Re: Surnames more on

[Plumpett@aol.com]

In a message dated 00-04-11 13:14:42 EDT, you write:

<< Now one relation shared with me that unless you had wealth and title or 
were
 arrested and or hung, there was little reason to record anyones name before
 1600 or so and it simply did not matter. Thoughts anyone?
 Neil Sinclair >>

Neil --

I can't speak as to any  Sinclair surname useage at this point in my research 
, however for a number other surnames in my family branches there seems to be 
consistent surname useage and spelling  from 1600 and in at least one 
instance 1500 !

I have observed that surname spellings did vary somewhat -- I have even seen 
on original  "" Legal "" documents where the surname spelling varied slightly 
on the SAME PAGE !!

I also noted that one branch altered their surname by dropping one of the two 
last 
 L 's merely to show their displeasure as a result of a family dispute -- 
that change has persisted for 250 years , more or less !

One of my other family surnames appears to reach back to at least 1350 , but 
I am still early in my research with that surname .

I would guess that a true analysis of surname developement  would have to 
deliberate what roll Seals , and like devices , played as substitutes for a 
spoken surname  ?

That analysis could take the concept of a unique family identifier back 
several thousand years ! 

Joe Greigg
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html