I perceive that your correspondents COWGILL and J. H. (p. 290.), and
MR. MARK ANTONY LOWER (p. 326.), make use of the word _surname_ to
signify "the permanent appellative of particular families."
Now, I have always considered that the English language, in this as in
many other instances, possessed two words which, though alike in sound,
were very different both in origin and meaning:--_surname_, i.e.
_sur-nom_, the name added to the common appellation, for the purpose of
distinguishing an individual; as Rufus, Coeur de Lion, Lackland, in the
case of our early kings: and _sir-name_, or _sire-name_, being that
which in recent times, and in most countries, every one born in wedlock
has inherited from his sire, and which is the subject of the articles in
"N. & Q."
As I do not suppose that your correspondents, the last of whom is of
considerable authority on this subject, have used the term unadvisedly,
I am anxious to know the grounds on which they would disallow my theory.