PATRONYMICS II - DENMARK & EUROPE
Article by Diana Gale Matthiesen
Historically, when people lived in clans or small villages, everyone had just one name: a "call" name or what we would now describe as a "given" name. One name was all they needed because everyone knew each other. As population increased, it became necessary to distinguish between people with the same call name. One obvious way to distinguish between, for example, two John's in the same village, would be to indicate whose son each is. In other words, John, son of William, or John, son of Robert; or more simply, John, William's son, or John, Robert's son. These have come down to us as Williamson, Robertson, and all the other -son's and -sen's (in several European languages, not just English). At some time, surprisingly late in some regions, these "patronymics" became fixed as an unchanging surname. But before discussing the fixation of patronymics as surnames, it's important to understand how patronymics work.
In the days before surnames, a person's call name (John, Ann, Matthew, etc.) was followed by the name of their father, usually with a grammatical ending indicating the name was a patronymic. Using Danish patronymics as an example, here would be a series of fathers and sons, before the use of surnames began:
Father: Søren Hansen
Son: Niels_Sørensen
Grandson: Hans_Nielsen
Great-grandson: Lars Hansen
For daughters, the ending is -datter/-sdatter:
Father: Søren Hansen
Daughter: Agate Sørensdatter
Father: Jacob Larsen
Daughter: Christina Jacobsdatter
Father: Peter Andresen
Daughter: Katrine Petersdatter
While "-datter" is the typical ending for a Danish female patronymic, there are regions where you will find that female patronymics follow the same pattern as males (i.e., with the -sen ending or, in some cases, with just the abbreviated "-s" ending). For example:
Father: Jes Larsen
Daughter: Karen Jessen
Father: Conrad Knudsen
Daughter: Birthe Conrads
In 1526, surnames became mandatory in Denmark only for the nobility. In 1771, surnames became mandatory in Slesvig-Holsten. In 1828, surnames became mandatory throughout Denmark, but the law was largely ignored. Then, in 1856, the legal mandate to use a surname was strengthened forcing the holdouts to give in and finally adopt a surname, making Danes among the last in Europe to adopt surnames.
I can use my own Danish ancestry as an example showing when surname fixation took place, that is, the generation in which the child was not given a patronymic based on the father's call name, but was, instead, given the father's patronymic as a fixed SURNAME (distinguished here in ALL-CAPS).
Hinrich
Mathias Hinrichsen
Søren Mathiesen (c1784-1840)
Andreas MATHIESEN (1819- )
Carsten MATHIESEN (1842-1904)
Andreas MATHIESEN / MATTHIESEN (1867-1921) — the immigrant in 1886
Arthur Carsten MATTHIESEN (1895-1967) — my paternal grandfather
As you can see, Mathias and Søren each used a traditional patronym based on his father's call name. If the tradition had been maintained, Søren's son, Andreas, would have been called "Andreas Sørensen," but we can see that, in this generation, Søren's patronym was fixed as a modern surname. I can only guess that the second "t" was added in the U.S. because the English patronymic of the same derivation (viz., Mattheson, for "Matthew's son") is spelled with two t's.
There are some important ramifications resulting from this process, other than the obvious. One is that people, today, whose surname is based on a patronymic, may be totally unrelated to other people with the same surname. Picture, if you will, that ca. 1856, everyone in Denmark was mandated to use a surname and most adopted their father's patronymic as a surname. Two brothers, Mathias and Søren, now have all their descendants named, respectively, MATHIESEN and SØRENSEN — yet these families are closely related. In contrast, two unrelated men named Søren, on opposite sides of Denmark, now both have all their descendants surnamed SØRENSEN — yet they are not related at all. It is for this reason that, as a Danish MATHIESEN, I feel no "sense of clan" with other Danish MATHIESENs, beyond my near relatives. A "reunion" of MATHIESENs — in Denmark or in America — would simply bring together a lot of unrelated strangers, hence there isn't likely to be such a gathering. For my family, it would make much more sense to have a reunion of "Danes from Visby" — our home town in Denmark (where my great-great-grandfather's house still stands and is still lived in).
The other important ramification is that once you've worked back to the point where surnames disappear, it becomes essentially impossible to trace your ancestry any further using traditional methods, unless you happen to be descended from nobility or royalty. What can be used beyond this point is DNA analysis, which opens up a whole new world of possibilities for researchers who have hit this wall. However, one other ramification of patronymic surnames is that Y-chromosome DNA surname projects are meaningless for them because, as I mentioned above, so many individuals with the same surname are not related while many with different surnames are related. The only logical way to organize Y-DNA projects for those with patronymic surnames is regionally, at the outset, and then genetically, after test results are known, as is the case in the Danish Demes Regional DNA Project. But back to the subject of patronymics …
Not all cultures dropped the use of patronymics when surnames were adopted. Some simply added the surname, and the patronymic became what we would call a "middle" name. Russians follow this custom and are more likely to call each other by their given name and patronym, than by their given name and surname. Here is an example of four generations, from father to son to son to daughter:
Ivan Petrovich [or Petrov] Zokolov
Mikhail Ivanovich [or Ivanov] Zokolov
Ivan Mikhailovich [or Mikailov] Zokolov
Anna Ivanova Zokolov
The vast majority of Russian surnames were, however, themselves formed from patronyms; so, from a grammatical point of view, it's likely to appear someone has two patronyms, as in the example above where Zokolov also looks like it could be a patronym. But the true status of the last name as a surname will be apparent because it will be passed unchanged from generation to generation, while the patronymic will keep changing.
Here are some examples of patronymics in different languages (the list is not exhaustive):
Language Ending(s) Examples
Danish -sen or -s (for a son or daughter), -datter or -sdatter (for a daughter)
Lars Hansen, Søren Friedrichsen, Marte Sørensdatter
Swedish -son (for a son), -sdotter (for a daughter)
Hans Anderson, Niels Larson, Sonya Svensdotter
Dutch -sen or -son (for a son), usually shortened to -se or –s, -sdockter (for a daughter), usually shortened to -sdr, sd, -se, or -s
Willem Jansse, Cornelis Dirkse, Jannetje Adrians
Russian -in, -yn, -ov, -ev, -vich, etc. (for a son), -vicha, -a, -ova, -ovna, -ina, etc. (for a daughter) The grammatical formation of Russian patronymics is actually even more complicated than implied here, but you get the idea.
Anton Alekseev, Dmitri Borodin, Sofiya Alekseeva, Anastasiya Borodina
Polish -owicz (for a son), -owna (for a daughter)
Janek Aronowicz, Kondrat Dawidowicz, Kornelia Dawidowna
Norman Fitz- ("son of")
Historically, FitzRoy has a special meaning as an Anglicized version of the French, Fils de Roi, which means "son of the King" and is applied to a King's bastard children.
Robert FitzAlan, James FitzScott, Henry FitzRoy, Duke of Richmond, bastard son of Henry VIII
Scots Mac- or Mc-
John MacDonald, Daniel McRay,
Irish O' or Mc-
John O'Brian, Adam McDermott
Welsh ap (for a son), ferch/verch (for a daughter)
Gruffyd ap Rhys, Dafydd ap Llywelyn, Angharad ferch Maredudd
-s
The Welsh were very late in adopting surnames, and many
of these are actually, though not at all obviously, patronyms. Jones = John's son, Davis = David's son, Williams = William's son, Roberts = Robert's son etc.
By Diana Gale Matthiesen: http://dgmweb.net/genealogy/Ancillary/OnE/Patronymics.shtml (slightly edited)