The following information
is from an article by Ron Collins that appeared on the roots computing web
site.
Primitive personal names
doubtless originated soon after the invention of spoken language in the
unrecorded ages preceding modern history.
For thousands of years first, or given, names were the only designations
that men and women bore; and at the dawn of recorded historic times, when the
world was less crowded than it is today and every man knew his neighbors, one
title of address was sufficient. Only
gradually, with the passing centuries and the increasing complexity of
civilized societies, did a need arise for more specific designations. While the roots of our system of family
names may be traced back to early civilized times, hereditary surnames, as we
know them today, date from scarcely more than 900 years ago.
As early as biblical times
certain distinguishing characteristics were occasionally used in addition to
the given name, as, for instance, Swen Forkbeard, Harold Bluetooth, Joshua the
son of Nun, Azariah the son of Nathan, Judas of Galilee, and Simon the Zealot.
In ancient Greece a daughter
was named after her father, as in Chryseis, daughter of Chryses, and a son’s
name was often an enlargement of his father’s, as in Hieronymus, son of Hiero.
The Romans met the need for
hereditary designations by inventing a complex system whereby every patrician
took several names. None of them,
however, exactly corresponded to surnames as we know them for the “clan name,”
although hereditary, was also given to slaves and other dependents. Examples are the Claudians, the house of
Tiberius and the Julians. This system
proved to be but a temporary innovation; the overthrow of the Western Empire by
Celtic and Germanic barbarian invaders brought about its end and a reversion to
the primitive custom of a single name.
The ancient Scandinavians,
and for the most part the Germans and the Celts, had only individual names, and
there were no family names, strictly speaking.
But as family and tribal groups grew in size, individual names became
inadequate and the need for supplementary designations began to be felt. Among the first employed were such terms as
the Hardy, the Stern, the Dreadful-in-Battle.
Also, nations of northern Europe soon adopted the practice of adding the
father’s name to the son’s, as in Oscar son of Carnuth, and Dermid son of
Duthno.
True surnames, in the sense
of hereditary appellations, date in England from about the year 1000. Largely they were introduced from Normandy,
although there are records of Saxon surnames prior to the Norman Conquest. During the reign of Edward the Confessor (1042-1066)
there were Saxon tenants in Suffolk bearing such names as Suert Magno, Stigand
Soror, Siuward Rufus and Leuric Hobbesune (Hobson). The Domesday Record of 1085-1086, which exhibits some curious
combinations of Saxon forenames with Norman family names, shows surnames in
still more general use.
By the end of the 12th
century hereditary names had become common in England. But even as late as 1465 they were not
universal. During the reign of Edward V
a law was passed to compel certain Irish to adopt surnames as a method of
tracking and controlling them. “They
shall take unto them a Surname, either of some Town, or some Color, as Black or
Brown, or some Art or Science, as Smyth or Carpenter, or some Office, as Cooke
or Butler.” And as late as the
beginning of the 19th century a similar decree was adopted in
Germany and Austria compelling Jews to add a German surname to the single names
they had previously used.
Family names fall into four
general classes according to their origins.
One of these classes is comprised
of surnames derived from the given name of the father. Such names were formed by adding a prefix or
suffix denoting either “son of” or a diminutive. English names terminating in “son (or the contraction “s”),
“ing,” and “kin” are of this type, as are the innumerable names prefixed with the
Gaelic “Mac,” the Norman “Fitz,” the Irish “O,” and the Welsh “ap.” Thus the sons of John became Johnson; the
sons of William, Williamson or Wilson; the sons of Richard, Richardson or
Richards; the sons of Neill, MacNeill; the sons of Herbert, FitzHerbert; the
sons of Reilly, O’Reilly, and the sons of Thomas, ap Thomas (ap has been
dropped from many names of which it was formerly a part). There are also German, Netherlands,
Scandinavian and other European surnames of similar formation, such as the Scandinavian
names ending in “sen.” In Slavic
countries “sky” and “ski” play the same role.
Another class of surnames,
those arising from some bodily or personal
characteristic of their first bearer, apparently grew out of what were
in the first instance nicknames. Thus
Peter the strong became Peter Strong, Roger of small stature became Roger
Little or Roger Small, and black-haired William or blonde Alfred became William
Black and Alfred White. A few examples
of names of this type are Long, Short, Hardy, Wise, Good, Gladman, Lover and
Youngman.
A third class of family
names, and perhaps the largest of all, is that comprising local surnames –
names derived from and originally designating the place of residence of the
bearer. Such names were employed in France
at an early date (for example, La Porte, meaning “at the entrance to”) and were
introduced into England by the Normans, many of whom were known by the title of
their estates. Surnames adopted by the
nobility were chiefly of this type and were used with the articles “de” and “de
la” or “del” (meaning “of” or “of the”).
The Saxon equivalent was the word “atte” (“at the”) found in such names
as John atte Brook, Edmund atte Lane, and William Atwood and John Atwater. The surnames of some of the Pilgrims illustrate
place designations. Winthrop, for
instance, means “of the friendly village;” Endicott “an end cottage,” and
Bradford “a broad ford. The suffixes
“ford,” “ham,” “ley,” and “ton,” denoting locality, frequently occur in English
names, for instance Ashford, Bingham, Burley and Norton.
Beginning about the time of
Edward the Confessor (1042-1066) a fourth class of surnames arose, i.e. names
derived from occupation. The earliest
of these seem to have been official names, such as Bishop, Mayor, Alderman,
Reeve, Sheriff, Chamberlain, Chancellor, Chaplain, Deacon, Latimer
(interpreter), Marshall, Sumner (summoner) and Parker (parkkeeper). Trade and craft names, although of the same
general type, were a slightly later development. Examples of this group are Currier, a dresser of skins; Webster,
a weaver; Wainwright, a wagon builder, and Baxter, a baker. Such names as Smith, Taylor, Barber,
Shepherd, Carter, Mason and Miller are self-explanatory. Similarly, in France we find La Farr (iron
worker), and in Germany Winegar (vine dresser) and Mueller (miller).
Some surnames of today which
seem to defy classification or explanation are corruptions of ancient forms
that have become changed almost beyond recognition. For instance, Troublefield was originally Tuberville; Wrinch was
Renshaw; Diggles was Douglas; Sinnocks and Snooks was Sevenoaks; Barrowcliff
and Berrycloth were Barraclough, and Strawbridge was Stourbridge. Such corruptions of family names, resulting
from ignorance of spelling, variations in pronunciation, or merely from the
preference of the bearer, tend to baffle both the genealogist and the
etymologist. Shakespeare’s name is
found in some 27 different forms, and the majority of English and Anglo-American
surnames have, in their history, appeared in from four to a dozen or more
variant spellings.
In the U.S. a greater
variety of family names exists than anywhere else in the world. Surnames of every race, nation and religion
are represented. While a substantial
number are of English, Scotch, Irish, Welsh and western European origin,
brought to this country by scions of families that had borne these names for
generations prior to emigration, many others have come from central and
southern Europe and the Slavic countries where the use of surnames is generally
a more recent practice. Some families
had no fixed surname until after their arrival in America, and in other cases
emigrants from continental Europe or their descendants have translated or
otherwise modified their names. These
factors contribute to the difficulties encountered by students of etymology and
family history.
In my research I have come
across several different explanations of the origin of the name Barefoot. Several of those explanations and their
sources follow. Most assuredly the name
is not Native American, and it seems that the Pennsylvania Barefoot line, at
least, has connections to Ireland.
Whether it goes back further to Scandinavia is not known.
According to
“Wallace-Bruce and Closely Related Families” by James Wallace:
A history of one branch of
the Barefoot family says there were two Barefoot men – Englishmen – who fought
in the Battle of Boyne on the Protestant side.
They were brothers. After the
war (William, Prince of Orange, against James II, 1690) they were given by King
William what was called Crown land in Ireland.
It is supposed the Barefoot men were Episcopalian, as nearly all the
British officers belonged to the established church. The one we sprung from married a Scotch woman who was said to be
very devout and brought her family up in the old secular fashion, always taking
the children with her to church. The Barefoot men were tall, measured six feet
or more, and of fair complexion. They
were rather long-lived.
There is also a tradition
that among the foreigners – gallant Protestants – who rallied to Prince
William’s banner from France, Holland, Germany and Scandinavia, there were two
Norwegians named Barfod, who were descendants (or claimed to be) of the
Norwegian King Magnus III (1093-1103) and that for their valor in the Battle of
the Boyne King William bestowed upon them Crown land in Ulster, Ireland.
According to information
contained in the Genealogy of James Barefoot, Sr., and Mary Sleek (Slick):
King Magnus III, called
Magnus Barefoot, was the son of Olaf III (ruled1066-1093) considered Norway’s
patron saint. Magnus was born in 1073
and came to the throne in 1093. He made
three expeditions to Scotland and established rule over the Orkneys and the
Hebrides, including the Isle of Man. On
returning home from his conquest of the Hebrides around 1097 he adopted the
dress in use there and went about barelegged, having a short tunic and also an
upper garment, and so men called him “Barefoot.” [This is the earliest authentic mention of the kilt.] On August 24, 1103 Magnus and a few of his
men were waiting to receive a promised herd of cattle in a swampy region near
Ulster, Ireland, when they were ambushed by a large group of Irish. Magnus was killed. He was given a Christian burial and is interred somewhere near
Dublin. He was succeeded by his three
sons – Olaf IV, Eystein I, Sigurd – who reigned jointly.
According to
Barefoot-Withrow Families” by Anne and Vivian Daughterty:
The name Barefoot is an
ancient Anglo-Saxon name. The name
Robert Barefot was recorded in Northamptonshire, England as early as 1160 according to “The First Century of
English Feudalism” by F. M. Stenton.
The name Reginald Barfot is in the “Pipe Rolls of Cumberland” in
1203. A John Barfot was in the “Assize
Rolls of Kent” in 1317. The name
Barefoot has had man spellings over many years. Barefoote, Barfoot, Burfot, Berfot to mention a few. The Danes spell the name Barfoed. The Norwegian spelling is Barfod. Barford is the name of several places in
England (other spellings of this name were Barley Ford, Ford of the Bear and
Birch Ford). In England the name was
also given to one who went barefooted and persons sent to a holy place as a
penance were often ordered to go barefoot.
From “New Dictionary of American Family Names” by Eldson C. Smith, published by Harper & Row, 1956:
Barefoot (Eng) one who had
the habit of going about barefoot; persons sent to a holy place as a penance
were often ordered to go barefoot; one who came from Barford (barley ford, ford
of the bear, birch ford), the name of several places in England.