researching and writing this letter by Ursula Georges, Maridonna Benvenuti, Aryanhwy merch Catmael, and Arval Benicoeur. For the Academy, Gunnvor Silfraharr and Talan Gwynek 6 December 2005 ----------------------------------------------------- References [1] Talan Gwynek, "Feminine Given Names in _A Dictionary of English Surnames_" (SCA: KWHS Proceedings, 1994; WWW: Academy of Saint Gabriel, 1997). http://www.s-gabriel.org/names/talan/reaney/ [2] Von Feilitzen, Olof. 'The Personal Names and Bynames of the Winton Domesday', in Martin Biddle, ed., _Winchester in the Early Middle Ages_, Winchester Studies 1 (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1976). P. 204. [3] Aryanhwy merch Catmael (Sara L. Friedemann), "12th & 13th Century English Textile Surnames" (WWW: privately published, 1999). http://www.ellipsis.cx/~liana/names/textile.html [4] To determine how it might have been spelled in the 12th century, we looked at 12th century forms of Old English words and names that also had the sequence . In line 3 of the late 12th century 'Brut' by Layamon, for instance, is the prepositional phrase , representing Old English <{ae}t Earnleage> 'at Earnleah'. [5] The bynames 12th c. 'hollow-eye' and 1184 'broad-eye' have Old English 'eye' as second element. [6] [5] Mosse/, Fernand. A Handbook of Middle English. Trans. James A. Walker (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1968 [1952]); p. 152. Here we are using a slash to indicate an acute accent over the preceding letter. [6] Reaney, P.H., & R.M. Wilson, _A Dictionary of English Surnames_ (London: Routledge, 1991; Oxford University Press, 1995). S.nn. , . [7] A picture of the letter yogh may be seen at . [8] Fransson, Gustav, _Middle English Surnames of Occupation, 1100-1350_ (Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1935). Pp. 105f. [9] Ibid., p. 106. [10] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], s.n. . [11] Clark, Cecily, "Some Early Canterbury Surnames", in _Words, Names and History: Selected Papers_. ed. Peter Jackson. Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1995. P. 212. [12] Ibid., p. 209. [13] Weiner, Edmund S. and John Simpson, eds. The Compact Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd Ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989). S.v. <-ster>. [14] Our earliest examples of this byname are 1262, 1280, and 1296, but like , 'female dyer' is a regular Old English derivative of the verb 'to dye' that could well have existed in late Old English. [15] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], s.n. . [16] Von Feilitzen, 'The Personal Names and Bynames of the Winton Domesday', op. cit. [see note [2] above], p. 165. [17] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], s.n. . [18] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], s.n. . [19] Von Feilitzen, 'The Personal Names and Bynames of the Winton Domesday', op. cit. [see note [2] above], p. 174. [20] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], s.n. . The notation ca.1150x1160 means that the name was found one time sometime between 1150 and 1160. [21] Von Feilitzen, 'The Personal Names and Bynames of the Winton Domesday', op. cit. [see note [2] above], p. 148. [22] Withycombe, E.G., _The Oxford Dictionary of English Christian Names_, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988). S.n. . [23] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], s.n. . [24] For the standard Latin genitive see for instance the French charter, dated before 1176, at: http://elec.enc.sorbonne.fr/cartulaires/pontoise/acte151/ [25] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], have 1150x60. This notation means that this form was found once between the years 1150 and 1160. [26] We have the name 1188 to show that the final <-e> of a modern French feminine suffix wasn't necessarily used. See: Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], s.n. . [27] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], s.n. . [28] Reaney & Wilson, op. cit. [see note [6] above], s.n. . [29] Clark Hall, J.R. & H.D. Meritt, _A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary_ (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1969). S.v. . [30] Thuresson, Bertil, _Middle English Occupational Terms_, Lund Studies in English XIX (Lund: C.W.K. Gleerup, 1950; Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint, 1968). p. 174. ---------------------------------