163 



These were what we call surnames and became, by trans- 

 mission from father to sou, family names. The various 

 modes in which these originated and grew up were then 

 systematically explained. 



The most obvious would be from personal peculiarities. 

 As, of two Johns in one neighborhood, one would soon 

 become known as John the Long, and another as John 

 the Short. Hence we get all the Shorts, Longs, Whites, 

 Blacks, Browns, etc. 



Next, children came to be particularized after their 

 parents, as John, Robert's son, or John Robertson, James, 

 William's son, or James Williamson, and so on. Again, 

 men got names from their occupations, as John the Smith 

 or soon simply John Smith, Hugh the Miller or Hugh 

 Miller. So in other languages, as the Scotch synonymes 

 of Baxter or Baker, Thaxter or Thacher, etc. 



Then we find many getting titles from their residence. 

 Noblemen, it is well known, are called from their estates. 

 So through all ranks, as Peter of the Lane, Sam on the 

 Hill, Jem of the Meadows, etc., and in this way grow up 

 in time countless family appellatives, as Lanes, Hills, 

 jNIeadows, Heaths, Dales, Downs, Forests, Brooks, Riv- 

 ers and the like. Of this class, too, are Greenwood, 

 Underwood, Redtield and many similar. 



Parts of the human body and various objects of nature, 

 plants, animals, even minerals, have by some sino-ular 

 association, hopeless now to trace, given special designa- 

 tions to individuals first, and then to families. For in- 

 stance, Head, Leg, Foote, Blood, Ash, Birch, Root, 

 Branch, Hedge, Straw, Peach, Pear, Thorn, Berry, Rice, 

 Millet, Hare, Fox, Badger, Bull, Partridge, Sparrow, 

 Bird, Drake, Fish, Pollock, Herring, etc., and Stone, 

 Jasper, Marble, Jewell and many more of similar char- 

 acter. 



