94 ‘The Names of Places in Wiltshire. 
is clearly the modern form of an implied Ceauningas. In a eharter 
from the Codex. Winton. (Cod. Dipl., 1193), we have, in the land- 
limits of Heyling, in Hants, the expression Cenninga-mer, whieh 
can only mean the boundary of the tribe, or elan, of the “ Cannings.” 
At no great distance from Cannings is a name, Cane Hit, whieh 
perchance may be a memorial of the chief from whom they took 
their name. In the name Ken, well-known and remembered in the 
West of England, we seem to have the name in something like its 
primitive form. 
Under this head may be placed also a number of names which have 
the form of genuine patronymies, but denote, not so much the clan 
descended from any particular chief, as that residing within a certain 
district. Thus Zfeningas, now AVENING, means, as has already been 
shown, the “dwellers on the Avon; ” in like manner Zeofuntinga- 
gemare (Cod. Dipl., 284) means the boundary of the “men of 
Teffont,” and Lamburninga-merc (Cod. Dipl., 792), in like manner 
means the “ mark” or district of those who belonged to Lambourne. 
So CoLztrnaBoury, spelt in the charters Colinga-burn (Cod. Dipl., 336) 
may mean the “bourn” or “stream” of those who lived on,the 
banks of the river Cole, though that name, at all events in that 
particular part of Wilts, is not now known. I admit, however, that 
it is as likely that the Colingas derived their name from some old 
leader or chieftain. We certainly meet in the charters with such 
expressions as Colan-tredw ( = Cole’s tree) (Cod. Dipl., 712), and 
Colan-ham (Cod. Dipl., 227) (= Cole’s homestead), which show 
that a personal name existed which may well explain the former 
portion of the name Collingbourn. Moreover, in the Wilts Domes- 
day we have Cola holding a small estate, as one of the King’s 
Thanes (W. Domesd., 136). 
59. It is right however to add that in dealing with this class of 
names much caution is necessary, for it is by no means enough that a 
word should end in -ing to make it a patronymic. On the contrary, as 
Kemble remarks,’ “it is a power of that termination to denote the 
genitive or possessive, which is also the generative case, and in some 

1Saxons in England, i., 60. Note, 

