The Earliest Names

The Earliest Names

The earliest names were very simple, given the rudimentary form of language millennia ago. It's a pretty sure bet that none of these names survive in their original form today (although “Ugh” could have formed the basis for “Hugh”).

With such a small population, there was no need for people to be identified by any more than one name. These “single” names (they really weren't first names because no middle or last names came after them) often related to a physical attribute or a circumstance of birth. Many of them still survive as surnames.

It is assumed, since there are no definitive records to support this, that naming continued along these lines for many centuries. But in the early part of the eleventh century something happened in England that not only served to change existing naming practices, it would also provide the first record of the names that were in use at the time. For this, we have a guy named William and a race named Norman to thank.

Enter the Normans

In 1066, the residents of England found themselves under siege by herds of marauding nomads from the east. Led by a particularly fervent fellow named William (a.k.a. William the Conqueror), they swept the land and overtook everything in sight, claiming everything they plundered for their home country.

Not only did William and his crew take over the population, they took over its language, replacing the simple names that had been used in England for centuries with unfamiliar, strange-sounding (at least to English ears) Norman names. Where original English names had been drawn chiefly from the Anglo-Saxon language, Norman names were primarily of German or French origin (the Normans having conquered these countries first), which we today associate with German- or French-speaking peoples. So, thanks to the Norman Conquest, many of the names we today think of as being English are actually German or French in origin.

Before William and his crew arrived, it was an English tradition to create new names by combining elements from existing names. As you can see by the following list, some of these combinations were pretty awkward. It's a good bet that none of them will climb onto the most popular name charts anytime soon, and perhaps that's a good thing. Can you imagine the ridicule a boy named But would face in school? And how about a little girl with the moniker of Wakerilda?

From: Leslie Alan Dunkling, First Names First (Universe Books, 1977).

This naming tradition was largely abandoned when the Normans came calling, as they forced their new subjects to adopt many of their traditions, including the ones they had for names. Instead of creating names, the Normans generally relied on an established group of monikers that was passed on through families, or they would name their children in honor of special friends or famous people. One of the results of this practice was a significant reduction in the number of names available for use.

As the pool of names dwindled, certain names came to dominate, leading to the adoption of family names, or last names, in about 1100 C.E. This practice, which is believed to have started in Italy, moved through Europe as the demands of an increasing population necessitated a procedure for distinguishing Edward the father from Edward the son from Edward the uncle. These last names, or surnames, were often built from popular first names, as in the case of John becoming Johnson (son of John). They also often reflected what the individual did for a living, such as Potter or Baker, or were taken from their hometowns.