CHAPTER I.

THE HEBREW INVASION.

"With what face can they object to the king the bringing in of

forraigners, when themselves entertaine such an army of Hebrewes?"

_The Character of a London Diurnall_ (Dec. 1644).

"Albeit in our late Reformation some of good consideration have

brought in Zachary, Malachy, Josias, etc., as better agreeing with our

faith, but without contempt of Country names (as I hope) which have

both good and gracious significations, as shall appeare

hereafter."--CAMDEN, _Remaines_. 1614.

I. _The March of the Army._

The strongest impress of the English Reformation to-day is to be seen in

our font-names. The majority date from 1560, the year when the Genevan

Bible was published. This version ran through unnumbered editions, and for

sixty, if not seventy, years was the household Bible of the nation. The

Genevan Bible was not only written in the vulgar tongue, but was printed

for vulgar hands. A moderate quarto was its size; all preceding versions,

such as Coverdale's, Matthew's, and of course the Great Bible, being the

ponderous folio, specimens of which the reader will at some time or other

have seen. The Genevan Bible, too, was the Puritan's Bible, and was none

the less admired by him on account of its Calvinistic annotations.

But although the rage for Bible names dates from the decade 1560-1570,

which decade marks the rise of Puritanism, there had been symptoms of the

coming revolution as early as 1543. Richard Hilles, one of the Reformers,

despatching a letter from Strasburg, November 15, 1543, writes:

"My wife says she has no doubt but that God helped her the sooner in

her confinement by reason of your good prayers. On the second of this

month she brought forth to the Church of Christ a son, who, as the

women say, is quite large enough for a mother of tall stature, and

whom I immediately named _Gershom_."--"Original Letters," 1537-1558,

No. cxii. Parker Society.

We take up our Bibles, and find that of Zipporah it is said--

"And she bare him (Moses) a son, and he called his name Gershom: for

he said, _I have been a stranger in a strange land_."--Exod. ii. 22.

The margin says, "a desolate stranger." At this time Moses was fled from

Pharaoh, who would kill him. The parallel to Richard Hilles's mind was

complete. This was in 1643.[12]

In Mr. Tennyson's drama "Mary," we have the following scene between

Gardiner and a yokel:

"_Gardiner._ I distrust thee,

There is a half voice, and a lean assent:

What is thy name?

_Man._ Sanders!

_Gardiner._ What else?

_Man._ Zerrubabel."

The Laureate was right to select for this rebellious Protestant a name

that was to be popular throughout Elizabeth's reign; but poetic license

runs rather far in giving this title to a _full-grown man_ in any year of

Mary's rule. Sanders might have had a young child at home so styled, but

for himself it was practically impossible. So clearly defined is the

epoch that saw, if not one batch of names go out, at least a new batch

come in. Equally marked are the names from the Bible which at this date

were in use, and those which were not. Of this latter category Zerrubabel

was one.

In the single quotation from Hilles's letter of 1543 we see the origin of

the great Hebrew invasion explained. The English Bible had become a fact,

and the knowledge of its personages and narratives was becoming _directly_

acquired. In every community up and down the country it was as if a fresh

spring of clear water had been found, and every neighbour could come with

jug or pail, and fill it when and how they would. One of the first

impressions made seems to have been this: children in the olden time

received as a name a term that was immediately significant of the

circumstances of their birth. Often God personally, through His prophets

or angelic messenger, acted as godparent indeed, and gave the name, as in

Isaiah viii. 1, 3, 4:

"Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in

it with a man's pen concerning Maher-shalal-hash-baz.

"And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son.

Then said the Lord to me, Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz.

"For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my

mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken

away before the king of Assyria."

Here was a name palpably significant. Even before they knew its exact

meaning the name was enrolled in English church registers, and by-and-by

zealot Puritans employed it as applicable to English Church politics.

All the patriarchs, down to the twelve sons of Jacob, had names of direct

significance given them. Above all, a peculiar emphasis was laid upon all

the titles of Jesus Christ, as in Isaiah vii. 14:

"Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his

name Immanuel."

At the same time that this new revelation came, a crisis was going on of

religion. The old Romish Church was being uprooted, or, rather, a new

system was being grafted upon its stock, for the links have never been

broken. The saints were shortly to be tabooed by the large mass of English

folk; the festivals were already at a discount. Simultaneously with the

prejudice against the very names of their saints and saintly festivals,

arose the discovery of a mine of new names as novel as it was

unexhaustible. They not merely met the new religious instinct, but

supplied what would have been a very serious vacuum.

But we must at once draw a line between the Reformation and Puritanism.

Previous to the Reformation, so far as the Church was concerned, there had

been to a certain extent a _system_ of nomenclature. The Reformation

abrogated that system, but did not intentionally adopt a new one.

Puritanism deliberately supplied a well-weighed and revised scheme, beyond

which no adopted child of God must dare to trespass. Previous to the

Reformation, the priest, with the assent of the gossip, gave the babe the

name of the saint who was to be its patron, or on whose day the birth or

baptism occurred. If the saint was a male, and the infant a female, the

difficulty was overcome by giving the name a feminine form. Thus Theobald

become Theobalda; and hence Tib and Tibot became so common among girls,

that finally they ceased to represent boys at all. If it were one of the

great holy days, the day or season itself furnished the name. Thus it was

Simon, or Nicholas, or Cecilia, or Austen, or Pentecost, or Ursula, or

Dorothy, became so familiar. From the reign of Elizabeth the clergy, and

Englishmen generally, gave up this practice. Saints who could not boast

apostolic honours were rejected, and holy men of lesser prestige, together

with a large batch of virgins and martyrs of the Agnes, Catharine, and

Ursula type, who belonged to Church history, received but scant

attention. As a matter of course their names lapsed. But the nation stood

by the old English names not thus popishly tainted. Against Geoffrey,

Richard, Robert, and William, they had no prejudice: nay, they clung to

them. The Puritan rejected both classes. He was ever trotting out his two

big "P's,"--Pagan and Popish. Under the first he placed every name that

could not be found in the Scriptures, and under the latter every title in

the same Scriptures, and the Church system founded on them, that had been

employed previous, say, to the coronation day of Edward VI. Of this there

is the clearest proof. In a "Directory of Church Government," found among

the papers of Cartwright, and written as early as 1565, there is the

following order regarding and regulating baptism:--

"They which present unto baptism, ought to be persuaded not to give

those that are baptized the names of God, or of Christ, or of angels,

or of holy offices, as of baptist, evangelist, etc., nor such as

savour of paganism or popery: but chiefly such whereof there are

examples, in the Holy Scriptures, in the names of those who are

reported in them to have been godly and virtuous."--Neale, vol. v.

Appendix, p. 15.

Nothing can be more precise than this. To the strict Puritan to reject the

Richards, Mileses, and Henrys of the Teutonic, and the Bartholomews,

Simons, Peters, and Nicholases of the ecclesiastic class, was to remove

the Canaanite out of the land.

How early this "article of religion" was obeyed, one or two quotations

will show. Take the first four baptismal entries in the Canterbury

Cathedral register:

"1564, Dec. 3. Abdias, the sonne of Robert Pownoll.

"1567, April 26. Barnabas, the sonne of Robert Pownoll.

"1569, June 1. Ezeckiell, the sonne of Robert Pownoll.

"1572, Feb. 10. Posthumus, the sonne of Robert Pownoll."

Another son seems to have been Philemon:

"1623, April 27. John, the sonne of Philemon Pownoll."

A daughter "Repentance" must be added:

"1583, Dec. 8. Married William Arnolde and Repentance Pownoll."

Take another instance, a little later, from the baptisms of St. Peter's,

Cornhill:

"1589, Nov. 2. Bezaleell, sonne of Michaell Nichollson, cordwayner.

"1599, Sep. 23. Aholiab, sonne of Michaell Nicholson, cordwainer.

"1595, May 18. Sara, daughter of Michaell Nichollson, cobler.

"1599, Nov. 1. Buried Rebecca, daughter of Michaell Nicholson,

cordwainer, 13 yeares."

Rebecca, therefore, would be baptized in 1586. Sara and Aholiab died of

the plague in 1603. Both old Robert Pownoll and the cobler must have been

Puritans of a pronounced type.

The Presbyterian clergy were careful to set an example of right

name-giving:

"1613, July 28. Baptized Jaell, daughter of Roger Mainwaring,

preacher."--St. Helen, Bishopsgate.

"1617, Jan. 25. Baptized Ezekyell, sonne of Mr. Richard Culverwell,

minister."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

"1582, ----. Buried Zachary, sonne of Thomas Newton,

minister."--Barking, Essex.

A still more interesting proof comes from Northampton. As an example of

bigotry it is truly marvellous. On July 16, 1590, Archbishop Whitgift

furnished the Lord Treasurer with the following, amongst many articles

against Edmond Snape, curate of St. Peter's, in that town:

"Item: Christopher Hodgekinson obteyned a promise of the said Snape

that he would baptize his child; but Snape added, saying, 'You must

then give it a christian name allowed in the Scriptures.' Then

Hodgekinson told him that his wife's father, whose name was Richard,

desired to have the giving of that name."

At the time of service Snape proceeded till they came to the place of

naming: they said "Richard;"

"But hearing them calling it Richard, and that they would not give it

any other name, he stayed there, and would not in any case baptize the

child. And so it was carried away thence, and was baptized the week

following at Allhallows Churche, and called Richard."--Strype's

"Whitgift," ii. 9.

This may be an extreme case, but I doubt not the majority of the

Presbyterian clergy did their best to uproot the old English names, so far

as their power of persuasion could go.

Even the pulpit was used in behalf of the new doctrine. William Jenkin,

the afterwards ejected minister, in his "Expositions of Jude," delivered

in Christ Church, London, said, while commenting on the first verse, "Our

baptismal names ought to be such as may prove remembrances of duty." He

then instances Leah, Alpheus, and Hannah as aware of parental obligations

in this respect, and adds--

"'Tis good to impose such names as expresse our baptismal promise. A

good name is as a thread tyed about the finger, to make us mindful of

the errand we came into the world to do for our Master."--Edition

1652, p. 7.

As a general rule, the New Testament names spread the most rapidly,

especially girl-names of the Priscilla, Dorcas, Tabitha, and Martha type.

They were the property of the Reformation. Damaris bothered the clerks

much, and is found indifferently as Tamaris, Damris, Dammeris, Dampris,

and Dameris. By James I.'s day it had become a fashionable name:

"1617, April 13. Christened Damaris, d. of Doctor Masters.

"----, May 29. Christened Damaris, d. of Doctor Kingsley."--Canterbury

Cathedral.

Martha, which sprang into instant popularity, is registered at the outset:

"1563, July 25. Christened Martha Wattam."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

Phebe had a great run. The first I have seen is--

"1568, Oct. 24. Christened Phebe, d. of Harry Cut."--St. Peter,

Cornhill.

Dorcas was, perhaps, the prime favourite, often styled and entered Darcas.

Every register has it, and every page. A political ballad says--

"Come, Dorcas and Cloe,

With Lois and Zoe,

Young Lettice, and Beterice, and Jane;

Phill, Dorothy, Maud,

Come troop it abroad,

For now is our time to reign."

Persis, Tryphena, and Tryphosa were also largely used. The earliest Persis

I know is--

"1579, Maye 3. Christened Persis, d. of William Hopkinson, minister

heare."--Salehurst.

Some of these names--as, for instance, Priscilla, Damaris, Dorcas, and

Phebe--stood in James's reign almost at the head of girls' names in

England. Indeed, alike in London and the provinces, the list of girl-names

at Elizabeth's death was a perfect contrast to that when she ascended the

throne. Then the great national names of Isabella, Matilda, Emma, and

Cecilia ruled supreme. Then the four heroines Anna, Judith, Susan, and

Hester, one or two of whom were in the Apocryphal narrative, had stamped

themselves on our registers in what appeared indelible lines, although

they were of much more recent popularity than the others. They lost

prestige, but did not die out. Many Puritans had a sneaking fondness for

them, finding in their histories a parallel to their own troubles, and

perchance they had a private and more godly rendering of the popular

ballad of their day:

"In Ninivie old Toby dwelt,

An aged man, and blind was he:

And much affliction he had felt,

Which brought him unto poverty:

He had by Anna, his true wife,

One only sonne, and eke no more."

Esther[13] is still popular in our villages, so is Susan. Hannah has her

admirers, and only Judith may be said to be forgotten. But their glory was

from 1450 to 1550. After that they became secondary personages. Throughout

the south of England, especially in the counties that surrounded London,

the Bible had been ransacked from nook to corner. The zealots early dived

into the innermost recesses of Scripture. They made themselves as familiar

with chapters devoted solely to genealogical tables, as to those which

they quoted to defend their doctrinal creed. The eighth chapter of Romans

was not more studied by them than the thirty-sixth of Genesis, and the

dukes of Edom classified in the one were laid under frequent contribution

to witness to the adoption treated of in the other. Thus names unheard of

in 1558 were "household words" in 1603.

The slowest to take up the new custom were the northern counties. They

were out of the current; and Lancashire, besides being inaccessible, had

stuck to the old faith. Names lingered on in the Palatinate that had been

dead nearly a hundred years in the south. Gawin figures in all northern

registers till a century ago, and Thurston[14] was yet popular in the

Fylde district, when it had become forgotten in the Fens. Scotland was

never touched at all. The General Assembly of 1645 makes no hint on the

subject, although it dwelt on nearly every other topic. Nothing

demonstrates the clannish feeling of North Britain as this does. At this

moment Scotland has scarcely any Bible names.

In Yorkshire, however, Puritanism made early stand, though its effects on

nomenclature were not immediately visible. It was like the fire that

smoulders among the underwood before it catches flame; it spreads the more

rapidly afterwards. The Genevan Bible crept into the dales and farmsteads,

and their own primitive life seemed to be but reflected in its pages. The

patriarchs lived as graziers, and so did they. There was a good deal about

sheep and kine in its chapters, and their own lives were spent among the

milk-pails and wool shears. The women of the Old Testament baked cakes,

and knew what good butter was. So did the dales' folk. By slow degrees

Cecilia, Isabella, and Emma lapsed from their pedestal, and the little

babes were turned into Sarahs, Rebeccas, and Deborahs. As the seventeenth

century progressed the state of things became still more changed. There

had been villages in Sussex and Kent previous to Elizabeth's death, where

the Presbyterian rector, by his personal influence at the time of baptism,

had turned the new generation into a Hebrew colony. The same thing

occurred in Yorkshire only half a century later. As nonconformity gained

ground, Guy, and Miles, and Peter, and Philip became forgotten. The lads

were no sooner ushered into existence than they were transformed into

duplicates of Joel, and Amos, and Obediah. The measles still ran through

the family, but it was Phineas and Caleb, not Robert and Roger, that

underwent the infliction. Chosen leaders of Israel passed through the

critical stages of teething. As for the twelve sons of Jacob, they could

all have answered to their names in the dames' schools, through their

little apple-cheeked representatives, who lined the rude benches. On the

village green, every prophet from Isaiah to Malachi might be seen of an

evening playing leap-frog: unless, indeed, Zephaniah was stealing apples

in the garth.

From Yorkshire, about the close of the seventeenth century, the rage for

Scripture names passed into Lancashire. Nonconformity was making progress;

the new industries were already turning villages into small centres of

population, and the Church of England not providing for the increase,

chapels were built. If we look over the pages of the directories of West

Yorkshire and East Lancashire, and strike out the surnames, we could

imagine we were consulting anciently inscribed registers of Joppa or

Jericho. It would seem as if Canaan and the West Riding had got

inextricably mixed.

What a spectacle meets our eye! Within the limits of ten leaves we have

three Pharoahs, while as many Hephzibahs are to be found on one single

page. Adah and Zillah Pickles, sisters, are milliners. Jehoiada Rhodes

makes saws--not Solomon's sort--and Hariph Crawshaw keeps a farm. Vashni,

from somewhere in the Chronicles, is rescued from oblivion by Vashni

Wilkinson, coal merchant, who very likely goes to Barzillai Williamson, on

the same page, for his joints, Barzillai being a butcher. Jachin, known to

but a few as situated in the Book of Kings, is in the person of Jachin

Firth, a beer retailer, familiar to all his neighbours. Heber Holdsworth

on one page is faced by Er Illingworth on the other. Asa and Joab are

extremely popular, while Abner, Adna, Ashael, Erastus, Eunice, Benaiah,

Aquila, Elihu, and Philemon enjoy a fair amount of patronage. Shadrach,

Meshach, and Abednego, having been rescued from Chaldaean fire, have been

deluged with baptismal water. How curious it is to contemplate such

entries as Lemuel Wilson, Kelita Wilkinson, Shelah Haggas, Shadrach

Newbold, Neriah Pearce, Jeduthan Jempson, Azariah Griffiths, Naphtali

Matson, Philemon Jakes, Hameth Fell, Eleph Bisat, Malachi Ford, or Shallum

Richardson. As to other parts of the Scriptures, I have lighted upon name

after name that I did not know existed in the Bible at all till I looked

into the Lancashire and Yorkshire directories.

The Bible has decided the nomenclature of the north of England. In towns

like Oldham, Bolton, Ashton, and Blackburn, the clergyman's baptismal

register is but a record of Bible names. A clerical friend of mine

christened twins Cain and Abel, only the other day, much against his own

wishes. Another parson on the Derbyshire border was gravely informed, at

the proper moment, that the name of baptism was Ramoth-Gilead. "Boy or

girl, eh?" he asked in a somewhat agitated voice. The parents had opened

the Bible hap-hazard, according to the village tradition, and selected the

first name the eye fell on. It was but a year ago a little child was

christened Tellno in a town within six miles of Manchester, at the

suggestion of a cotton-spinner, the father, a workman of the name of Lees,

having asked his advice. "I suppose it must be a Scripture name," said his

master. "Oh yes! that's of course." "Suppose you choose _Tellno_," said

his employer. "That'll do," replied the other, who had never heard it

before, and liked it the better on that account. The child is now Tell-no

Lees, the father, too late, finding that he had been hoaxed.[15] "_Sirs_,"

was the answer given to a bewildered curate, after the usual demand to

name the child. He objected, but was informed that it was a Scripture

name, and the verse "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" was triumphantly

appealed to. This reminds one of the Puritan who styled his dog

"_Moreover_" after the dog in the Gospel: "_Moreover_ the dog came and

licked his sores."

There is, again, a story of a clergyman making the customary demand as to

name from a knot of women round the font. "Ax her," said one. Turning to

the woman who appeared to be indicated, he again asked, "What name?" "Ax

her," she replied. The third woman, being questioned, gave the same reply.

At last he discovered the name to be the Scriptural Achsah, Caleb's

daughter--a name, by the way, which was somewhat popular with our

forefathers. No wonder this mistake arose, when Achsah used to be entered

in some such manner as this:

"1743-4, Jan. 3. Baptized Axar Starrs (a woman of ripe years), of

Stockport.

"1743-4, Jan. 3. Married Warren Davenport, of Stockport, Esq., and

Axar Starrs, aforesaid, spinster."--Marple, Cheshire.

Axar's father was Caleb Starrs. The scriptural relationship was thus

preserved. Achsah crossed the Atlantic with the Pilgrim Fathers, and has

prospered there ever since. It is still popular in Devonshire and the

south-west of England. All these stories serve to show the quarry whence

modern names are hewn.

I have mentioned the north because I have studied its Post-Office

Directories carefully. But if any one will visit the shires of Dorset, and

Devon, and Hampshire, he will find the same result. The Hebrew has won the

day. Just as in England, north of Trent, we can still measure off the

ravages of the Dane by striking a line through all local names lying

westward ending in "by," so we have but to count up the baptismal names of

the peasantry of these southern counties to see that they have become the

bondsmen of an Eastern despot. In fact, go where and when we will from the

reign of Elizabeth, we find the same influence at work. Take a few places

and people at random.

Looking at our testamentary records, we find the will of Kerenhappuch

Benett proved in 1762, while Kerenhappuch Horrocks figures in the

Manchester Directory for 1877. Onesiphorus Luffe appears on a halfpenny

token of 1666; Habakkuk Leyman, 1650; Euodias Inman, 1650; Melchisedek

Fritter, 1650; Elnathan Brock, 1654; and Abdiah Martin, 1664 ("Tokens of

Seventeenth Century"). Shallum Stent was married in 1681 (Racton,

Sussex); Gershom Baylie was constable of Lewes in 1619, Araunah Verrall

fulfilling the same office in 1784. Captain Epenetus Crosse presented a

petition to Privy Council in 1660 (C. S. P. Colonial); Erastus Johnson was

defendant in 1724, and Cressens Boote twenty years earlier. Barjonah Dove

was Vicar of Croxton in 1694. Tryphena Monger was buried in Putney

Churchyard in 1702, and Tryphosa Saunders at St. Peter's, Worcester, in

1770. Mahaliel Payne, Azarias Phesant, and Pelatiah Barnard are recorded

in State Papers, 1650-1663 (C. S. P.), and Aminadab Henley was dwelling in

Kent in 1640 ("Proceedings in Kent." Camden Society). Shadrack Pride is a

collector of hearth-money in 1699, and Gamaliel Chase is communicated with

in 1635 (C. S. P.). Onesiphorus Albin proposes a better plan of collecting

the alien duty in 1692 (C. S. P.), while Mordecai Abbott is appointed

deputy-paymaster of the forces in 1697 (C. S. P.). Eliakim Palmer is

married at Somerset House Chapel in 1740; Dalilah White is buried at

Cowley in 1791, and Keziah Simmons is christened there in 1850. Selah

Collins is baptized at Dyrham, Gloucestershire, in 1752, and Keturah Jones

is interred at Clifton in 1778. Eli-lama-Sabachthani Pressnail was

existing in 1862 (_Notes and Queries_), and the _Times_ recorded a

Talitha-Cumi People about the same time. The will of Mahershalalhashbaz

Christmas was proved not very long ago. Mrs. Mahershalalhashbaz Bradford

was dwelling in Ringwood, Hampshire, in 1863; and on January 31, 1802, the

register of Beccles Church received the entry, "Mahershalalhashbaz, son of

Henry and Sarah Clarke, baptized," the same being followed, October 14,

1804, by the baptismal entry of "Zaphnaphpaaneah," another son of the same

couple. A grant of administration in the estate of Acts-Apostles Pegden

was made in 1865. His four brothers, older than himself, were of course

the four Evangelists, and had there been a sixth I dare say his name would

have been "Romans." An older member of this family, many years one of the

kennel-keepers of Tickham fox-hounds, was Pontius Pilate Pegden. At a

confirmation at Faversham in 1847, the incumbent of Dunkirk presented to

the amazed archbishop a boy named "Acts-Apostles." These are, of course,

mere eccentricities, but eccentricities follow a beaten path, and have

their use in calculations of the nature we are considering. Eccentricities

in dress are proverbially but exaggerations of the prevailing fashion.

II. POPULARITY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

The affection felt by the Puritans for the Old Testament has been observed

by all writers upon the period, and of the period. Cleveland's remark,

quoted by Hume, is, of course, an exaggeration.

"Cromwell," he says, "hath beat up his drums cleane through the Old

Testament--you may learne the genealogy of our Saviour by the names in

his regiment. The muster-master uses no other list than the first

chapter of Matthew."

Lord Macaulay puts it much more faithfully in his first chapter, speaking,

too, of an earlier period than the Commonwealth:

"In such a history (_i.e._ Old Testament) it was not difficult for

fierce and gloomy spirits to find much that might be distorted to suit

their wishes. The extreme Puritans, therefore, began to feel for the

Old Testament a preference which, perhaps, they did not distinctly

avow even to themselves, but which showed itself in all their

sentiments and habits. They paid to the Hebrew language a respect

which they refused to that tongue in which the discourses of Jesus and

the Epistles of Paul have come down to us. They baptized their

children by the names, not of Christian saints, but of Hebrew

patriarchs and warriors."

The Presbyterian clergy had another objection to the New Testament names.

The possessors were all saints, and in the saints' calendar. The apostolic

title was as a red rag to his blood-shot eye.

"Upon Saint Peter, Paul, John, Jude, and James,

They will not put the 'saint' unto their names,"

says the Water-poet in execrable verse. Its _local_ use was still more

trying, as no man could pass through a single quarter of London without

seeing half a dozen churches, or lanes, or taverns dedicated to Saint

somebody or other.

"Others to make all things recant

The christian and surname of saint,

Would force all churches, streets, and towns

The holy title to renounce."

To avoid any saintly taint, the Puritan avoided the saints themselves.

But the discontented party in the Church had, as Macaulay says, a decided

hankering after the Old Testament on other grounds than this. They paid

the Hebrew language an almost superstitious reverence.[16] Ananias, the

deacon, in the "Alchemist," published in 1610, says--

"Heathen Greek, I take it.

_Subtle._ How! heathen Greek?

_Ananias._ All's heathen but the Hebrew."[17]

Bishop Corbet, in his "Distracted Puritan," has a lance to point at the

same weakness:

"In the holy tongue of Canaan

I placed my chiefest pleasure,

Till I pricked my foot

With an Hebrew root,

That I bled beyond all measure."

In the "City Match," written by Mayne in 1639, Bannsright says--

"Mistress Dorcas,

If you'll be usher to that holy, learned woman,

That can heal broken shins, scald heads, and th' itch,

Your schoolmistress: that can expound, and teaches

To knit in Chaldee, and work Hebrew samplers,

I'll help you back again."

The Puritan was ever nicknamed after some Old Testament worthy. I could

quote many instances, but let two from the author of the "London Diurnall"

suffice. Addressing Prince Rupert, he says--

"Let the zeal-twanging nose, that wants a ridge,

Snuffling devoutly, drop his silver bridge:

Yes, and the gossip's spoon augment the summe,

Altho' poor _Caleb_ lose his christendome."

More racy is his attack on Pembroke, as a member of the Mixed Assembly:

"Forbeare, good Pembroke, be not over-daring:

Such company may chance to spoil thy swearing;

And these drum-major oaths of bulk unruly

May dwindle to a feeble 'by my truly.'

He that the noble Percy's blood inherits,

Will he strike up a Hotspur of the spirits?

He'll fright the _Obediahs_ out of tune,

With his uncircumcis-ed Algernoon:

A name so stubborne, 'tis not to be scanned

By him in Gath with the six fingered hand."

If a Bible quotation was put into the zealot's mouth, his cynical foe took

care that it should come from the older Scriptures. In George Chapman's

"An Humorous Day's Work," after Lemot has suggested a "full test of

experiment" to prove her virtue, Florilla the Puritan cries--

"O husband, this is perfect trial indeed."

To which the gruff Labervele replies--

"And you will try all this now, will you not?

_Florilla._ Yes, my good head: for it is written, we must pass to

perfection through all temptation: Abacuk the fourth.

_Labervele._ Abacuk! cuck me no cucks: in a-doors, I say: thieves,

Puritans, murderers! in a-doors, I say!"

In the same facetious strain, Taylor, the Water-poet, addresses a child

thus:

"To learne thy duty reade no more than this:

Paul's nineteenth chapter unto Genesis."

This certainly tallies with the charge in "Hudibras," that they

"Corrupted the Old Testament

To serve the New as precedent."

This affection for the older Scriptures had its effect upon our

nomenclature. No book, no story, especially if gloomy in its outline and

melancholy in its issues, escaped the more morbid Puritan's notice. Every

minister of the Lord's vengeance, every stern witness against natural

abomination, the prophet that prophesied ill--these were the names that

were in favour. And he that was least bitter in his maledictions was most

at a discount. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were in every-day request,

Shadrach and Abednego being the favourites. Mordecai, too, was daily

commemorated; while Jeremiah attained a popularity, as Jeremy, he can

never altogether lose. "Lamentations" was so melancholy, that it must

needs be personified, don a Puritanical habit, and stand at the font as

godfather--I mean witness--to some wretched infant who had done nothing to

merit such a fate. "Lamentations Chapman" appeared as defendant in a suit

in Chancery about 1590. The exact date is not to be found, but the case

was tried towards the close of Elizabeth's reign ("Chancery Suits,

Elizabeth").

It is really hard to say why names of melancholy import became so common.

Perhaps it was a spirit morbidly brooding on the religious oppressions of

the times; perhaps it was bile. Any way, Camden says "Dust" and "Ashes"

were names in use in the days of Elizabeth and James. These, no doubt,

were translations of the Hebrew "Aphrah" into the "vulgar tongue," the

name having become exceedingly common. Micah, in one of the most mournful

prophecies of the Old Testament, says--

"Declare ye it not at Gath, weep ye not at all: in the house of Aphrah

roll thyself in the dust."

Literally: "in the house of dust roll thyself in the dust." The name was

quickly seized upon:

"Sept., 1599. Baptized Affray, d. of Richard Manne of

Lymehus."--Stepney.

"May 15, 1576. Wedding of William Brickhead and Affera Lawrence."--St.

Peter's, Cornhill.

This last entry proves how early the name had arisen. In Kent it had

become very common. The registers of Canterbury Cathedral teem with it:

"1601, June 5. Christened Afra, the daughter of William Warriner.

"1614, Oct. 30. Christened Aphora, the daughter of Mr. Merrewether.

"1635, July 20. Robert Fuller maryed Apherie Pitt."

In these instances we see at a glance the origin of the licentious Aphra

Behn's name, which looks so like a _nom-de-plume_, and has puzzled many.

She was born at Canterbury, with the surname of Johnson, baptized Aphra,

and married a Dutch merchant named Behn. When acting as a Government spy

at Antwerp in 1666, she signs a letter "Aphara Behn" (C. S. P.), which is

nearer the Biblical form than many others. It is just possible her father

might have rolled himself several times in the dust had he lived to read

some of his daughter's writings. Their tone is not Puritanic. The name

has become obsolete; indeed, it scarcely survived the seventeenth century,

dying out within a hundred years of its rise. But it was very popular in

its day.

Rachel, in her dying pains, had styled, under deep depression, her babe

Benoni ("son of my sorrow"); but his father turned it into the more

cheerful Benjamin ("son of the right hand"). Of course, Puritanism sided

with the mother, and the Benonis flourished at a ratio of six to one over

the Benjamins:

"1607. Christened Benony, sonne of Beniamyn Ruthin,

mariner."--Stepney.

"1661, Dec. 20. Christened Margrett, d. of Bennoni Wallington,

goldsmith."--St. Dionis Backchurch.

"1637, May 6. Order to transmit Benoni Bucke to England from

Virginia."--"C. S. P. Colonial."

"1656, March 25. Petition of Benoni Honeywood."--"C. S. P. Colonial."

I don't think, however, all these mothers died in childbed. It would speak

badly for the chirurgic skill of the seventeenth century if they did. It

was the Church of Christ that was in travail.

_Ichabod_ was equally common. There was something hard and unrelenting in

Jael (already mentioned) that naturally suited the temper of every

fanatic:

"1613, July 28. Christened Jaell, d. of Roger Manwaryng,

preacher."--St. Helen, Bishopsgate.

Mehetabell had something in it, probably its length, that made it popular

among the Puritan faction. It lasted well, too:

"1680, March 24. Married Philip Penn and Mehittabela Hilder."--Cant.

Cath.

"1693, May 21. Baptized Mehetabell, d. of Jeremiah Hart,

apothecary."--St. Dionis Backchurch.

But while Deborah, an especial pet of the fanatics, Sara, Rebecca, Rachel,

Zipporah, and Leah were in high favour as Old Testament heroines, none had

such a run as Abigail:

"1573, Oct. Abigoll Cumberford, christened."--Stepney.

"1617, Oct. 15. Christened Abbigale, d. of John Webb, shoemaker."--St.

Peter, Cornhill.

"1635, Jan. 19. Married Jarrett Birkhead and Abigaile

Whitehead."--Ditto.

"May 30, 1721. Married Robert Elles and Abigail Six."--Cant. Cath.

Few Scripture names made themselves so popular as this. At the conclusion

of the sixteenth century it was beginning its career, and by Queen Anne's

day had reached its zenith. When the Cavalier was drinking at the

alehouse, he would waggishly chant through his nose, with eye upturned--

"Come, sisters, and sing

An hymne to our king,

Who sitteth on high degree.

The men at Whitehall,

And the wicked, shall fall,

And hey, then, up go we!

'A match,' quoth my sister Joice,

'Contented,' quoth Rachel, too;

Quoth Abigaile, 'Yea,' and Faith, 'Verily,'

And Charity, 'Let it be so.'"

A curious error has been propagated by writers who ought to have known

better. It is customarily asserted that abigail, as a cant term for a

waiting-maid, only arose after Abigail Hill, the Duchess of Marlborough's

cousin, became waiting-woman to the queen, and supplanted her kinswoman.

Certainly we find both Swift and Fielding using the term after this event.

But there is good reason for believing that the sobriquet is as old as

Charles I.'s reign. Indeed, there can be no reasonable doubt but that we

owe the term to the enormous popularity of Beaumont's comedy, "The

Scornful Ladie," written about 1613, and played in 1616. The chief part

falls to the lot of "Abigal, a waiting-gentlewoman," as the _dramatis

personae_ styles her, the playwright associating the name and employment

after the scriptural narrative. But Beaumont knew his Bible well.

That Abigail at once became a cant term is proved by "The Parson's

Wedding," written by Killigrew some time between 1645 and 1650. Wanton

addresses the Parson:

"Was she deaf to your report?

_Parson._ Yes, yes.

_Wanton._ And Ugly, her abigail, she had her say, too?

_Parson._ Yes, yes."

That this sentence would never have been written but for Beaumont's play,

there can be no reasonable doubt. It was performed so late as 1783. In

1673, after yearly performances, it was published as a droll, and entitled

"The False Heir." In 1742 it appears again under the title of "The Feigned

Shipwreck." Samuel Pepys, in his Diary, records his visits to the

playhouse to see "The Scornful Lady" at least four times, viz. 1661, 1662,

1665, and 1667. Writing December 27, 1665, he says--

"By coach to the King's Playhouse, and there saw 'The Scornful Lady'

well acted: Doll Common doing Abigail most excellently."

Abigail passed out of favour about the middle of the last century, but

Mrs. Masham's artifices had little to do with it. The comedy had done its

work, and Abigail coming into use, like Malkin two centuries before, as

the cant term for a kitchen drab, or common serving wench, as is

sufficiently proved by the literature of the day, the name lost caste with

all classes, and was compelled to bid adieu to public favour.

This affection for the Old Testament has never died out among the

Nonconformists. The large batch of names I have already quoted from modern

directories is almost wholly from the earlier Testament. Wherever Dissent

is strong, there will be found a large proportion of these names. Amongst

the passengers who went out to New England in James and Charles's reigns

will be found such names as Ebed-meleck Gastrell, Oziell Lane, Ephraim

Howe, Ezechell Clement, Jeremy Clement, Zachary Cripps, Noah Fletcher,

Enoch Gould, Zebulon Cunninghame, Seth Smith, Peleg Bucke, Gercyon Bucke

(Gershom), Rachell Saunders, Lea Saunders, Calebb Carr, Jonathan Franklin,

Boaz Sharpe, Esau del a Ware, Pharaoh Flinton, Othniell Haggat, Mordecay

Knight, Obediah Hawes, Gamaliell Ellis, Esaias Raughton, Azarias Pinney,

Elisha Mallowes, Malachi Mallock, Jonadab Illett, Joshua Long, Enecha

Fitch (seemingly a feminine of Enoch), and Job Perridge. Occasionally an

Epenetus Olney, or Nathaniell Patient, or Epaphroditus Haughton, or

Cornelius Conway, or Feleaman Dickerson (Philemon), or Theophilus Lucas,

or Annanias Mann is met with; but these are few, and were evidently

selected for their size, the temptation to poach on apostolic preserves

being too great when such big game was to be obtained. Besides, they were

not in the calendar! These names went to Virginia, and they are not

forgotten.

III. OBJECTIONABLE SCRIPTURE NAMES.

Camden says--

"In times of Christianity, the names of most holy and vertuous

persons, and of their most worthy progenitors, were given to stirre up

men to the imitation of them, whose names they bare. But succeeding

ages, little regarding St. Chrysostome's admonition to the contrary,

have recalled prophane names, so as now Diana, Cassandra, Hyppolitus,

Venus, Lais, names of unhappy disastre, are as rife somewhere, as ever

they were in Paganisme."--"Remaines," p. 43.

The most cursory survey of our registers proves this. Captain Hercules

Huncks and Ensign Neptune Howard fought under the Earl of Northumberland

in 1640 (Peacock's "Army List of Roundheads and Cavaliers"). Both were

Royalists.

"1643, Feb. 6. Buried Paris, son of William and Margaret Lee."--St.

Michael, Spurriergate, York.

"1670, March 13. Baptized Cassandra, d. of James Smyth."--Banbury.

"1679, July 2. Buried Cassandra, ye wife of Edward Williams."--St.

Michael, Barbados, (Hotten).

"1631, May 26. Married John Cotton and Venus[18] Levat."--St. Peter,

Cornhill.

Cartwright, the great Puritan, attacked these names in 1575, as "savouring

of paganism" (Neal, v. p. xv. Appendix). It was a pity he did not include

some names in the list of his co-religionists, for surely Tamar and Dinah

were just as objectionable as Venus or Lais. The doctrine of a fallen

nature could be upheld, and the blessed state of self-abasement

maintained, without a daily reminder in the shape of a Bible name of evil

repute. Bishop Corbett brought it as a distinct charge against the

Puritans, that they loved to select the most unsavoury stories of Old

Testament history for their converse. In the "Maypole" he makes a zealot

minister say--

"To challenge liberty and recreation,

Let it be done in holy contemplation.

Brothers and sisters in the fields may walk,

Beginning of the Holy Word to talk:

Of David and Uria's lovely wife,

Of Tamar and her lustful brother's strife."

One thing is certain, these names became popular:

"1610, March. Baptized Bathsheba, d. of John Hamond, of

Ratcliffe."--Stepney.

"1672, Feb. 23. Buried Bathsheba, wife of Richard Brinley,

hosier."--St. Denis Backchurch.

The alternate form of Bath-shua (1 Chron. iii. 5) was used, although the

clerks did not always know how to spell it:

"1609, July 1. Baptized Bathshira and Tabitha, daughters of Sir

Antonie Dering, Knight.

"1609, July 5. Buried Bathshira and Tabitha, ds. of Sir Antonie

Dering, Knight, being twines."--Pluckley, Kent.

"1601, Jan. Baptized Thamar, d. of Henry Reynold."--Stepney.

"1691, Nov. 20. Baptized Tamar, d. of Francis and Tamar Lee."--St.

Dionis Backchurch.

"1698, April 10. Buried Tamar, wife of Richard Robinson, of

Fell-foot."--Cartmel.

As for Dinah, she became a great favourite from her first introduction;

every register contains her name before Elizabeth's death:

"1585, Aug. 15. Christening of Dina, d. of John Lister, barbor.

"1591, Aug. 21. Buried Mrs. Dina Walthall, a vertuous yong woman, 30

years."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

Crossing the Atlantic with the Pilgrim Fathers, she settled down at length

as the typical negress; yet Puritan writers admitted that when she "went

out to see the daughters of the land," she meant to be seen of the sons

also!

Taylor, the Water-poet, seems to imply that Goliath was registered at

baptism by the Puritan:

"Quoth he, 'what might the child baptized be?

Was it a male She, or a female He?'--

'I know not what, but 'tis a Son,' she said.--

'Nay then,' quoth he, 'a wager may be laid

It had some Scripture name.'--'Yes, so it had,'

Said she: 'but my weak memory's so bad,

I have forgot it: 'twas a godly name,

Tho' out of my remembrance be the same:

'Twas one of the small prophets verily:

'Twas not Esaias, nor yet Jeremy,

Ezekiel, Daniel, nor good Obadiah,

Ah, now I do remember, 'twas Goliah!'"

Pharaoh occurs, and went out to Virginia, where it has ever since

remained. It is, as already shown, familiar enough in Yorkshire.

Of New Testament names, whose associations are of evil repute, we may

mention Ananias, Sapphira, and Antipas. Ananias had become so closely

connected with Puritanism, that not only did Dryden poke fun at the

relationship in the "Alchemist," but _Ananias Dulman_ became the cant term

for a long-winded zealot preacher. So says Neal.

"1603, Sep. 12. Buried Ananias, sonne of George Warren, 17

years."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

"1621, Sep. Baptized Ananias, son of Ananias Jarratt,

glassmaker."--Stepney.

_Sapphira_ occurs in Bunhill Fields:

"Here lyeth the body of Mrs. Sapphira Lightmaker, wife of Mr. Edward

Lightmaker, of Broadhurst, in Sussex, gent. She died in the Lorde,

Dec. 20, 1704, aged 81 years."

She was therefore born in 1633. Her brother (they were brought up

Presbyterians) was Robert Leighton, who died Archbishop of Glasgow.

_Drusilla_, again, was objectionable, but perchance her character was less

historically known then:

"1622. Baptized Drusilla, d. of Thomas Davis."--Ludlow.

_Antipas_, curiously enough, was almost popular, although a murderer and

an adulterer:

"1633, Feb. 28. Baptized Antipas, sonne of Robert Barnes, of

Shadwell."--Stepney.

"1662. Petition of Antipas Charrington."--"Cal. St. P. Dom."

"1650. Antipas Swinnerton, Tedbury, wollman."--"Tokens of Seventeenth

Century."

Dr. Increase Mather, the eminent Puritan, in his work entitled "Remarkable

Providences," published at Boston, U.S.A., in 1684, has a story of an

interposition in behalf of his friend Antipas Newman.

Of other instances, somewhat later, _Sehon_ Stace, who lived in Warding in

1707 ("Suss. Arch. Coll.," xii. 254), commemorates the King of the

Amorites, _Milcom_ Groat ("Cal. St. P.," 1660) representing on English

soil "the abomination of the children of Ammon." Dr. Pusey and Mr.

Spurgeon might be excused a little astonishment at such a conversion by

baptism.

_Barrabas_ cannot be considered a happy choice:

"Buried, 1713, Oct. 18, Barabas, sonne of Barabas

Bowen."--All-Hallows, Barking.

Mr. Maskell draws attention to the name in his history of that church.

There is something so emphatic about "now Barrabas was a robber," that

thoughts of theft seem proper to the very name. We should have locked up

the spoons, we feel sure, had father or son called upon us. The father who

called his son "Judas-not-Iscariot" scarcely cleared the name of its evil

associations, nor would it quite meet the difficulty suggested by the

remark in "Tristram Shandy:"

"Your Billy, sir--would you for the world have called him Judas?...

Would you, sir, if a Jew of a godfather had proposed the name of your

child, and offered you his purse along with it--would you have

consented to such a desecration of him?"

We have all heard the story of Beelzebub. If the child had been

inadvertently so baptized, a remedy might have been found in former days

by changing the name at confirmation. Until 1552, the bishop confirmed by

name. Archbishop Peccham laid down a rule:

"The minister shall take care not to permit wanton names, which being

pronounced do sound to lasciviousness, to be given to children

baptized, especially of the female sex: and if otherwise it be done,

the same shall be changed by the bishop at confirmation."

That this law had been carelessly followed after the Reformation is clear,

else Venus Levat, already quoted, would not have been married in 1631

under that name. Certainly Dinah and Tamar come under the ban of this

injunction.

Curiously enough, the change of name was sanctioned in the case of

orthodox names, for Lord Coke says--

"If a man be baptized by the name of Thomas, and after, at his

confirmation by the Bishop, he is named John, his name of confirmation

shall stand."

He then quotes the case of Sir Francis Gawdie, Chief Justice of the Court

of Common Pleas, whose name by baptism was Thomas, Thomas being changed to

Francis at confirmation. He holds that Francis shall stand ("Institutes,"

1. iii.). This practice manifestly arose out of Peccham's rule, but it is

strange that wanton instances should be left unchanged, and the orthodox

allowed to be altered.

Arising out of the Puritan error of permitting names like Tamar and Dinah

to stand, modern eccentricity has gone very far, and it would be

satisfactory to see many names in use at present forbidden. I need not

quote the Venuses of our directories. Emanuel is of an opposite character,

and should be considered blasphemy. We have not adopted Christ yet, as Dr.

Doran reminded us they have done in Germany, but my copy of the London

Directory shows at least one German, bearing the baptismal name of Christ,

at present dwelling in the metropolis. Puritan eccentricity is a trifle to

this.

IV. LOSSES.

(_a._) _The Destruction of Pet Forms._

But let us now notice some of the more disastrous effects of the great

Hebrew invasion. The most important were the partial destruction of the

nick forms, and the suppression of diminutives. The English pet names

disappeared, never more to return. Desinences in "cock," "kin," "elot,"

"ot," "et," "in," and "on," are no more found in current literature, nor

in the clerk's register. Why should this be so? An important reason

strikes us at once. The ecclesiastic names on which the enclytics had

grown had become unpopular well-nigh throughout England. It was an

English, not a Puritan prejudice. With the suppression of the names proper

went the desinences attached to them. The tree being felled, the parasite

decayed. Another reason was this: the names introduced from the Scriptures

did not seem to compound comfortably with these terminatives. The Hebrew

name would first have to be turned into a nick form before the diminutive

was appended. The English peasantry had added "_in_," "_ot_," "_kin_," and

"_cock_" only to the _nickname_, never to the baptismal form. It was

Wat-kin, not Walterkin; Bat-kin, not Bartholomewkin; Wilcock, not

Williamcock; Colin, not Nicholas-in; Philpot, not Philipot. But the

popular feeling for a century was against turning the new Scripture names

into curt nick forms. As it would have been an absurdity to have appended

diminutives to sesquipedalian names, national wit, rather than deliberate

plan, prevented it. If it was irreverent, too, to curtail Scripture names,

it was equally irreverent to give them the diminutive dress. To prove the

absolute truth of my statement, I have only to remind the reader that,

saving "Nat-kin," not one single Bible name introduced by the Reformation

and the English Bible has become conjoined with a diminutive.[19]

The immediate consequence was this; the diminutive forms became obsolete.

Emmott lingered on till the end of the seventeenth century; nay, got into

the eighteenth:

"Emmit, d. of Edward and Ann Buck, died 24 April, 1726, aged 6

years."--Hawling, Gloucester.

But it was only where it was not known as a form of Emma, and possibly

both might exist in the same household. I have already furnished instances

of Hamlet. Here is another:

"The Rev. Hamlet Marshall, D.D., died in the Close, Lincoln, in 1652.

With him dwelt his nephew, Hamlet Joyce. He bequeaths legacies in his

will to Hamlet Pickerin and Hamlet Duncalf, and his executor was his

son, Hamlet Marshall."--_Notes and Queries_, February 14, 1880.

It lasted till the eighteenth century. But nobody knew by that time that

it was a pet name of Hamon, or Hamond; nay, few knew that the surname of

Hammond had ever been a baptismal name at all:

"1620, Jan. 3. Buried Hamlet Rigby, Mr. Askew's man."--St. Peter,

Cornhill.

"1620. Petition of Hamond Franklin."--"Cal. S. P. Dom.," 1619-1623.

It is curious to notice that Mr. Hovenden, in his "Canterbury Register,"

published 1878, for the Harleian Society, has the following entries:--

"1627, Aprill 3. Christened Ham'on, the sonn of Richard Struggle."

"1634. Jan. 18. Christened Damaris, daughter of Mr. Ham'on Leucknor."

Turning to the index, the editor has styled them _Hamilton_ Struggle and

_Hamilton_ Leucknor. Ham'on, of course, is Hammon, or Hammond. I may add

that some ecclesiastic, a critic of my book on "English Surnames," in the

_Guardian_, rebuked me for supposing that Emmot could be from Emma, and

calmly put it down as a form of Aymot! What can prove the effect of the

Reformation on old English names as do such incidents as these?

An English monarch styled his favourite Peter Gaveston as "Piers," a form

that was sufficiently familiar to readers of history; but when an

antiquary, some few years ago, found this same Gaveston described as

"Perot," it became a difficulty to not a few. The Perrots or Parratts of

our London Directory might have told them of the old-fashioned diminutive

that had been knocked on the head with a Hebrew Bible.

Collet, from Nicholas, used as a feminine name, died out also. The last

instance I know of is--

"1629, Jan. 15. Married Thomas Woollard and Collatt Hargrave."--St.

Peter, Cornhill.

Colin, the other pet form, having got into our pastoral poetry, lingered

longer, and may be said to be still alive:

"1728. Married Colin Foster and Beulah Digby."--Somerset House Chapel.

The last Wilmot I have discovered is a certain Wilmote Adams, a defendant

in a Chancery suit at the end of Elizabeth's reign ("Chancery Suits:

Elizabeth"), and the last Philpot is dated 1575:

"1575, Aug. 26. Christened Philpott, a chylde that was laide at Mr

Alderman Osberne's gatt."--St. Dionis Backchurch.

All the others perished by the time James I. was king. Guy, or Wyatt,

succumbed entirely, and the same may be said of the rest. Did we require

further confirmation of this, I need only inquire: Would any Yorkshireman

now, as he reads over shop-fronts in towns like Leeds or Bradford, or in

the secluded villages of Wensleydale or Swaledale, the surnames of Tillot

and Tillotson, Emmett and Emmotson, Ibbott, Ibbet, Ibbs, and Ibbotson,

know that, twenty years before the introduction of our English Bible,

these were not merely the familiar pet names of Matilda, Emma, and

Isabella, but that as a trio they stood absolutely first in the scale of

frequency? Nay, they comprised more than forty-five per cent. of the

female population.

The last registered Ibbot or Issot I have seen is in the Chancery suits at

the close of Queen Bess's reign, wherein Ibote Babyngton and Izott Barne

figure in some legal squabbles ("Chancery Suits: Elizabeth," vol. ii.). As

for Sissot, or Drewet, or Doucet, or Fawcett, or Hewet, or Philcock, or

Jeffcock, or Batkin, or Phippin, or Lambin, or Perrin, they have passed

away--their place knoweth them no more. What a remarkable revolution is

this, and so speedy!

Failing our registers, the question may arise whether or not in familiar

converse the old pet forms were still used. Our ballads and plays preserve

many of the nick forms, but scarcely a pet form is to be seen later than

1590. In 1550 Nicholas Udall wrote "Ralph Roister Doister," in the very

commencement of which Matthew Merrygreek "says or sings"--

"Sometime Lewis Loiterer biddeth me come near:

Somewhiles _Watkin_ Waster maketh us good cheer."

Amongst the _dramatis personae_ are _Dobinet_ Doughty, Sim Suresby, Madge

Mumblecrust, _Tibet_ Talkapace, and _Annot_ Aliface. A few years later

came "Gammer Gurton's Needle." Both _Diccon_ and Hodge figure in it: two

rustics of the most bucolic type. Hodge, after relating how Gib the cat

had licked the milk-pan clean, adds--

"Gog's souls, _Diccon_, Gib our cat had eat the bacon too."

Immediately after this, again, in 1568 was printed "Like will to Like."

The chief characters are Tom Tosspot, _Hankin_ Hangman, Pierce Pickpurse,

and Nichol Newfangle. Wat Waghalter is also introduced. But here may be

said to end this homely and contemporary class of play-names. 'Tis true,

in Beaumont and Fletcher's "Beggar's Bush," Higgen (_Higgin_) is one of

the "three knavish beggars," but the scene is laid in Flanders.

Judging by our songs and comedies, the diminutive forms went down with

terrible rapidity, and were practically obsolete before Elizabeth's death.

But this result was more the work of the Reformation at large than

Puritanism.

(_b._) _The Decrease of Nick Forms._

This was not all. The nick forms saw themselves reduced to straits. The

new godly names, I have said, were not to be turned into irreverent cant

terms. From the earliest day of the Reformation every man who gave his

child a Bible name stuck to it unaltered. Ebenezer at baptism was Ebenezer

among the turnips, Ebenezer with the milk-pail, and Ebenezer in courtship;

while Deborah, who did not become Deb till Charles I.'s reign, would

Ebenezer him till the last day she had done scolding him, and put

"Ebenezer" carefully on his grave, to prove how happily they had lived

together!

As for the zealot who gradually forged his way to the front, he gave his

brother and sister in the Lord the full benefit of his or her title,

whether it was five syllables or seven. There can be no doubt that these

Hebrew names did not readily adapt themselves to ordinary converse with

the world. Melchisedek and Ebedmelech were all right elbowing their way

into the conventicle, but Melchisedek dispensing half-pounds of butter

over the counter, or Ebedmelech carrying milk-pails from door to door,

gave people a kind of shock. These grand assumptions suggested knavery.

One feels certain that our great-grandmothers had a suspicion of tallow in

the butter, and Jupiter Pluvius in the pail.

Nor did these excavated names harmonize with the surnames to which they

were yoked. Adoniram was quaint enough without Byfield, but both (as

Butler, in "Hudibras," knew) suggested something slightly ludicrous. Byron

took a mean advantage of this when he attacked poor Cottle, the bookseller

and would-be writer:

"O Amos Cottle! Phoebus! what a name

To fill the speaking trump of future fame!

O Amos Cottle! for a moment think

What meagre profits spring from pen and ink."

Amos is odd, but Amos united to Cottle makes a smile irresistible.

Who does not agree with Wilkes, who, when speaking to Johnson of Dryden's

would-be rival, the city poet, says--

"Elkanah Settle sounds so queer, who can expect much from that name?

We should have no hesitation to give it for John Dryden, in preference

to Elkanah Settle, from the names only, without knowing their

different merits"?

And Sterne, as the elder Disraeli reminds us, in one of his multitudinous

digressions from the life of "Tristram Shandy," makes the progenitor of

that young gentleman turn absolutely melancholy, as he conjures up a

vision of all the men who

"might have done exceeding well in the world, had not their characters

and spirits been totally depressed, and Nicodemas'd into nothing."

Even Oliver Goldsmith cannot resist styling the knavish seller of green

spectacles by a conjunction of Hebrew and English titles as Ephraim

Jenkinson; and his servant, who acts the part of a Job Trotter (another

Old Testament worthy, again) to his master, is, of course, Abraham!

But, oddly as such combinations strike upon the modern tympanum, what must

not the effect have been in a day when a nickname was popular according as

it was curt? How would men rub their eyes in sheer amazement, when such

conjunctions as Ebedmelech Gastrell, or Epaphroditus Haughton, or

Onesiphorus Dixey, were introduced to their notice, pronounced with all

sesquipedalian fulness, following upon the very heels of a long epoch of

traditional one-syllabled Ralphs, Hodges, Hicks, Wats, Phips, Bates, and

Balls (Baldwin). Conceive the amazement at such registrations as these:

"1599, Sep. 23. Christened Aholiab, sonne of Michaell Nicolson,

cordwainer."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

"1569, June 1. Christened Ezekiell, sonne of Robert Pownall."--Cant.

Cath.

"1582, April 1. Christened Melchisadeck, sonne of Melchizadeck Bennet,

poulter."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

"1590, Dec. 20. Christened Abacucke, sonne of John Tailer."--Ditto.

"1595, Nov. Christened Zabulon, sonne of John Griffin."--Stepney.

"1603, Sep. 15. Buried Melchesideck King."--Cant. Cath.

"1645, July 19. Buried Edward, sonne of Mephibosheth Robins."--St.

Peter, Cornhill.

"1660, Nov. 5. Buried Jehostiaphat (_sic_) Star."--Cant. Cath.

"1611, Oct. 21. Baptized Zipporah, d. of Richard Beere, of

Wapping."--Stepney.

The "Chancery Suits" of Elizabeth contain a large batch of such names; and

I have already enumerated a list of "Pilgrim Fathers" of James's reign,

whose baptisms would be recorded in the previous century.

But compare this with the fact that the leading men in England at this

very time were recognized only by the curtest of abbreviated names. In

that very quaint poem of Heywood's, "The Hierarchie of Blessed Angels,"

the author actually makes it the ground of an affected remonstrance:

"Marlowe, renowned for his rare art and wit,

Could ne'er attain beyond the name of _Kit_,

Although his _Hero and Leander_ did

Merit addition rather. Famous Kid

Was called but _Tom_. _Tom_ Watson, though he wrote

Able to make Apollo's self to dote

Upon his muse, for all that he could strive,

Yet never could to his full name arrive.

_Tom_ Nash, in his time of no small esteem,

Could not a second syllable redeem.

* * * * *

Mellifluous Shakespeare, whose enchanting quill

Commanded mirth or passion, was but _Will_:

And famous Jonson, though his learned pen

Be dipped in Castaly, is still but _Ben_."

However, in the end, he attributes the familiarity to the right cause:

"I, for my part,

Think others what they please, accept that heart

That courts my love in most familiar phrase;

And that it takes not from my pains or praise,

If any one to me so bluntly come:

I hold he loves me best that calls me _Tom_."

It is Sir Christopher, the curate, who, in "The Ordinary," rebels against

"Kit:"

"_Andrew._ What may I call your name, most reverend sir?

_Bagshot._ His name's Sir Kit.

_Christopher._ My name is not so short:

'Tis a trisyllable, an't please your worship;

But vulgar tongues have made bold to profane it

With the short sound of that unhallowed idol

They call a kit. Boy, learn more reverence!

_Bagshot._ Yes, to my betters."

We need not wonder, therefore, that the comedists took their fun out of

the new custom, especially in relation to their length and pronunciation

in full. In Cowley's "Cutter of Colman Street," Cutter turns Puritan, and

thus addresses the colonel's widow, Tabitha:

"Sister Barebottle, I must not be called Cutter any more: that is a

name of Cavalier's darkness; the Devil was a Cutter from the

beginning: my name is now Abednego: I had a vision which whispered to

me through a key-hole, 'Go, call thyself Abednego.'"

In his epilogue to this same comedy, Cutter is supposed to address the

audience as a "congregation of the elect," the playhouse is a conventicle,

and he is a "pious cushion-thumper." Gazing about the theatre, he

says--through his nose, no doubt--

"But yet I wonder much not to espy a

Brother in all this court called Zephaniah."

This is a better rhyme even than Butler's

"Their dispensations had been stifled

But for our Adoniram Byfield."

In Brome's "Covent Garden Weeded," the arrival at the vintner's door is

thus described:

"_Rooksbill._ Sure you mistake him, sir.

_Vintner._ You are welcome, gentlemen: Will, Harry, Zachary!

_Gabriel._ Zachary is a good name.

_Vintner._ Where are you? Shew up into the Phoenix."--Act. ii. sc. 2.

The contrast between Will or Harry, the nick forms, and Zachary,[20] the

full name, is intentionally drawn, and Gabriel instantly rails at it.

In "Bartholomew Fair," half the laughter that convulsed Charles II., his

courtiers, and courtezans, was at the mention of _Ezekiel_, the cut-purse,

or _Zeal-of-the-land_, the baker, who saw visions; while the veriest

noodle in the pit saw the point of Squire Cokes' perpetually addressing

his body-man Humphrey in some such style as this:

"O, Numps! are you here, Numps? Look where I am, Numps, and Mistress

Grace, too! Nay, do not look so angrily, Numps: my sister is here and

all, I do not come without her."

How the audience would laugh and cheer at a sally that was simply

manufactured of a repetition of the good old-fashioned name for Humphrey;

and thus a passage that reads as very dull fun indeed to the ears of the

nineteenth century, would seem to be brimful of sarcastic allusion to the

popular audience of the seventeenth, especially when spoken by such lips

as Wintersels.

The same effect was attempted and attained in the "Alchemist." Subtle

addresses the deacon:

"What's your name?

_Ananias._ My name is Ananias.

_Subtle._ Out, the varlet

That cozened the Apostles! Hence away!

Flee, mischief! had your holy consistory

No name to send me, of another sound,

Than wicked Ananias? Send your elders

Hither, to make atonement for you, quickly,

And give me satisfaction: or out goes

The fire ...

If they stay threescore minutes; the aqueity,

Terreity, and sulphureity

Shall run together again, and all be annulled,

Thou wicked Ananias!"

Exit Ananias, and no wonder. Of course, the pit would roar at the expense

of Ananias. But Abel, the tobacco-man, who immediately appears in his

place, is addressed familiarly as "Nab:"

"_Face._ Abel, thou art made.

_Abel._ Sir, I do thank his worship.

_Face._ Six o' thy legs more will not do it, Nab.

He has brought you a pipe of tobacco, doctor.

_Abel._ Yes, sir; I have another thing I would impart----

_Face._ Out with it, Nab.

_Abel._ Sir, there is lodged hard by me

A rich young widow."

To some readers there will be little point in this. They will say "Abel,"

as an Old Testament name, should neither have been given to an

un-puritanic character, nor ought it to have been turned into a nickname.

This would never have occurred to the audience. Abel, or Nab, had been one

of the most popular of English names for at least three centuries before

the Reformation. Hence it was _never_ used by the Puritans, and was, as a

matter of course, the undisturbed property of their enemies. Three

centuries of bad company had ruined Nab's morals. The zealot would none of

it.[21]

But from all this it will be seen that a much better fight was made in

behalf of the old nick forms than of the diminutives. By a timely rally,

Tom, Jack, Dick, and Harry were carried, against all hindrances, into the

Restoration period, and from that time they were safe. Wat, Phip, Hodge,

Bat or Bate, and Cole lost their position, but so had the fuller Philip,

Roger, Bartholomew, and Nicholas, But the opponents of Puritanism carried

the war into the enemy's camp in revenge for this, and Priscilla, Deborah,

Jeremiah, and Nathaniel, although they were rather of the Reformation than

Puritanic introductions, were turned by the time of Charles I. into the

familiar nick forms of Pris, Deb, Jerry, and Nat. The licentious Richard

Brome, in "The New Academy," even attempts a curtailment of Nehemiah:

"_Lady Nestlecock._ Negh, Negh!

_Nehemiah._ Hark! my mother comes.

_Lady N._ Where are you, childe? Negh!

_Nehemiah._ I hear her _neighing_ after me."

Act iv. sc. 1. (1658).

It was never tried out of doors, however, and the experiment was not

repeated. Brome was still more scant in reverence to Damaris. In "Covent

Garden Weeded" Madge begins "the dismal story:"

"This gentlewoman whose name is Damaris----

_Nich._ Damyris, stay: her nickname then is Dammy: so we may call her

when we grow familiar; and to begin that familiarity--Dammy, here's to

you. (_Drinks._)"

After this she is Dammy in the mouth of Nicholas throughout the play.

This, too, was a failure. Indeed, it demonstrates a remarkable reverence

for their Bible on the part of the English race, that every attempt to

turn one of its names into a nick form (saving in some three or four

instances) has ignominiously failed. We mean, of course, since the

Reformation.

The Restoration was a great restoration of nick forms. Such names as had

survived were again for a while in full favour, and the reader has only

to turn to the often coarse ballads and songs contained in such

collections as Tom d'Urfey's "Pills to Purge Melancholy" to see how Nan,

Sis, Sib, Kate, and Doll had been brought back to popular favour. It was

but a spurt, however, in the main. As the lascivious reaction from the

Puritanic strait-lacedness in some degree spent itself, so did the newly

restored fashion, and when the eighteenth century brought in a fresh

innovation, viz. the _classic_ forms, such as Beatrix, Maria, Laetitia,

Carolina, Louisa, Amelia, Georgina, Dorothea, Prudentia, Honora--an

innovation that for forty years ran like an epidemic through every class

of society, and was sarcastically alluded to by Goldsmith in Miss Carolina

Wilhelmina Amelia Skeggs, and the sisters Olivia and Sophia--the old nick

forms once more bade adieu to English society, and now enjoy but a partial

favour. But Bill, Tom, Dick, and Harry still hold on like grim death. Long

may they continue to do so!

(_c._) _The Decay of Saint and Festival Names._

There were some serious losses in hagiology. Names that had figured in the

calendar for centuries fared badly; Simon, Peter, Nicholas, Bartholomew,

Philip, and Matthew, from being first favourites, lapsed into comparative

oblivion. Some virgins and martyrs of extra-Biblical repute, like Agnes,

Ursula, Catharine, Cecilia, or Blaze, crept into the registers of

Charles's reign, but they had then become but shadows of their former

selves.

'Sis' is often found in D'Urfey's ballads, but it only proves the songs

themselves were old ones, or at any rate the choruses, for Cecilia was

practically obsolete:

"1574, Oct. 8. Buried Cisly Weanewright, ye carter's wife."--St.

Peter, Cornhill.

"1578, June 1. Buried Cissellye, wife of Gilles Lambe."--St. Dionis

Backchurch.

"1547, Dec. 26. Married Thomas Bodnam and Urcylaye Watsworth."--Ditto.

"1654, Sep. 20. Buried Ursley, d. of John Fife."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

It was now that Awdry gave way:

"1576, Sept. 7. Buryed Awdry, the widow of -- Seward."--St. Peter,

Cornhill.

"1610, May 27. Baptized Awdrey, d. of John Cooke, butcher."--St.

Dionis Backchurch.

St. Blaze,[22] the patron saint of wool-combers and the _nom-de-plume_ of

Gil Blas, has only a church or two to recall his memory to us now. But he

lived into Charles's reign:

"Blaze Winter was master of Stodmarsh Hospital, when it was

surrendered to Queen Elizabeth, 1575."--Hasted's "History of Kent."

"1550, May 23. Baptized Blaze, daughter of -- Goodwinne."--St. Peter,

Cornhill.

"1555, Julie 21. Wedding of Blase Sawlter and Collis Smith."--Ditto.

"1662, May 6. Blase Whyte, one of ye minor cannons, to Mrs. Susanna

Wright, widow."--Cant. Cath.

This is the last instance I have seen. Hillary shared the same fate:

"1547, Jan. 30. Married Hillarye Finch and Jane Whyte."--St. Dionis

Backchurch.

"1557, June 27. Wedding of Hillary Wapolle and Jane Garret."--St.

Peter, Cornhill.

"1593, Jan. 20. Christening of Hillary, sonne of Hillary Turner,

draper."--Ditto.

Bride is rarely found in England now:

"1556, May 22. Baptized Bryde, daughter of -- Stoakes.

"1553, Nov. 27. Baptized Bryde, daughter of -- Faunt."--St. Peter,

Cornhill.

Benedict, which for three hundred years had been known as Bennet, as

several London churches can testify, became well-nigh extinct; but the

feminine Benedicta, with Bennet for its shortened form, suddenly arose on

its ashes, and flourished for a time:

"1517, Jan. 28. Wedding of William Stiche and Bennet Bennet,

widow."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

"1653, Sep. 29. Married Richard Moone to Benedicta Rolfe."--Cant.

Cath.

"1575, Jan. 25. Baptized Bennett, son of John Langdon."--St. Columb

Major.

These feminines are sometimes bothering. Look, for instance, at this:

"1596, Feb. 6. Wedding of William Bromley and Mathew Barnet, maiden,

of this parish."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

"1655, Sep. 24. Married Thomas Budd, miller, and Mathew Larkin,

spinster."--Ditto.

The true spelling should have been Mathea, which, previous to the

Reformation, had been given to girls born on St. Matthew's Day.[23] The

nick form _Mat_ changed sexes. In "Englishmen for my Money" Walgrave

says--

"Nay, stare not, look you here: no monster I, But even plain Ned, and

here stands Mat my wife."

Appoline, all of whose teeth were extracted at her martyrdom with pincers,

was a favourite saint for appeal against toothache. In the Homily "Against

the Perils of Idolatry," it is said--

"All diseases have their special saints, as gods, the curers of them:

the toothache, St. Appoline."[24]

Scarcely any name for girls was more common than this for a time; up to

the Commonwealth period it contrived to exist. Take St. Peter, Cornhill,

alone:

"1593, Jan. 13. Christened Apeline, d. of John Moris, clothworker.

"1609, M{ch}. 11. Christened Apoline, d. of Will{m}. Burton, marchant.

"1617, June 29. Buried Appelyna, d. of Thomas Church."

Names from the great Church festivals fared as badly as those from the

hagiology. The high day of the ecclesiastical calendar is Easter. We have

more relics of this festival than any other. Pasche Oland or Pascoe Kerne

figure in the Chancery suits of Elizabeth. Long before this the Hundred

Rolls had given us a _Huge fil. Pasche_, and a contemporary record

contained an _Antony Pascheson_. The different forms lingered till the

Commonwealth:

"1553, M{ch}. 23. Baptized Pascall, son of John Davye."--St. Dionis

Backchurch.

"1651, M{ch}. 18. Married Thomas Strato and Paskey Prideaux."--St.

Peter's, Cornhill.

"1747, May 4. Baptized Rebekah, d. of Pasko and Sarah Crocker."--St.

Dionis Backchurch.

"1582, June 14. Baptized Pascow, son-in-law of Pascowe John."--St.

Columb Major.

Pascha Turner, widow, was sister of Henry Parr, Bishop of Worcester.

The more English "Easter" had a longer survival, but this arose from its

having become confounded with Esther. To this mistake it owes the fact

that it lived till the commencement of the present century:

"April, 1505. Christened Easter, daughter of Thomas Coxe, of

Wapping."--Stepney.

"May 27, 1764. Buried Easter Lewis, aged 56 years."--Lidney, Glouc.

"July 27, 1654. Married Thomas Burton, marriner, and Easter

Taylor."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

_Epiphany_, or _Theophania_ (shortened to Tiffany), was popular with both

sexes, but the ladies got the chief hold of it.

"Megge Merrywedyr, and Sabyn Sprynge,

Tiffany Twynkeler, fayle for no thynge,"

says one of our old mysteries. This form succumbed at the Reformation.

Tyffanie Seamor appears as defendant about 1590, however ("Chancery Suits:

Eliz."), and in Cornwall the name reached the seventeenth century:

"1594, Nov. 7. Baptized Typhenie, daughter of Sampson Bray.

"1600, June 21. Baptized Tiffeny, daughter of Harry Hake."--St. Columb

Major.

The following is from Banbury register:

"1586, Jan. 9. Baptized Epiphane, ye sonne of Ambrose Bentley."[25]

Epiphany Howarth records his name also about 1590 ("Chancery Suits:

Eliz."), and a few years later he is once more met with in a State paper

(C. S. P. 1623-25):

"1623, June. Account of monies paid by Epiphan Haworth, of

Herefordshire, recusant, since Nov. 11, 1611, L6 10 0."

This Epiphan is valuable as showing the transition state between Epiphania

and Ephin, the latter being the form that ousted all others:

"1563, March 14. Christening of Ephin King, d. of -- King.

"1564, June 30. Christening of Effam, d. of John Adlington.

"1620, March 30. Frauncis, sonne of Alexander Brounescome, and Effym,

his wife, brought a bead at Mr. Vowell's house.

"1635, Jan. 28. Buried Epham Vowell, widow."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

But Ephin was not a long liver, and by the time of the Restoration had

wholly succumbed. The last entry I have seen is in the Westminster Abbey

register:

"1692, Jan. 25. Buried Eppifania Cakewood, an almsman's wife."

Pentecost was more sparely used. In the "Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum in

Turri Londonensi" occur both Pentecost de London (1221) and Pentecost

Servicus, and a servitor of Henry III. bore the only name of "Pentecost"

("Inquis., 13 Edw. I.," No. 13). This name was all but obsolete soon after

the Reformation set in, but it lingered on till the end of the seventeenth

century.

"1577, May 25. Baptized Pentecost, daughter of Robert Rosegan."--St.

Columb Major.

"1610, May 27. Baptized Pentecost, d. of William Tremain."--Ditto.

"August 7, 1696. Pentecost, daughter of Mr. Ezekel and Pentecost Hall,

merchant, born and baptized."--St. Dionis Backchurch.

Noel shared the same fate. The Hundred Rolls furnish a Noel de Aubianis,

while the "Materials for a History of Henry VII." (p. 503) mentions a

Nowell Harper:

"1486, July 16. General pardon to Nowell Harper, late of Boyleston,

co. Derby, gent."

"1545, Dec. 20. Baptized Nowell, son of William Mayhowe."--St. Columb

Major.

"1580, March 1. Baptized James, son of Nowell Mathew."--Ditto.

"1627. Petition of Nowell Warner."--"C. S. P. Domestic," 1627-8.

Noel still struggled gamely, and died hard, seeing the eighteenth century

well in:

"1706, April 23. Noell Whiteing, son of Noell and Ann Whiteing,

linendraper, baptized."--St. Dionis Backchurch.

Again the Reformation, apart from Puritanism, had much to do with the

decay of these names.

(_d._) _The Last of some Old Favourites._

There were some old English favourites that the Reformation and the

English Bible did not immediately crush. Thousands of men were youths when

the Hebrew invasion set in, and lived unto James's reign. Their names crop

up, of course, in the burial registers. Others were inclined to be

tenacious over family favourites. We must be content, in the records of

Elizabeth's and even James's reign, to find some old friends standing side

by side with the new. The majority of them were extra-Biblical, and

therefore did not meet with the same opposition as those that savoured of

the old ecclesiasticism. Nevertheless, this new fashion was telling on

them, and of most we may say, "Their places know them no more."

Looking from now back to then, we see this the more clearly. We turn to

the "Calendar of State Papers," and we find a grant, dated November 5,

1607, to _Fulk_ Reade to travel four years. Shortly afterwards (July 15,

1609), we come across a warrant to John Carse, of the benefit of the

recusancy of _Drew_ Lovett, of the county of Middlesex. Casting our eye

backwards we speedily reach a grant or warrant in 1603, wherein

_Gavin_[26] Harvey is mentioned. In 1604 comes _Ingram_ Fyser. One after

another these names occur within the space of five years--names then,

although it was well in James's reign, known of all men, and borne

reputably by many. But who will say that Drew, or Fulk, or Gavin, or

Ingram are alive now? How they were to be elbowed out of existence these

very same records tell us; for within the same half-decade we may see

warrants or grants relating to _Matathias_ Mason (April 7, 1610) or

_Gersome_ Holmes (January 23, 1608). _Jethro_ Forstall obtains licence,

November 12, 1604, to dwell in one of the alms-rooms of Canterbury

Cathedral; while _Melchizedec_ Bradwood receives sole privilege, February

18, 1608, of printing Jewel's "Defence of the Apology of the English

Church." The enemy was already within the bastion, and the call for

surrender was about to be made.

Take another specimen a few years earlier. In the Chancery suits at the

close of Elizabeth's reign, we find a plaintiff named Goddard Freeman,

another styled Anketill Brasbridge, a defendant bearing the good old title

of Frideswide Heysham, while a fourth endeavours to secure his title to

some property under the signature of Avery Howlatt. Hamlett Holcrofte and

Hammett Hyde are to be met with (but we have spoken of them), and such

other personages as Ellice Heye, Morrice Cowles, and Gervase Hatfield.

Within a few pages' limit we come across Dogory Garry, Digory Greenfield,

Digory Harrit, and Degory Hollman. These names of Goddard, Anketill,

Frideswide, Avery, Hamlet, Ellice, Morrice, Gervase, and Digory were on

everybody's lips when Henry VIII. was king. Who can say that they exist

now? Only Maurice and Gervase enjoy a precarious existence. A breath of

popular disregard would blow them out. Avery held out, but in vain:

"Avery Terrill, cooke at ye Falcon, Lothbury, 1650."--"Tokens of

Seventeenth Century."

But what else do we see in these same registers? We are confronted with

pages bearing such names as Esaye Freeman (Isaiah), or Elizar Audly

(Eliezer), or Seth Awcocke, or Urias Babington, or Ezekias Brent,--and

this not forty years after the Reformation. These men must have been

baptized in the very throes of the great contest.

Another "Calendar of State Papers," bearing dates between 1590 and 1605,

contains the names of Colet Carey (1580) and Amice Carteret (1599),

alongside of whom stands Aquila Wyke (1603). Here once more we are

reminded of two pretty baptismal names that have gone the way of the

others. It makes one quite sad to think of these national losses. Amice,

previous to the Reformation, was a household favourite, and Colet a

perfect pet. Won't somebody come to the rescue? Why on earth should the

fact that the Bible has been translated out of Latin into English strip us

of these treasures?

Turn once more to our church registers. Few will recognize Thurstan as a

baptismal name:

"1544, May 11. Married Thryston Hogkyn and Letyce Knight."--St. Dionis

Backchurch.

"1573, Nov. 15. Wedding of Thrustone Bufford and Annes Agnes

Dyckson."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

Drew and Fulk are again found:

"1583, April 16. Buried Drew Hewat, sonne of Nicholas Hewat.

"1583, March 8. Buried Foulke Phillip, sonne of Thomas Phillip,

grocer."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

Take the following, dropped upon hap-hazard as I turn the pages of St.

Dionis Backchurch:

"1540, Oct. 25. Buried Jacomyn Swallowe.

"1543, Aug. 3. Buried Awdrye Hykman.

"1543, June 12. Married Bonyface Meorys and Jackamyn Kelderly.

"1546, Nov. 23. Christened Grizill, daughter of--Deyne.

"1557, Nov. 8. Buried Austin Clarke.

"1567, April 22. Married Richard Staper and Dennis Hewyt.

"1573, Sep. 25. Married John Carrington and Gyllian Lovelake.

"1574, Oct. 23. Buried Joyce, d. of John Bray.

"1594, Nov. 1. Married Gawyn Browne and Sibbell Halfhed."

So they run. How quaint and pretty they sound to modern ears! Amongst the

above I have mentioned some girl-names. The change is strongly marked

here. It was Elizabeth's reign saw the end of Joan. Jane Grey set the

fashionable Jane going; Joan was relegated to the milkmaid, and very soon

even the kitchen wench would none of it. Joan is obsolete; Jane is showing

signs of dissolution.[27]

It was Elizabeth's reign saw the end of Jill, or Gill, which had been the

pet name of Juliana for three centuries:

"1586, Feb. 5. Christening of Gillian Jones, daughter of Thomas Jones,

grocer."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

"1573, Sep. 25. Married John Carrington, Cheape, and Gillian

Lovelake."--St. Dionis Backchurch.

In one of our earlier mysteries Noah's wife had refused to enter the ark.

To Noah she had said--

"Sir, for Jak nor for Gille

Wille I turne my face,

Tille I have on this hille

Spun a space."

It lingered on till the close of James's reign. In 1619 we find in

"Satyricall Epigrams"--

"Wille squabbled in a tavern very sore,

Because one brought a _gill_ of wine--no more:

'Fill me a quart,' quoth he, 'I'm called Will;

The proverb is, each _Jacke_ shall have his _Gill_.'"

But Jill had become a term for a common street jade, like Parnel and Nan.

All these disappeared at this period, and must have sunk into disuse,

Bible or no Bible. A nanny-house, or simple "nanny," was well known to the

loose and dissolute of either sex at the close of the sixteenth century.

Hence, in the ballad "The Two Angrie Women of Abington," Nan Lawson is a

wanton; while, in "Slippery Will," the hero's inclination for Nan is

anything but complimentary:

"Long have I lived a bachelor's life,

And had no mind to marry;

But now I faine would have a wife,

Either Doll, Kate, Sis, or Mary.

These four did love me very well,

I had my choice of Mary;

But one did all the rest excell,

And that was pretty Nanny.

"Sweet Nan did love me deare indeed," etc.

Respectable people, still liking the name, changed it to Nancy, and in

that form it still lives.

Parnel, the once favourite Petronilla, fell under the same blight as

Peter, and shared his fate; but her character also ruined her. In the

registers of St. Peter, Cornhill, we find the following entries:--

"1539, May 20. Christened Petronilla, ignoti cognominis."

"1594, Sep. 15. Christening of Parnell Griphin, d. of John Griphin,

felt-maker."

"1586, April 17. Christening of Parnell Averell, d. of William

Averell, merchant tailor."

Two other examples may be furnished:--

"1553, Nov. 15. Peternoll, daughter of William Agar, baptized."--St.

Columb Major.

"1590, April. Pernell, d. of Antony Barton, of Poplar."--Stepney,

London.

The Restoration did not restore Parnel, and the name is gone.

Sibyl had a tremendous run in her day, and narrowly escaped a second epoch

of favour in the second Charles's reign. Tib and Sib were always placed

side by side. Burton, speaking of "love melancholy," says--

"One grows too fat, another too lean: modest Matilda, pretty pleasing

Peg, sweet singing Susan, mincing merry Moll, dainty dancing Doll,

neat Nancy, jolly Joan, nimble Nell, kissing Kate, bouncing Bess with

black eyes, fair Phillis with fine white hands, fiddling Frank, tall

Tib, slender Sib, will quickly lose their grace, grow fulsome, stale,

sad, heavy, dull, sour, and all at last out of fashion."

The "Psalm of Mercie," too, has it:

"'So, so,' quoth my sister Bab,

And 'Kill 'um,' quoth Margerie;

'Spare none,' cry's old Tib; 'No quarter,' says Sib,

'And, hey, for our monachie.'"

In "Cocke Lorelle's Bote," one of the personages introduced is--

"Sibby Sole, mylke wyfe of Islynton."

"Sibb Smith, near Westgate, Canterbury, 1650."--"Half-penny Tokens of

Seventeenth Century."

"1590, Aug. 30. Christening of Cibell Overton, d. of Lawrence Overton,

bowyer."

Three names practically disappeared in this same century--Olive, Jacomyn

or Jacolin, and Grissel:

"1581, Feb. 17. Baptized Olyff, daughter of Degorie Stubbs."--St.

Columb Major.

"1550, Dec. 11. Christning of Grysell, daughter of -- Plummer."--St.

Peter, Cornhill.

"1598, March 15. Buried Jacolyn Backley, widow."--St. Dionis

Backchurch.

Olive was a great favourite in the west of England, and was restored by a

caprice of fashion as Olivia in the eighteenth century. It was the

property of both sexes, and is often found in the dress of "Olliph,"

"Olyffe," and "Olif." From being a household pet, Dorothy, as Doll, almost

disappeared for a while. Doll and Dolly came back in the eighteenth

century, under the patronage of the royal and stately Dorothea. What a run

it again had! Dolly is one of the few instances of a really double

existence. It was the rage from 1450 to 1570; it was overwhelmed with

favour from 1750 to 1820. Dr. Syntax in his travels meets with three

Dollys. Napoleon is besought in the rhymes of the day to

"quit his folly,

Settle in England, and marry Dolly."

Once more Dolly, saving for Dora, has made her bow and exit. I suppose she

may turn up again about 1990, and all the little girls will be wearing

Dolly Vardens.

_Barbara_, with its pet Bab, is now of rarest use. _Dowse_, the pretty

Douce of earlier days, is defunct, and with it the fuller Dowsabel:

"1565, Sep. 9. Buried Dowse, wife of John Thomas."--St. Dionis

Backchurch.

_Joyce_ fought hard, but it was useless:

"1563, Sep. 8. Buried Joyce, wife of Thomas Armstrong."--St. Dionis

Backchurch.

"1575, April 5. Baptized Joyes, daughter of John Lyttacott."--St.

Columb Major.

"1652, Aug. 18. Married Joseph Sumner and Joyce Stallowhace."--St.

Peter, Cornhill.

_Lettice_ disappeared, to come back as Laetitia in the eighteenth century:

"1587, June 19. Married Richard Evannes and Lettis Warren."--St.

Peter, Cornhill.

_Amery_, or _Emery_, the property of either sex, lost place:

"1584, April 9. Buried Amery Martin, widow, of Wilsdon."--St. Peter,

Cornhill.

"1668. Emerre Bradley, baker, Hartford."--"Tokens of Seventeenth

Century."

_Avice_ shared the same fate:

"Avis Kingston and Amary Clerke, widow, applied for arrears of pay due

to their husbands, May 13, 1656."--C. S. P.

"1590-1, Jan. Christened Avis, d. of Philip Cliff."--Stepney.

"1600, Feb. 6. Baptized Avice, daughter of Thomas Bennett."--St.

Columb Major.

"1623, August 5. Christened Thomas, the sonne of James Jennets, and

Avice his wife."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

Thomasine requires a brief notice. Coming into use as a fancy name about

1450, it seems to have met with no opposition, and for a century and a

half was a decided success. It became familiar to every district in

England, north or south, and is found in the registers of out-of-the-way

villages in Derbyshire, as plentifully as in those of the metropolitan

churches:

"1538, Nov. 30. Married Edward Bashe and Thomeson Agar."--St. Dionis

Backchurch.

"1582, Nov. 1. Baptized Tamson, daughter of Richard Hodge."--St.

Columb Major.

"1622, Jan. 19. Christened Thomas, the sonne of Henery Thomson,

haberdasher, and of Thomazine his wife."--St. Peter, Cornhill.

"1620, Jan. 21. Baptized Johanna, fil. Tamsin Smith,

adulterina."--Minster.

"1640, Jan. 31. Buried Thomasing, filia William Sympson."--Wirksworth,

Derbyshire.

In other registers such forms as Thomasena, Thomesin, Thomazin, Tomasin,

and Thomasin occur. In Cowley's "Chronicle," too, the name is found:

"Then Jone and Jane and Audria,

And then a pretty Thomasine,

And then another Katharine,

And then a long et caetera."

V. THE GENERAL CONFUSION.

But what a state of confusion does all this reveal! By the time of the

Commonwealth, there was the choice of three methods of selection open to

the English householder in this matter of names. He might copy the zealot

faction, and select his names from the Scriptures or the category of

Christian graces; he might rally by the old English gentleman, who at this

time was generally a Cavalier, and Dick, Tom, Harry, or Dolly, his

children; or he might be careless about the whole matter, and mix the two,

according to his caprice or fancy. That Royalist had no bad conception of

the state of society in 1648, when he turned off verses such as these:

"And Greenwich shall be for tenements free

For saints to possess Pell-Mell,

And where all the sport is at Hampton Court

Shall be for ourselves to dwell.

_Chorus._ ''Tis blessed,' quoth Bathsheba,

And Clemence, 'We're all agreed.'

''Tis right,' quoth Gertrude, 'And fit,' says sweet Jude,

And Thomasine, 'Yea, indeed.'

"What though the king proclaims

Our meetings no more shall be;

In private we may hold forth the right way,

And be, as we should be, free.

_Chorus._ 'O very well said,' quoth Con;

'And so will I do,' says Franck;

And Mercy cries, 'Aye,' and Mat, 'Really,'

'And I'm o' that mind,' quoth Thank."

As we shall show in our next chapter, "Thank" was no imaginary name,

coined to meet the exigencies of rhyme. Thanks, however, to the good sense

of the nation, an effort was made in behalf of such old favourites as

John, William, Richard, Robert, and Thomas. So early as 1643, Thomas

Adams, Puritan as he was, had delivered himself in a London pulpit to the

effect that "he knew 'Williams' and 'Richards' who, though they bore names

not found in sacred story, but familiar to the country, were as gracious

saints" as any who bore names found in it ("Meditations upon the Creed").

The Cavalier, we know, had deliberately stuck by the old names. A

political skit, already referred to, after running through a list of all

the new-fangled names introduced by the fanatics, concludes:

"They're just like the Gadaren's swine,

Which the devils did drive and bewitch:

An herd set on evill

Will run to the de-vill

And his dam when their tailes do itch.

'Then let 'em run on!'

Says Ned, Tom, and John.

'Ay, let 'um be hanged!' quoth Mun:

'They're mine,' quoth old Nick,

'And take 'um,' says Dick,

'And welcome!' quoth worshipful Dun.

'And God blesse King Charles!' quoth George,

'And save him,' says Simon and Sill;

'Aye, aye,' quoth old Cole and each loyall soul,

'And Amen, and Amen!' cries Will."

Another ballad, lively and free as the other, published in 1648, and

styled "The Anarchie, or the Blest Reformation," after railing at the

confusion of things in general, and names in particular, concludes with

the customary jolly old English flourish:

"'A health to King Charles!' says Tom;

'Up with it,' says Ralph like a man;

'God bless him,' says Moll, 'And raise him,' says Doll,

'And send him his owne,' says Nan."

The Restoration practically ended the conflict, but it was a truce; for

both sides, so far as nomenclature is concerned, retained trophies of

victory, and, on the whole, the Hebrew was the gainer. At the start he had

little to lose, and he has filled the land with titles that had lain in

abeyance for four thousand years. The old English yeoman has lost many of

his most honoured cognomens, but he can still, at least, boast one thing.

The two names that were foremost before the middle of the twelfth century

stand at this moment in the same position. Out of every hundred children

baptized in England, thirteen are entered in the register as John or

William. The Cavalier, too, can boast that "Charles,"[28] although there

were not more of that name throughout the length and breadth of England at

the beginning of Elizabeth's reign than could be counted on the fingers of

one hand, now occupies the sixth place among male baptismal names.

Several names, now predominant, were for various reasons lifted above the

contest. George holds the fourth position among boys; Mary and Elizabeth,

the first and second among girls. George dates all his popularity from the

last century, and Mary was in danger of becoming obsolete at the close of

Elizabeth's reign, so hateful had it become to Englishmen, whether

Churchmen or Presbyterians. It was at this time Philip, too, lost a place

it can never recover. But the fates came to the rescue of Mary, when the

Prince of Orange landed at Torbay, and sate with James's daughter on

England's throne. It has been first favourite ever since. As for

Elizabeth, a chapter might be written upon it. Just known, and no more, at

the beginning of the sixteenth century, it was speedily popularized in the

"daughter of the Reformation." The Puritans, in spite of persecution and

other provocations, were ever true to "Good Queen Bess." The name, too,

was scriptural, and had not been mixed up with centuries of Romish

superstition. Elizabeth ruled supreme, and was contorted and twisted into

every conceivable shape that ingenuity could devise. It narrowly escaped

the diminutive desinence, for Ezot and Ezota occur to my knowledge four

times in records between 1500 and 1530. But Bess and Bessie took up the

running, and, a century later, Bett and Betty. It will surprise almost all

my readers, I suspect, to know that the "Lady Bettys" of the early part of

last century were never, or rarely ever, christened Elizabeth. Queen

Anne's reign, even William and Mary's reign, saw the fashionable rage for

Latinized forms, already referred to, setting in. Elizabeth was turned

into Bethia and Betha:

"1707, Jan. 2. Married Will{m}. Simonds and Bethia Ligbourne."--St.

Dionis Backchurch.

"1721. Married Charles Bawden to Bethia Thornton."--Somerset House

Chapel.

"1748. Married Adam Allyn to Bethia Lee."[29]--Ditto.

The familiar form of this was Betty:

"Betty Trevor, wife of the Hon. John Trevor, eldest d. of Sir Thomas

Frankland, of Thirkleby, in the county of York, Baronet, ob. Dec. 28,

1742, aetat. 25."--"Suss. Arch. Coll.," xvii. 148.

Bess was forgotten, and it was not till the present century that, Betty

having become the property of the lower orders, who had soon learnt to

copy their betters, the higher classes fell back once more on the Bessie

of Reformation days.

Meanwhile other freaks of fancy had a turn. Bessie and Betty were dropped

into a mill, and ground out as Betsy. This, after a while, was relegated

to the peasantry and artisans north of Trent. Then Tetty and Tetsy had an

innings. Dr. Johnson always called his wife Tetty. Writing March 28, 1753,

he says--

"I kept this day as the anniversary of my Tetty's death, with prayer

and tears in the morning."

Eliza arose before Elizabeth died; was popular in the seventeenth, much

resorted to in the eighteenth, and is still familiar in the nineteenth

century. Thomas Nash, in "Summer's Last Will and Testament," has the

audacity to speak of the queen as--

"that Eliza, England's beauteous queen,

On whom all seasons prosperously attend."

Dr. Johnson, in an epigram anent Colley Cibber and George II., says--

"Augustus still survives in Maro's strain,

And Spenser's verse prolongs Eliza's reign."

But by the lexicographer's day, the poorer classes had ceased to

recognize that Eliza and Betty were parts of one single name. They took up

each on her own account, as a separate name, and thus Betty and Eliza were

commonly met with in the same household. This is still frequently seen.

The _Spectator_, the other day, furnished a list of our commonest font

names, wherein Elizabeth is placed fourth, with 4610 representatives in

every 100,000 of the population. Looking lower down, we find "Eliza"

ranked in the twenty-first place with 1507. This is scarcely fair. The two

ought to be added together; at least, it perpetuates a misconception.