| Question Home |
Position:Home>Genealogy> Specificaly, which decade in the 13/14th Century did the typical English familyQuestion:Initially when surnames came into fashion they were not transferable from father to son. Thus, John Smith's son might be William Johnson. William Johnson's son might be called Richard Williams. Or maybe if Richard was a carpenter he's call himself Richard Wright. Richard's son might be called Thomas Reed because he had red hair, but his son might go by Henry thopson. Get it? Well sometime in the 1100's the upper classes around London and the South began to grant title of their surnames to their sons and daughters. As time went on this practice slowly creeped into the culture in the lower classes and swept northward. By 1400 it was a common practice amongst all the English. My question is when, precisely, which decade or so, did this practice become the norm amongst the average, common peasant family in middle England? In other words, how long has the surname of a typical family today been handed down from one generation to the next? Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: Initially when surnames came into fashion they were not transferable from father to son. Thus, John Smith's son might be William Johnson. William Johnson's son might be called Richard Williams. Or maybe if Richard was a carpenter he's call himself Richard Wright. Richard's son might be called Thomas Reed because he had red hair, but his son might go by Henry thopson. Get it? Well sometime in the 1100's the upper classes around London and the South began to grant title of their surnames to their sons and daughters. As time went on this practice slowly creeped into the culture in the lower classes and swept northward. By 1400 it was a common practice amongst all the English. My question is when, precisely, which decade or so, did this practice become the norm amongst the average, common peasant family in middle England? In other words, how long has the surname of a typical family today been handed down from one generation to the next? Your question contradicts your own question. If the practice slowly creeped, it slowly creeped. No "precisely" is out there, nor were there generally kept records that can show, one way or the other. Surnames were commonly in use, sometime prior to the beginnings of parish records. Without widely kept records, people can only have guesstimates. In Britain, hereditary surnames were adopted in the 13th and 14th centuries, initially by the aristocracy but eventually by everyone. By 1400, most English people and Scottish people had acquired surnames, but many Highland Scots and Welsh people didn't adopt surnames until the 17th century, or later. From the website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_name... I know that this does not answer your question as stated; however, your question is the first thing I have ever read that claimed surnames in England as far back as the 1100s. From what I have read, the Romans were the first to use more than one name; my own surname is a "son of ..." type of surname, meaning that it became used more or less simultaneously by various unrelated people, even in several different countries. Surnames still did not come into common usage until mandated by the various monarchies in Europe. If you know so much about it, you should know that you can't isolate processes like that to a specific decade. All I can say is that in the later fourteenth century, Simon of Sudbury and William of Wykeham were two men who still didn't have surnames. As there were no parish records before the 16th century, it would seem that the research you are asking for would be extremely difficult. The surnames indicated they were the son of someone, their habitation, their occupation or some characteristic. The Normans introduced them for taxation purposes. It is possible that legitimate sons of the same man could all have different surnames but they each shared their surnames with others that were not related. A lot of families came from France with William the Conqueror in 1066 and afterwards. They had surnames, or family names so did all their descendants so the practice certainly was going on then. Some of them would have been rich, some of them would have become peasants and still had surnames. This site is quite interesting, but I don't think anyone can really answer your question that accurately. http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/familyhisto... |