When did people start taking last names?

Question:I've been working on the geneology for my dad's side of the family. So far I have only been able to trace my dad's last named as far back as the mid 1700's. My ancestry is Pomeranian (the country not the dog!) and my last name is actually Soribian and means "A newcomer to district" so is it possible that upon moving to that area my ancestors picked up a last name or possibly a new last name?

Any info and links (except of Wikipedia please!) would be very helpful. Thanks :)

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: I've been working on the geneology for my dad's side of the family. So far I have only been able to trace my dad's last named as far back as the mid 1700's. My ancestry is Pomeranian (the country not the dog!) and my last name is actually Soribian and means "A newcomer to district" so is it possible that upon moving to that area my ancestors picked up a last name or possibly a new last name?

Any info and links (except of Wikipedia please!) would be very helpful. Thanks :)

Various sources give different answers, but generally speaking, the Romans were credited with being the first to use surnames. They would actually use four names; a "given name", a second name, then the name from the mother's family followed by the name from the father's family (sound familiar?)
Try http://www.zeitlerweb.com/surnames.htm
http://www.searchforancestors.com/surnam...
http://genealogy.about.com/od/surname_me...
http://www.intl-research.com/surname.htm

Otherwise, keep searching.

Different time in different places. In Europe for most people it wasn't until the last melennium. In England most had a surname by the end of the 14th century. They took their names based on being the 1. the son of someone, like Jones and Johnson, son of John.
2. their occupation, smith, miller, fisher, clark(clerk), baker, taylor, barber etc.
3. where they lived. Sam that lived on or near a hill became Sam Hill. Names ending in ton (indicates town(settement).
4. some characteristic about the person, Little, Short, Small, Brown(meaning brown hair) etc.

By the time they got through legitimate sons of the same man could each have a different surname but they each shared their surname with others with whom they were not related.

Also it wasn't until a couple of more centuries that everybody kept the same surname down through the family each generation. William Smith's son could have been John Williamson but then John's son the blacksmith became James Smith.

It was initially used as an identifier, as there were too many with the same name. It started off by the occupation, or the fathers occupation, or even the fathers name, and son was tagged on to it, as the son was traditionally the heir and more important than a daughter. It was also done by place of birth, and even by the first thing the mother sees, as a surname.
Last names such as Smith, Smithson, Johnson, Fjord, Runningbear would be examples, respectively.

European surnames first occurred between the eleventh and fifteenth centuries, with some patronymic surnames in Scandinavia being acquired as late as the nineteenth century. Prior to this time period, particularly during the "Dark Ages" between the fifth and eleventh centuries, people were largely illiterate, lived in rural areas or small villages, and had little need of distinction beyond their given names. During Biblical times people were often referred to by their given names and the locality in which they resided such as "Jesus of Nazareth." However, as populations grew, the need to identify individuals by surnames became a necessity. The acquisition of surnames during the past eight hundred years has been affected by many factors, including social class and social structure, cultural tradition, and naming practices in neighboring cultures.

The majority of surnames are derived from patronymics, i.e. the forming of a surname from the father's given name such as Johnson, meaning literally "the son of John." In some rare cases, the naming practice was metronymic, wherin the surname was derived from the mother's give name such as Catling, Marguerite or Dyott.

Other popular methods of origin for surnames are derived from place names or geographical names such as England, occupational names such as Smith or Carpenter in the British Isles; Schmidt or Zimmerman in Germany, etc. Less popular methods of surname origins include housenames such as Rothchild, surnames derived from nicknames of physical descriptions such as Blake or Hoch, or after one's character such as Stern or Gentile. In some cases an individual was named after a bird or an animal such as Lamb for a gentile or inoffensive person, while Fox was used for a person who was cunning. Surnames were also derived from anectodotal events such as Death and Leggatt, or seasons such as Winter and Spring, and status such as Bachelor, Knight and Squire.

Surname spelling and pronunciation has evolved over centuries, with our current generation often unaware of the origin and evolution of their surnames. Among the humbler classes of European society, and especially among the illiterate, individuals had little choice but to accept the mistakes of officials, clerks, and priests who officially bestowed upon them new versions of their surnames, just as they had meekly accepted the surnames which they were born with. In North America, the linguistic problems confronting immigration officials at Ellis Island in the 19th century were legendary as a prolific source of Anglicization. In the United States such processes of official and accidental change caused Bauch to become Baugh, Micsza to become McShea, Siminowicz to become Simmons, etc. Many immigrants deliberately Anglicized or changed their surnames upon arrival in the New World, so that Mlynar became Miller, Zimmerman became Carpenter, and Schwarz became Black.

Hence, regardless of the current spelling of your surname, the spelling and pronunciation of your surname has evolved over the centuries. In many cases, the current generation may be aware of the change. However, in many cases the change of the surname occurred so long ago that they are not aware of the original spelling and pronunciation of their surname. To the trained genealogist, the change or evolution of most surnames is obvious and very interesting, particularly to the bearer of that surname.

For practical reasons, people began using suffixes that indicated "son of", or "descendant of" as populations increased and it was necessary to differentiate between two like-named people. A common example is Peter the Swede, whose son becomes "Petersson", and so on. Also, until the last 100 - 200 years, spelling names several ways (often phonetically spelled by those writing it down) was common. It's only a recent phenomenon to consistently spell a family name the same way - relating to the need for accuracy of modern records.

It's not only possible the name was "picked up" from new "namers" for practical reasons, but happened all the time.

No disrespect intended, but your ancestry is far more than Pomeranian or Soribian in the 1700s. Your father's/your patriarchal name is one thing, and by all means an important piece of family history, but in roughly 200 years you have 10 generations, and over that time you also have 1024 grandparents who make up your heritage. In 20 generations that increases to over 500,000; and in 30 generations that increases to well over 500 MILLION separate grandparents. That still accounts for only about 600 years of history, while the earth is far, far older than that. It doesn't take long to see we're all related. We are our brother's keeper.