We are Cenocrats. We believe there is a need for a Complete-, New-, Whole- government. This is our premise. And though we may share the same designation, our personal philosophies invite the considerations for multiple perspectives in the consideration of developing a Cenocracy, which is a word defining our collective intention. While some believe an Actual Communism is the best, others consider that an Actual Democracy, or an Actual Socialism, or an Actual Theocracy... or some combination of multiple Actual ideologies is best. Present ideologies are commonly interpreted as sprinkled variations of their true image... though it also is considered that humanity is not yet mature enough to practice an honest reflection of an Ideal representation. We are well aware that Opinions differ, but we are united in the Premise that humanity is in dire need for a shared political philosophy based on a larger appreciation and respect for the information at hand, and is decipherable in the context of our common assertion. And we also are well aware that those presently in charge of governing systems lack the necessary cognitive skills to promote, much less develop a larger governing philosophical disposition.
In any respect, there is no country trying to achieve a further development because the presently practiced one(s) are a hindrance The currently practiced social governing policies involving one another form of economics formula typically underscored with the label known as Capitalism, have failed to assist humanity in achieving the provision of even the most modest goals for all of humanity, much less provide the means that we should be able to pursue the exploration of reaching beyond our potentials as a collective species. In many cases, their is wide-spread acknowledgment that a given political system is rigged, yet there is no one calling for the adoption of a new government formula. Instead, for example, an incumbent may make the claim of a rigged system, and then upon failing to reach a personal goal within this rigged system, executes an about-face, and asks their supporters to participate in the rigged system! Such expressions of hypocrisy are common amongst political incumbents and those whose positions in business, government or religion are permitted to prosper so long as the rigged system persists.
The governing systems of the United States, Great Britain, Russia, China, Mexico, and so many others... as well as the charter of the United Nations, have all failed to produce that which many of us, for so many generations, had hoped would be accomplished by this day and age. They have not, because they can not. They do not have the appropriate long-term life philosophy... in which to collectively instill in all populations with education that would make the most basic and most ambitious goals a reality. There is continued poverty, crime, war and various inequalities because governing systems to not have the correct reward and punishment systems of philosophy. Instead, the world's present governing systems are run by those whose shallow personal philosophies, when collectively amalgamated, produce systems of distraction, denial, and distortion as a means of concealing the bad and revealing yet another fantasy, typically aligned with some commercial adventure. For example, the development of the European Union downplays itself as a commercial enterprise by disincluding the word "Economic" in its name. It prefers a two-name variation of itself like the ancient practice of assigning two names to a person that was preceded by a more antiquated practice of everyone having a single name, though, no doubt, there were a rebellious few who did not want to be identified by any singular name that might be used as a means of manipulation or derision by others.
In the practice of assigning names, as many a genealogist would attest to, there are those who came to be recognized by place, work-place occupation or deed. Others no doubt were named because of some other behavior, gesture, or habit, such as one might be assumed by the action of shaking a spear to produce the name "Shakespeare". While the usage of having two names in some cases has been retained, the adoption of having three names may have occurred long ago, but we have an historical reference with the ancient Roman words "praenomen, nomen, cognomen", which is a pattern-of-three, with the sometimes used additional name called the agonomen... which would be a 3 -to- 1 ration, that... interestingly enough, is not a common practice, but that a person in many cases is referred to by a single name, whereby their three-part name is a 3 -to- 1 ratio. And, it must be understood, that the usage of name arrangements does not always use the Western formula. Some cultures such as the Chinese, may say someone's last name first, whereas in Western culture, to do so represents a more formal, less personal situation of identification, though variations of personal usage differ amongst various context-driven social situations.
Making reference to the names of people is important in a sociological analysis for developing a New Government philosophy, because it can assist with understanding by heightening interest of other words such as Communism, Democracy, Socialism, etc., since they are names being used to attach to personal ideas and beliefs. In a sense, they become projected extensions of oneself. Words, as labels of perception, can help us to understand origins and unravel any misperceptions that may later be applied to interpretations. Because present governing systems are resultant interpretations that have failed to provide us with ideas by which humanity can reach its ultimate potentials, it is obvious that the ideas we have are wrong. This "wrongness" can be due to a lack of information just as it can be due to a misjudgment based on a sequence of faulty interpretations that are compounded by further faulty interpretations. In order to understand what has gone wrong in our analysis, we often turn to a re-examination of history... sometimes referred to as "going back to square one". In other words, because we are wrong in the present, is this due to a wrong headedness from a former age? If the result is wrong, are we using the wrong equation? Are the variables and/or that which they represent, based on a faulty one-to-one relationship? Did someone(s) name something wrong and those that followed them accepted the wrong association as being correct, and/or misinterpreted it further?
For example, a person is named "running bear" whose subsequent family generations have used and interpreted this to mean someone who ran from a bear... indicating cowardice, but in actuality, the original "running bear" was someone who ran after a bear either because the bear stole a fish from them, to save another person's life, or because of some otherwise comical scene like a person chasing after a pet dog whole had stolen a slipper or morning paper. Because the initial naming of a person had been misinterpreted, subsequent generations had developed a large social philosophy regarding the name "running bear" which is based on a wrong interpretation. The same goes for the use of names describing a given social philosophy and subsequent understanding as well as application thereof. But when something goes wrong, that something is not achieved in deed what is claimed in name, such as former attempts to establish a Communism or Socialism, many people try to re-examine a given doctrine to find out what went wrong. Some conclude that it wasn't the ideology itself, but the type of application of a given perspective of the ideology. The ideology is accepted as being sound, but those who failed to obtain the ideal did not have the right idea... though both idealist and idea may be the resulting conclusion of a philosophical history that has been inaccurately developed because of a faulty system of naming that has taken place... that has evolved over time and place.
It is therefore helpful in understanding what is believed to be the development of personal name assignments so that a greater understanding of naming assignments in general might be better understood for the sake of a "back to the drawing board" methodology of examination. The fault of a given ideology may be due to a single variable that should not exist, or should exist in a given equation but doesn't, because of some former development that overlooked a particular aspect. And though the forthcoming Britannica articles do not cover all naming situations, but they are valuable in providing an appreciation of how names can be developed, and subsequent alterations lead to misunderstanding... particularly when the state of one's ego is used in demeaning or uplifting a particular name.
However, just because someone is successful in rooting out an origin, does not necessarily mean they will be just as successful in making an accurate interpretation or that whatever interpretation may be made, that it will subsequently be kept intact with respect to meaning and intent. Subsequent generations may indeed make profitable usage of alterations, or make multiple miscalculations that end up with such a mangling, that one may not be able to reach the source of a river of knowledge, because after it was dammed up by subsequent generations, someone had the then thought bright idea of taking it out of context in order to place it into a place of safe-keeping (personal ownership), that the original birthplace no longer exists due to erosion, like a tree whose roots kept soil intact, but after removing the tree (or shrubbery), the landscape deteriorated to the point of unrecognizability. Sometimes, the origins of an idea or belief, such as for example... Islam, Christianity, Paganism, Witchcraft, or Satanism... are deliberately concealed or/and misinterpreted to give either a better or worse image, depending on the intentions of those doing the investigation, analysis, and description.
And for those readers who have retained an awareness of the "threes" theme, let us add a pattern-of-three expression from childhood that relates quite well to the present discussion of names and language:
And as is the case with many fairy tales, there are numerous references to "threes", one of which is of applicability in the present discussion since it involves the task of a young women given three attempts at naming (Rumplestiltskin) or he will take her baby away. In ancient times, it was thought that by knowing a person's name, they were "owned" by the person who held onto their name, similar to the superstition in which some people thought that a photograph "captured" a person's soul:
(Name) a word or group of words used to refer to an individual entity (real or imaginary). A name singles out the entity by directly pointing to it, not by specifying it as a member of a class.
It is possible to refer to the same entity, for example, a river, in two distinct ways: (1) “The Colorado is a beautiful river” and (2) “The river that flows through Austin is beautiful.” Because there is only one river that flows through Austin, Texas, the subject of sentence 2 is unambiguously identified, and the reference of the sentence is fully individual. The subject of sentence 2, however, is not a name but rather a nominal (noun) phrase that specifies one member of the whole class of rivers by indicating a unique property of it. The word Colorado in sentence 1, on the other hand, is a name because it directly points to the specific river. The fact that there is more than one river called Colorado, and that more specific information is sometimes needed to identify the one being discussed (e.g., “I prefer the Texan Colorado to the California one”), does not change the status of Colorado as a name, because each of the two rivers is referred to in the way required by the definition.
Names and appellatives
A general appellative (i.e., a common noun) capable of being used in reference to a whole class of entities can also be used with an individual reference. For instance, if an inhabitant of Austin, Texas, says, “Let's go swimming today, not in the pool but in the river,” there is no doubt that the word river has a unique, individual reference to one single river—namely, the Colorado. This fact, however, does not make a name out of it; river is here a common noun, but its reference is specified by the extralinguistic context of the situation in which the sentence was said. Some names seem to belong more to the category of appellatives than to the category of names like Colorado in “the Colorado River.” For example, names like Big River, Red River, Stony Brook, and Cedar Hill may have their origin in a specific use of a general noun. If a sentence like “After five days of marching, we had to cross a river, the big one, not one of the smaller ones” is used very often, the name Big River may result. Such names are more frequently given as directly descriptive names. The similarity of names of this type with expressions like those exemplified in sentence 2 above is deceptive. There is, after all, more than one big river, so the specification “the big river” is not complete. The full identification of one single river as the reference is given by the context. Therefore, apart from certain special expressions (like “the big one, not one of the smaller ones”), names like Big River, Red River, and so on have the same status as names like Colorado.
In some languages, a name is differentiated from an appellative (common noun) by formal means. The difference is sometimes indicated by the script; e.g., languages using alphabets such as the Latin, Greek, Cyrillic, Armenian, and Georgian use a capital letter at the beginning of a name. (But, on the contrary, in German all nouns, not only names, are written with an initial capital.) There are examples of a purely grammatical differentiation of names as well, such as the usual absence of the articles a or an in English—e.g., “Yesterday I saw an archer practicing his art” and “Yesterday I saw (Bill) Archer practicing his art.”
The distinction between names and appellatives (common nouns) is generally clear: names are used in individual reference, and appellatives can be used in reference to all members of a class or to any number of them (e.g., river, hill, man, girl, car, table, virtue, and so on). Nevertheless, there are some borderline cases. For instance, a nation can be conceived as an individualized entity, so that “Americans,” “Englishmen,” and “Spaniards” are names; on the other hand, it is clear that other groups of people are not conceived in this way, so that expressions like “soldiers,” “sailors,” and “clergy” are not names. It is difficult to decide on the status of expressions like “the Baptists,” “Adventists,” and “spiritists.” In a similar way, if all vehicles produced by Henry Ford are Fords and if one can buy an individual Ford as well, is Ford a name? It probably is, or approaches that status, but names of this type frequently lose the character of names and develop into common nouns. Expressions like “the Roman Catholic Church” and “the Ministry of Education” (of a specific state) also have a dubious position as to their status as real names. The uncertainty in this respect is indicated by the vacillation in the use of capital letters in various languages. This overlapping has a long history and is reflected in modern terminology. The Greeks used the term “noun” (onoma) for both the common noun and the name; when they wished to make a distinction, they specified the name as a proper noun (onoma kyrion). It is in this tradition that the term proper noun, or proper name, is used for a name, and noun, general noun, or common noun is used for an appellative.
The science of onomastics
Categories of names
The science that studies names in all their aspects is called onomastics (or onomatology—an obsolete word). The subject of this science is broad because almost everything can have a name and because the study of names theoretically encompasses all languages, all geographical and cultural regions, and all historical epochs. For practical purposes, some divisions of the subject are necessary—e.g., by language (as the study of Kiowa or Provençal names) or by geographical, historical, or similar partitions (the study of the names in India, of the Levant at the time of the Crusades, and so forth). Another division (usually combined with the preceding ones) is given by the character of the names themselves; in a very broad categorization, names of persons, or personal names, are discerned on the one hand, and names of places, or place-names, on the other. In the most precise terminology, a set of personal names is called anthroponymy and their study is called anthroponomastics. A set of place-names is called toponymy, and their study is called toponomastics. In a looser usage, however, the term onomastics is used for personal names and their study, and the term toponymy is used for place-names and their study. The term toponymy itself can be understood in two ways, even in the exact terminology: either it is taken in the broadest possible way as including inhabited places, buildings, roads, countries, mountains, rivers, lakes, oceans, stars, and so on, or it is restricted to inhabited places (cities, towns, villages, hamlets). If the latter alternative is the understanding of the term toponymy, then the uninhabited places (e.g., fields, small parts of forests) are called microtoponymy; names of streets, roads, and the like are called hodonymy; names of bodies of water, hydronymy; and names of mountains, oronymy. Additional terms are not generally used (though one occasionally hears words like chrematonymy—names of things).
In any case, different categories of names frequently must be studied together, because there are transitions. For instance, many place-names are derived from personal names (e.g., Washington), many names of planets and stars are derived from the names of mythological characters (e.g., Venus, Mars, Alpha Centauri), and many personal names are derived from place-names, names of nations, and other such names (e.g., Austerlitz, Napoleon's battlefield; French; Scott). There is also a division of names into primary and secondary ones. Neptune is primarily the name of a Roman god; transferred to the name of a planet, it is a secondary name.
Forms of personal names
There are many subdivisions and terms within the category of personal names. Originally, one name was given to a person at an early period of life—in Europe (and later in America), normally at baptism. This is called simply the name, the baptismal or Christian name, or the forename; in the United States and Canada it is usually called the first name or the given name. Because many people received the same name (given name), they were differentiated by surnames (for example, John Redhead, John Hunter, John Scott). Many of these surnames became fixed and hereditary in individual families. These are called either surnames or family names, and in the United States and Canada they are frequently known as last names. Thus the basic pattern is given name + family name, together called the name or the personal name. There are exceptions concerning this sequence. Among the Chinese and Hungarians, for example, the family name precedes the given name: Mao Zedong, Nagy István. The Hungarians usually switch the order when they write English; thus, Nagy István becomes István (or Stephen) Nagy. The Chinese, however, maintain the order of family name first.
There are variations in the basic pattern. In the United States and Canada the usual practice is to insert another name (frequently expressed in writing only by the initial letter) between the given and the family name. This is the second, or middle, name. It may be the original family name of a married woman inserted between her first name and the last name of her husband, the maiden name of one's mother, as well as other names. In Europe such a second name is less common and is usually acquired at baptism (or, eventually, at confirmation). In most European countries the first baptismal name is the important one, and the second one (third, and so forth) can be omitted. In German usage, however, the baptismal name immediately preceding the family name is the most important one. For example, if one of the baptismal names in Johann Sebastian Bach or Johann Wolfgang von Goethe is to be omitted, it would be Johann. (But in a sequence like Johann Nepomucenus Nestroy, the shorter form is Johann Nestroy, because Nepomucenus is only an attribute discerning one of the numerous saints who had the name Johann.) British usage varies in this respect but sometimes follows the German pattern—e.g., W. Sidney Allen.
In a few areas, particularly among East Slavs, the so-called patronymic (i.e., a name derived from the given name of the father) is inserted between the given name and the family name. In Russian, if the father's name is Ivan Krylov, then the son's name will be, for example, Pyotr (given) Ivanovich (patronymic) Krylov (family), and the daughter's name will be, for example, Varvara Ivanovna Krylova. The usual form of address in Russian—among acquaintances, neighbours, colleagues at work, and inclusive superiors—is by the given name and the patronymic. In Iceland the given name is used with the patronymic, the use of family names being discouraged. In Spain the family name of an individual consists of the family names of father and mother, the first being the most important one.
The terms maiden name and girl's name are sometimes used for the original family name of a married woman. Nickname is used in reference to surnames (which have not developed into family names), mainly of the jocose type—e.g., a thickish Mr. John Smith might be called Fatty. A surname, also called a byname or to-name (obsolete), can be used to differentiate persons with the same family names if they belong to different families and if given names are not used among them. In a village there may be several families with the name Jones; if they are not called or referred to by first names, they may be known as Jones at the Pond, Jones the Redhead, and so forth. Hypocoristic forms of names are those that are used in familiar, friendly, or intimate situations (usually shortened or otherwise modified)—e.g., Tom for Thomas, Jim for James. Some of these forms are also used as given names, particularly in the United States.
The naming process
One of the most important elements of the naming process concerns the meaning and associations of the name. In this case the term meaning is radically different from that in the case of common nouns, in which the “meaning” is their ability to be used in reference to a class of entities, to denote or designate them. As was noted above, the absence of this ability to refer to a class of entities is typical of a name. If the meaning of a typical common noun, such as automobile, is considered, it can be seen that it denotes a certain type of vehicle. On the other hand, if the word automobile itself is considered, one can see that it consists of a Greek element, auto ‘self,' and a Latin one, mobilis ‘movable,' so that the sum of the meanings of the constituent parts of the word suggests a gloss like “self-movable,” “self-mover.” The meaning of a name involves that which the constituent parts suggest. In this sense, the meaning of a name like Red River is obvious. To get a meaning of a name like Philip, however, one must go back to its original Greek version, Philippos, which means “lover of horses.” This meaning of names frequently gets lost, however. There are several causes for this, one being that the name may be accepted into another language, as were the Indian place-names in America (e.g., Oshkosh, Chicago, Kankakee) and the Greek and other names transferred to Europe and America via Christianity. In addition, names may cease to be understood as a result of language change; e.g., the place-name Birmingham was understandable in Old English as “habitation of Biorma's people,” and the originally Germanic name Gerard was once understood as “strong spear” (Ger-hardo). Names also changed by shortening (e.g., Los Angeles, from El Pueblo de la Reyna de los Angeles, “Town of the Queen of the Angels,” the town named in honour of the Virgin Mary) and by scribal error (e.g., Pria in France, a misread medieval abbreviation of Pradaria, “Meadow”). Another cause of the loss of meaning in names is that the meaning simply fades out by constant use of the word as a name. No one thinks of the meaning “ford for oxen” when speaking about Oxford, and no one realizes a discrepancy if Mr. White has a dark complexion. Finally, it sometimes happens that a name has no particular meaning from the beginning. For instance, the place-name Tonolo and the family name Bréal were created from random sequences of sounds.
Choice of personal names
Names that have no meaning (above all not for the person who chooses the name) still can have associations. Although “Mary” and “John” may have no specific meaning, they were the names of important persons in the Christian religion and therefore have been used very frequently. An association may be so strong that it overwhelms the meaning of a name, even a disagreeable meaning; e.g., the association with the cult of St. Demetrios made the name Demetrios one of the most popular in the Greek Orthodox Church, though its meaning is “belonging to [the pagan goddess] Demeter.” On the other hand, such an association may more or less completely fade out and be combined with or replaced by other associations, such as a national tradition (Patrick in Ireland, Yves in Brittany, István in Hungary, Ivan in Russia) or with a family tradition (Louis in the Bourbon family, Wilhelm among the Hohenzollerns, Henry in the Ford family). On a less-elevated level, there is the example of a rich uncle making a given name more than eligible. A name can be associated, correctly or not, with various prestige factors, or its choice may be influenced simply by fashion. Another source of names, often extraordinary ones, was the occasional habit in Roman Catholic countries of giving a child the name of the patron saint whose day of celebration coincides with the child's day of birth (or baptism); many names like Hyacinthus X, or Narcissus Y, were produced in this way.
In the majority of cases, children are given “good,” likable, and propitious names. In some cultures (e.g., in some parts of sub-Saharan Africa, formerly in China, and sporadically in ancient Greece), however, the children are (or were) sometimes given “bad” names with meanings like “ugly,” “disagreeable,” or “crippled.” The purpose of such names, which are called apotropaic names, is to make the child undesirable to demons.
The choosing of a given name is a highly private and individual matter. All the circumstances just mentioned can be motives for the choice, in addition to many other personal reasons, such as a consideration for the relatives' names or a simple liking of the phonetic shape of a given name. This wish to give a likable name may go so far that a sequence of sounds is chosen that sounds pleasant to the person who makes the choice but that has no relation to the existing stock of names or to the words of the language; e.g., “Golly” was invented as a name of a girl and has no “meaning” or associations. This phenomenon is relatively common in the United States.
Choice of place-names
Place-names are less personal, less intimate, and a matter of public concern. The usual pattern is that the national Ministry of the Interior (or its equivalent) keeps an official list of place-names, particularly of place-names that form administrative units, together with lists of districts, counties, and the like. This function may also be performed by the ministry or agency that supervises the postal service. Bodies endowed with authority provide or choose new place-names if there is a need to create them on a greater scale—e.g., the U.S. Board on Geographic Names.
International cooperation (performed above all by the Universal Postal Union) is necessary because names of identical places may vary from language to language. Particularly difficult are place-names originally written in scripts other than the Latin (Roman) one (the official script of the Universal Postal Union), such as Arabic, Chinese, Cyrillic, and the Indic writing systems. But, even within the Latin script, there are two basic types of difficulties. First, one place can have different names (or modifications of a name) in various languages—e.g., French Nice and Italian Nizza; German München, English and French Munich, and Italian Monaco. A very difficult situation arises when a place is generally better known by its international name than by its original one; e.g., Dublin is Baile Átha Cliath in Irish. Confusion may also be caused by names that are translated; e.g., the Rocky Mountains are in German Felsengebirge and in Russian Skalistye Gory. There are also names with the same written form but with varying pronunciations; e.g., for Paris, the accent, pronunciation of vowels, and pronunciation of consonants change from French to German to English.
The second difficulty involves the actual printing of all the letters with diacritical marks that are necessary for different alphabets of the Latin script. Because many printing firms lack the various marks, some possibly confusing omissions or modifications can hardly be avoided; e.g., the dot over the I in Turkish İstanbul and the bar through the l in Polish Kołobrzeg are frequently omitted. International cooperation is also necessary and is developing in connection with the choice of place-names in outer space, particularly on the surface of the Moon.
Historical and cross-cultural development of names
Legal aspects of naming
While place-names are considered a public matter, personal names also seem to be getting more regimented by various laws and regulations. The United Kingdom and the United States are practically the only countries that adhere to the principle of Roman law that a person has the right to use and change his name as he pleases, except for fraudulent purposes. The first important regulation concerning given names was the decision of the Council of Trent (1563), which specified that the Roman Catholic priest administering baptism should make certain that children are given names of Catholic saints; if the parents were to insist on another name, the priest should administer baptism in that name but add the name of a saint as the second baptismal name. This regulation, still a valid part of Canon Law, was directed against the Protestant custom (spreading at that time) of giving children names of important persons from the Old Testament otherwise unconnected with Christianity (e.g., Abraham, Samuel, Rachel). In this respect the regulation was successful in Catholic countries, but it did not succeed in stopping the use of given (baptismal) names like Cesare in Italy (from Latin Caesar).
The next important law was passed in France. The French Revolution first gave complete freedom in naming; the result was some very fanciful given names like Mort aux Aristocrates, Racine de la Liberté, or even Café Billard. To stop this, a law was passed in 1803 that restricted given names to “names of persons known from ancient history” and “names used in various calendars.” Again, the law was successful in its main intention; in addition, it prevented the spread of controversial given names such as Marat and Robespierre and of literary names such as Aramis, d'Artagnan, and Romeo. Very reasonably, the law never was interpreted too narrowly, so that feminine given names such as Jeanette and Henriette, for example, have been admitted, though they were not legal because no calendar contains them. This law is still valid in France.
Similar laws were passed, at various times, in eastern European countries and in certain neighbouring Central Asian states, where the given name can be chosen only from names known and established as such, the exact formulation varying from country to country. Catholic names are commonplace in Lithuania, whereas Muslim and other names are used in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, sometimes without any ecclesiastical association whatsoever. In the Caucasus there are given names such as Soslan and Dzerassa, drawn from Caucasian mythology.
In regard to family names, the most important regulation was made at the Council of Trent (1563): it was decreed that every parish must keep complete registers of baptisms, with the names of the child and those of his parents and grandparents. This had been done before but not so systematically. The new practice (soon followed in Protestant parishes) helped to establish the family names. There is not much legislation concerning family names, because two basic assumptions are made: that the bride will accept the bridegroom's family name by marriage and that their children will automatically have the family name of the parents.
Combined names—as under the German law permitting the bride to add her original family name to her new one in a hyphenated form (Inka Schmidt, when married to Karl Neumann, may become Inka Neumann-Schmidt) or the practice in outstanding British families of combining the family names of the married couple in a hyphenated form (Beatrix Curzon and Frederic Cholmondeley become Beatrix and Frederic Cholmondeley-Curzon)—are rare.
In the majority of cases, the law is concerned with family names mainly in cases of divorce, adoption, and illegitimacy. After a divorce, the wife is usually eventually allowed to reassume her maiden name and in Germany, for example, can be forced to do so if she is judged to be the guilty party and her former husband so desires. In adoption procedures, either the family name of the adopting persons is accepted or a hyphenated form is created. A child born out of wedlock usually receives the family name of its mother.
In many parts of Europe, legislation or habit have changed the basic assumptions concerning the family name, and a different situation has developed. When a Czech woman, Anna Klímová, for example, marries a Josef Novák, both may retain their original family names, or the wife may become Anna Nováková or, more remarkably, the husband may become Josef Klíma, accepting the wife's family name. This must be decided by mutual agreement, and their children's names also are agreed upon in this way. The purported reason for this legislation is the full equality of women. (There is, however, one loophole in the system—namely, the Russian patronymic, which is automatically derived from the father's name, whereas equality understood in this way would demand a choice between the father's or the mother's name.) In Spain the married woman normally retains her maiden name.
European patterns of naming
The development of personal names was complicated. In the old Indo-European system, a person had one name, which could be one of two types: a compound or a noncompound substantive. Noncompound names may originally have been given to inferior members of the tribe and their children. The compound names frequently associated the bearer with a god (they are called theophoric names) or attested to his virtues, abilities, skills, possessions, and so forth. The association of the meanings of the parts of the compound was sometimes only loose, as is particularly observable in German anthroponymy (see below). Examples of compound names include the Sanskrit Viṣṇuputra ‘son of Vishnu,' Devadatta ‘given by god,' and Devarāja ‘god-king.' From Iran come the Avestan name Hōrmizāfrīd ‘benediction of Ahura Mazdā' and the Old Persian name Mithradates ‘given by Mithra' (two Iranian gods).
Among Greek names there are also many theophoric names, such as Herodotos ‘given by Hera,' Isidoros (modern Isidore) ‘given by Isis', and both Theodoros (modern Theodore) and Dorotheos (modern only in the feminine form, Dorothy) ‘given by god.' There are many other similar Greek names—e.g., Astyanax ‘lord of the city,' Pericles ‘very famous,' and Demosthenes ‘strength of the people.' Plato ‘broad (in shoulders)' is a noncompound Greek name.
The compound names of the Celts include Vercingetorix ‘great king of warriors,' Orgetorix ‘king of killers,' and Rextugenos ‘son of justice.' Noncompound Celtic names included, for example, Artos ‘bear' and Galba ‘big.' Examples of Germanic compound names include Heriberhto ‘army + resplendent' (modern Herbert), Huguberhto ‘resplendent by thought' (modern Hubert), Godofrido ‘divine peace' (modern Gottfried and Geoffrey), Frideriko ‘peace + powerful' (modern Frederic and Friedrich), and Theodobaldo ‘people + valiant.' Among the noncompound Germanic names is Karl (or Charles), in the Latin form Carolus ‘man.' Typical Slavic compound names are Vladimir ‘governs the world,' Vladislav ‘rule + glory,' and Miroslav ‘world + glory.'
The Latin system of personal names was quite different and probably developed under Etruscan influence. In the earliest times the Romans seemingly had only one name—e.g., Romulus, Remus, Manius. From the beginning of historical times, however, the Roman personal name consisted of a praenomen (given name, forename) and a nomen (or nomen gentile). Only intimates used the praenomen, and its choice was restricted to fewer than 20 names, among them Gaius, Gnaeus, Marcus, Quintus, Publius, Tiberius, and Titus. The nomen that followed was hereditary in each gens (a related group of families, like the Scottish clan); examples include Antonius, Aurelius, Claudius, Cornelius, Fabius, Horatius, Julius, Lucius, Maccius, Tullius, and some others. Because the choice of both the praenomen and the nomen was restricted, the patrician families and later all families started using a hereditary name, called a cognomen.
These cognomina developed from original surnames—e.g., Cicero ‘bean,' Pictor ‘painter,' Plautus ‘flat foot,' Tacitus ‘silent.' Thus, the Roman name eventually consisted of three parts: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Gaius Julius Caesar. In addition, a person might acquire an individual surname, called an agnomen: Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus was so named because of his successful war in Africa.
This system of naming was used during the whole republican period and later in the empire. Toward the end of the empire, however, the naming pattern began to change and subsequently was lost. One reason was that more persons used names lacking any real relation to themselves. For instance, a slave (and then his children) used the praenomen and the nomen of the master who set him free; e.g., had Marcus Tullius Cicero freed a Syrian slave, the name of the latter might have been Marcus Tullius Syrus.
The number of freed slaves grew constantly, particularly after the victory of the Christian religion. Also, a free inhabitant of the empire who was granted Roman citizenship acquired the praenomen and nomen of the magistrate who made him a citizen, and in 212 CE, when all free noncitizens were given citizenship by the emperor Caracalla, hundreds of thousands of persons prefixed Marcus Aurelius to their names, whether Greek, Syrian, African, or any other. In this way, Roman names lost their significance.
Another change was introduced by the Christians, who belonged to social classes that were not particularly concerned with the habits of the Roman higher class and who preferred names connected with their own religion—e.g., from its founders (Petrus, Paulus, Joannes, Maria, Timotheus) or from the new martyrs, frequently persons with simple Latin or Greek surnamelike names such as Stephanos ‘wreath' (modern Stephen), Laurentius ‘laurel' (modern Lawrence), and Sidonius ‘coming from Sidon [in Phoenicia]' (modern Sidney). Simple names like these were sometimes called signum. The Christians, however, soon started creating their own names—e.g., Benedictus ‘blessed,' Desiderius ‘desiring [salvation],' Renatus ‘reborn [by baptism]' (modern René).
With the spread of Christianity, this stock of names spread into territories that did not belong to the Roman Empire, but the diffusion was slow. In both the Germanic and the Slavic sphere (half of which came under the influence of the Eastern church), the use of many of the original non-Christian names was continued, partly by tradition and partly because some of the bearers of these names became saints themselves. In this way, the repertory of given names was set, in general, somewhere around the 12th century. A notable addition to it was the influx of Old Testament names brought by the Reformation (Adlai, Benjamin, and so on). Certain names have left no trace of their ephemeral existence—e.g., Puritan names such as Humility, Be Faithful, Kill Sin; French Revolutionary names; and Russian post-Revolutionary names such as Mels (an acronym containing the initial letters of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin). American fanciful given names for girls, such as Claretta, Elizene, Gwyned, and Marilla, are also relatively insignificant in impact, though the group is growing.
Family names came into use in the later Middle Ages (beginning roughly in the 11th century); the process was completed by the end of the 16th century. The use of family names seems to have originated in aristocratic families and in big cities, where they developed from original individual surnames when the latter became hereditary. Whereas a surname varies from father to son, and can even be changed within the life span of a person, a hereditary surname that develops into a family name better preserves the continuation of the family, be it for prestige or for the easier handling of official property records and other matters. Family names frequently developed (via surnames) from hypocoristic forms of given names. For example, from Henry came Harry, Harris, Hal, Halkin; from Gilbert came Gibbs, Gibbons, Gibbin, Gipps, Gilbye, Gilpin; and from Gregory there developed Gregg, Grigg, Greggs, Griggs, Greig. Other sources of family names are original nicknames, from which came Biggs, Little, Grant (grand, large), Greathead, Cruikshank, Beaver, Hogg, Partridge. From occupations came Archer, Clark, Clerk, Clarkson (son of a clerk), Bond, Bonds, Bound, Bundy (bondman); and from place-names came Wallace (man from Wales), Allington, Murray, Hardes, Whitney (places in England), Fields, Holmes, Brookes, Woods (from microtoponyms).
A great number of family names come from patronymic surnames; in English they are usually formed by the suffixation of -son. Patronymic surnames can be formed from the father's given name or from any of its variants. Thus, there is not only the form Richardson but also Dickson, Dixon, Dickinson; and there are Henryson, Harrison, Henderson; Gilbertson, Gibson; and Gregson, Grigson. Some English patronymics, particularly in old families, are formed with a prefixed Fitz- (e.g., Fitzgerald), which goes back to Norman French fis ‘son.' In contradistinction to English, the Scottish patronymics are formed by a prefixed Mac or Mc (McGregor), the Irish with O (O'Brien) or Mc or Mac, and the Welsh with P- (Powell ‘son of Howel'). In Modern Greek, patronymics are formed by suffixation—e.g., Dimitriopoulos ‘son of Dimitrios.'
The development of family names is similar in all of Europe. For example, French names such as Jaquet, Jacquot, Jacotot, Jacotin, Cottet, Cottin, Cotin, Jacquin, Jacquinet, Jacquinot, Jacquart, Jacquier all derive from Jacques; Davignon, Decaen, Derennes, and Beauvais developed from the place-names Avignon, Caen, and so forth; Breton, Lebreton, Lenormand come from the names of districts; Clerk, Leclerc, Duclerc, Auclerk, Clergue (cf. English Clark), Boucher, Boulanger, Masson designate professions (butcher, baker, mason); and Roux, Leroux, Roussel, Rousseau, Lerouge, Roujon are all variants of “red” (i.e., red hair). Roughly the same scheme exists everywhere in Europe. Some family names can be traced to nicknames that must have their origin in incidents and attitudes that cannot be understood now—e.g., Czech family names such as Nejezchleba ‘Don't eat bread!' and Skoc(dopole ‘Jump into the field!'
The development is slightly different among Jews. While living in ghettos, they used only given names. After the end of the 18th and beginning of the 19th century, they chose or were given family names. Many of these names (which vary in the individual languages) are derived from religious vocations: Cantor, Canterini, Kantorowicz (lower priest); Kohn, Cohen, Cahen, Kaan, Kahane (priest); Levi, Halévy, Löwy (name of the tribe of priests). Many are derived from place-names, such as Morpurgo (Marburg), or from nicknames, such as Hirsch (“deer” in German). Frequently, particularly in Austria, Jews were given derisory family names, such as Eberstark ‘strong as boar,' Rosenduft ‘fragrance of roses,' and Hitzig ‘hot,' from Itzick, a mocking form of Isaac.
The only outstanding exception to this European pattern of naming occurs with the names of kings, who use one of their given names. Some royal families have what could be called family names—e.g., the Hohenzollerns (more correctly, Hohenzollers) of Prussia. The British royal family accepted the name Windsor only in 1917 (this was changed to Mountbatten-Windsor for the future members of the family who will not enjoy princely status). The pope of the Roman Catholic Church abandons his personal name after his election and chooses a single name, sometimes associated with his intentions; e.g., Pope Paul VI chose the name Paulus because of St. Paul's missionary activities and travels.
Other patterns of naming
Names and naming practices in other cultural areas show a strong similarity in the basic trends. Among the ancient Assyrian and Babylonian names are theophoric designations such as Ashurbanipal, meaning “Ashur [a god] created son,” and Nabukudurriusur (Nebuchadrezzar of the Bible), translated as “Nabu [a god] protected the estate.” The Phoenician (Carthaginian) name Hannibal means “grace of Baal” (a god). The Hebrew Yehonatan, Yonatan (i.e., Jonathan) means “God gave”; Rafa'el (Rafael) is translated as “God cured.” There are also nontheophoric names such as Laban (from Hebrew lavan ‘white'). The Aramaic surname of the fisherman Simon, Kepha, meaning “stone,” became famous in the New Testament as Petros (Peter), the Greek translation of the name (petra ‘rock, stone').
The more-complicated structure of Arabic society brought an independent development similar to the European one. Given names such as Muḥammad, Ibrāhēm (= Abraham), MaṆsur ‘victor,' 'Ali ‘exalted,' 'Abd Allāh ‘slave of Allah' are differentiated by surnames such as ibn 'Abbās ‘son of 'Abbās,' al-Baghdādī ‘from Baghdad,' al-Ghazālī ‘the spinner.' The Caucasian (e.g., Ossetic) personal name consists of a given name preceded by the name of the tribe (gens) in the genitive plural; the name of the father may be inserted, thus giving Gaglojty Soslany fyrt Nafi ‘Nafi, son of Soslan, of [the gens of] Gaglo.' Chinese society has had the institution of hereditary family names since the 4th century BCE, but the number of these names has been reduced to some 200. Examples include Chan, Mao, and Lu. The choice of the given name was formerly much freer, but legislation seems to have restricted it. In a similar way, there are not more than 300 Korean family names, but only three of them—Kim, Pak, and Yi—belong to the great majority of families in Korea. The given name is chosen, but its choice is limited by the practice that one of the two syllables of the name should be identical within a family for a generation; the whole given name should have an auspicious meaning.
By the 20th century the originally European pattern of given name + family name had been introduced practically everywhere. Sub-Saharan Africa (e.g., among the Yoruba) now has the “normal” pattern of personal names, but both the given and the family names are of vernacular stock. There are given names such as Olúṣolá ‘god [non-Christian] made greatness,' Òṣunbúnmi ‘Osun [a river] gave me,' and Adeyẹmí ‘crown befits me' and family names like Ajólore ‘who [is] a kind doer.' Among the American Indians there are, surprisingly, practically no theophoric names. Instead, the Indians used names related to the totem, to animals indicated by omens or dreams, and to successful incidents in life. Those North American Indians who did not accept English names now use the English translation of their names as last names (which sometimes are not hereditary)—e.g., John Sleeping Owl, Mary Little Bear.
Descriptive and commemorative place-names
If the “meanings” of place-names and the motives for their choice are examined, several broad types may be discerned. Descriptive names indicate a characteristic feature of the entity—e.g., Rocky Mountains, North Sea, Newcastle. The chosen feature is sometimes only illusory or observed by chance, as in the case of the Pacific Ocean (only a small part of it was calm, or pacific, when seen and named). Honorific and commemorative names are another broad category. Examples include Constantinople, formerly called Byzantium, renamed Konstantinoupolis ‘city of Constantine' because that emperor made it the capital of the Roman Empire; Aphrodisias ‘(the town of) Aphrodite,' in Asia Minor, changed into Stauropolis ‘city of the cross' with the advent of Christianity; Cartagena, transferred to Colombia (South America) in commemoration of Cartagena in Spain, and Cartagena in Spain in turn developed from Latin Carthago Nova, a translation of the name given to the town by the Phoenician settlers in commemoration of Carthage, the Phoenician rival of Rome; and Nieuw-Amsterdam, commemorative of the Dutch capital, changed to New York, honorific for the duke of York. Among the numerous benedictory, wishful names are the Russian Vladivostok ‘Govern the East!' (founded and named by Russians as their main base on the Pacific coast), Cape of Good Hope (a renaming of a more descriptive Cape of Tempests), and Greek Pontus Euxinus (now the Black Sea) ‘hospitable sea' (a renaming of Pontus Axeinos ‘inhospitable sea'). In most cases, however, place-names do not have a “meaning” at all, particularly not for the general user.
Place-names reflecting historical influences
Place-names are frequently accepted into the language of a new population. The toponymy of the United States illustrates this well. Spanish names are numerous in the South and Southwest—e.g., Florida, San Antonio, Santa Fe, and San Diego, all of which are Spanish names of Roman Catholic saints or holidays. French names occur frequently in the Southeast and the central United States (e.g., La Nouvelle Orléans, changed into New Orleans; Baton Rouge; St. Louis; Louisiana); Dutch names are found in the East (Haarlem changed into Harlem); Indian names are interspersed everywhere; and, finally, English names are superimposed over all the rest. An examination of all these names, which are now used by a mostly English-speaking population, could not fail to yield some information about the colonization of the United States, even if the history were not known.
In the same way, the place-names of Britain reflect its history. Above all, there are Celtic names—e.g., Eboracum (named for a tree), partly translated as Eoforwic, which changed into York. Roman names are also numerous; e.g., Castra ‘military camp' changed into Chester, and Lindum Colonia ‘Colony Lindum' (which itself is Celtic, linne + dunom ‘town at the lake') is now Lincoln. There are, in addition, Anglo-Saxon names (e.g., Whittingham ‘habitation of Hwita's people'), Scandinavian names (e.g., Badby, in which -by is the Scandinavian element instead of English -bury ‘castle'), and Norman names (e.g., Richmond, from a personal name consisting of ri-ki ‘rich, powerful' + mond ‘world').
Any country's toponymy consists of various layers. In France there are Celtic names such as Lucodunos ‘shining town' that became Latinized into Lugdunum and changed into the modern form Lyon; Greek names such as Agathe (Tyche) ‘good (luck),' which has become Agde; Roman names such as Forum Julii ‘marketplace of Julius,' modern Fréjus; and old Germanic names such as Clarbec ‘clear brook' (klar + Bach in German). Most important is the fact that place-names can be used as a source of information themselves, even if other forms of evidence are lacking; for instance, because Moskva (= Moscow) is a Finnish name (Finnish kva ‘water') and because other Finnish toponyms are present in Russia, the prehistoric presence of Finnish tribes in that location can be presumed. Names of rivers are particularly important for this purpose, because they are very conservative and usually are taken over by a new population. A considerable number of river names in western and central Europe show remarkable similarity (e.g., Esera in Spain, Isère in France, Yser in Belgium, Isar in Bavaria, Jizera in the Czech Republic) and are the only evidence of a pre-Celtic Indo-European population of those regions.
In a similar way, names are also indicative of cultural and political trends. Singapore (Sanskrit Sim.hapura ‘castle of lions'), for example, testifies to the cultural influence of India in the area. Particularly significant in this respect are deliberate changes of names caused by changes in political power, ideology, and so forth. Changes such as Nieuw-Amsterdam becoming New York, or Léopoldville (named after the king of Belgium who acquired the Congo) becoming Kinshasa, are very common. Some cases of renaming do not lack humour: La Roche-sur-Yon in France was rebuilt by Napoleon and renamed Napoléon-Vendée, which was changed to Bourbon-Vendée under the Restoration; during the 100 days of Napoleon's return from Elba and in the subsequent second Restoration, the cycle was repeated once more, and only the Third Republic restored the old name. Renaming also shows examples of cynicism: Lyon, which had rebelled against the revolutionary covenant, was punished by systematic demolition and a massacre of its inhabitants; the ruins of the city were renamed Commune-Affranchie ‘Liberated Commune.' Changes of place-names are sometimes made systematically; when the territory called Alto Adige in Italian and Südtirol (South Tirol) in German became part of Italy after World War I, for instance, a systematic effort was made to give or to return to these territories the Italian character in both place-names and personal names. The Russian Revolution brought a change of names that were reminiscent of the old regime and ideology; e.g., St. Petersburg (changed into a more Slavic Petrograd by the tsar during the war) became Leningrad (and then St. Petersburg again in 1991); Tsaritsyn (from tsar ‘emperor') became Stalingrad (and then Volgograd in the late 1950s); and Yekaterinodar (from Yekaterina [= Catherine], an empress) became Krasnodar (from krasny ‘red'). However, most of the pre-Revolution names were reinstated after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
General studies on names and naming are Ernst Pulgram, Theory of Names (1954), treating theoretical problems such as the distinction between names and common nouns; Frank Nuessel, The Study of Names: A Guide to the Principles and Topics (1992); and Leslie Dunkling, The Guinness Book of Names, 6th ed. (1993), providing information on many types of names, particularly personal names and place-names.
Treatments dealing specifically with personal names include L.G. Pine, The Story of Surnames (1965), readable and well informed; and Richard D. Alford, Naming and Identity: A Cross-Cultural Study of Personal Naming Practices (1988), a technical study. Other informative texts are C. L'Estrange Ewen, A History of Surnames of the British Isles (1931, reprinted 1968), containing rich information and a bibliography; H.L. Mencken, The American Language: An Inquiry Into the Development of English in the United States: Supplement II (1948), a survey of American naming—some of the text is also available as part of a briefer form of the original 4th edition, abridged by Raven I. McDavid, Jr. (1963, reprinted 1977); Elsdon C. Smith, American Surnames (1969, reissued 1986), a historical survey; Leslie Dunkling, First Names First (1977, reprinted 1982); Una Stannard, Mrs Man (1977), dealing with the history of married women's names; J.N. Hook, Family Names (1982), on American surnames.
Dictionaries of personal names are Charles Wareing Bardsley, A Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames: With Special American Instances, ed. by A. Bardsley (1901, reissued 1980); Elsdon C. Smith, New Dictionary of American Family Names (1973, reissued 1988); E.G. Withycombe (compiler), The Oxford Dictionary of English Christian Names, 3rd ed. (1977, reissued 1988), indicating the provenience of names listed; Benzion C. Kaganoff, A Dictionary of Jewish Names and Their History (1977); George R. Stewart, American Given Names: Their Origin and History in the Context of the English Language (1979); Leslie Dunkling and William Gosling, The Facts on File Dictionary of First Names, rev. ed. (1984); Edward MacLysaght, The Surnames of Ireland, 6th ed. (1985), with a general history; Patrick Hanks and Flavia Hodges, A Dictionary of Surnames (1988), a scholarly work examining the origin and history of nearly 70,000 European surnames, and A Dictionary of First Names (1990), looking at some 4,500 names; George F. Jones, German-American Names (1990), covering some 12,700 names; Julia Cresswell, Bloomsbury Dictionary of First Names (1990), dealing mainly with names of English, Celtic, and Welsh derivation; and P.H. Reaney, A Dictionary of English Surnames, 3rd ed. with corrections and additions by R.M. Wilson (1991).
Studies of place-names include George R. Stewart, Names on the Globe (1975), on the theory of place-naming around the world, and Names on the Land, 4th ed. (1982), a readable and instructive study of the origin of U.S. place-names; W.F.H. Nicolaisen, Scottish Place-Names (1976, reissued 1986); Kenneth Cameron, English Place-Names (1961); and C.M. Matthews, Place Names of the English-Speaking World (1972). Dictionaries of place-names are Eilert Ekwall, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Place-Names, 4th ed. (1960, reissued 1987), including the origin of place-names; Kelsie B. Harder (ed.), Illustrated Dictionary of Place Names: United States and Canada (1976, reprinted 1985); and Adrian Room, Place-Names of the World: A Dictionary of Their Origins and Backgrounds, rev. ed. (1987).
The journal of the American Name Society, Names (quarterly), publishes articles and research materials in the field of onomatology. Annotated bibliographies include Edwin D. Lawson (compiler), Personal Names and Naming (1987); and Richard B. Sealock, Margaret M. Sealock, and Margaret S. Powell, Bibliography of Place-Name Literature: United States and Canada, 3rd ed. (1982).
Ladislav Zgusta (Ed.)
Source: "Name." Encyclopædia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite, 2013.
Native American Self-Names
Many ethnic groups have more than one name, and this is as much the case for Native Americans as it is for others. Names can originate in a number of ways, and their creation and use are often intertwined with historical events.
The best-known names for many Native American groups were bestowed by their rivals and, when translated into English, can be seen to be quite insulting. Although derogatory colloquialisms are typically avoided in legal and political contexts—one would hardly expect to find a treaty between France and England that referred, respectively, to the Frogs and the Roast Beefs—similarly offensive names were commonly used in colonial administrative documents. When the Ojibwa (Anishinaabe) and Fox (Meskwaki) were asked who lived to their west, French traders were told stories of the Wini(pig, or Wini(pyägohagi—a name that translates roughly to “Filthy (or Stinking) Waters.” In 1993, after more than 300 years of this negative appellation, the members of the Wisconsin Winnebago Tribe revised their constitution in order to replace this legal name with the ethnonym (self-name) Ho-Chunk, meaning the “People of the Big Voice” in Hoca;k, their language. Notably, the members of the Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska did not enact a parallel renaming, a valid choice given that these are two entirely independent political entities, each with its own priorities.
Sometimes a name substitution is undesirable or difficult to effect. Such is the case for the dozens of legally recognized bands or tribes of the Sioux nation (see also Sidebar: The Difference Between a Tribe and a Band). Many members of these tribes and bands prefer the ethnonyms Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota (for the three dialects of their language), because Sioux is a derivation of Nadouessioux—meaning “Adder” or “Snake”; another name bestowed courtesy of traditional rivals. Nonetheless, Sioux remains in common use for several reasons: it provides a convenient referent for the three dialect groups as a whole; it promotes ethnic solidarity; it is used in a variety of other contexts such as history and linguistics (e.g., the so-called Siouan languages); and changing the legal name of a band or tribe is difficult enough that it inevitably diverts energy from other political and social priorities. Rather than abandoning the name Sioux altogether, then, many groups simply refer to themselves in multiple ways. The Rosebud Sioux Tribe, for example, is also known as the Sicangu Lakota Band. Both names are legitimate reflections of the community so named: Rosebud is the name of the group's reservation, while Sicangu and Lakota are the ethnonyms for the people and their dialect.
Periods of cultural rupture or coalescence have also spurred the creation of multiple names. For example, three of the village-dwelling nations of the Plains—the Mandan, the Hidatsa, and the Arikara—were struck by recurring waves of smallpox, whooping cough, and other illnesses from 1780 to 1840. The Mandan suffered horrendously; according to reliable eyewitness accounts, their population plummeted from approximately 10,000–15,000 in the 1730s to perhaps 150 in 1837, a crushing loss. To maintain their viability as a people, Mandan survivors merged with the Hidatsa, their close neighbours and allies; these two tribes were later joined by the Arikara, who had once been their economic and military rivals.
By the late 19th century the three nations had legally merged and had taken a
new name, the Three Affiliated Tribes. Yet, even as they worked in concert politically,
the original groups created separate ethnic enclaves; well into the early 21st century,
most members of this tribe referred to themselves as Mandan, Hidatsa, or Arikara or u
sed a hyphenated ethnicity (e.g., Mandan-Hidatsa). Clearly, the distinct ethnic
identities of the three original tribes have survived despite devastating losses,
coalescence, and the adoption of a new legal name.
Elizabeth Prine Pauls
But a discussion about the naming of people says nothing about the naming of pets, or a breed of a particular type of animal. Nor does it provide an analysis of names used by professionals or generalities of professions such as scientists in using an ancient language for given scientific names. Nor does it speak of the possibility that a correct name may be applied, but that an incorrect name may be more suitable because it provides more profitable occasions to occur because of misidentification... such as the development of a valuable lesson to be learned from the mis-telling of a story or the misunderstanding of an experience. Being right does not necessarily mean that being right is more valuable than being wrong, or vice versa. Many rights and wrongs are context applicable for different results to be derived. However, because naming deals with language, it is necessary that readers review the connections being made in the first few pages of this sequence of essays for outlining the development of a new philosophy concerning the decay of the environment and its effects on our thinking, which is needed to grasp the rationale for developing this type of a Cenocracy.