Unusual names

Did parents with common surnames choose unusual forenames for their children?

by Donald Hatch

Introduction

This note makes use of a large database of Victorian marriage registrations to check whether parents with common surnames chose unusual forenames for their children, and conversely whether common forenames were more frequently chosen by parents with unusual surnames.

Sample

The database was generated for an analysis of the frequency distribution of forenames, available as separate articles for males and females on this site. A summary of that research was published in an article in Family History Monthly, December 2002. It also forms the basis for an analysis of the frequency of occurrence of surnames, which has yet to be published.

All the marriages between 1867 and 1886 of brides and grooms whose surname began with the letters Ha were extracted from the FreeBMD database as at November 2001. At that time the coverage was about 73%. (5,7 million persons marrying, compared to the ONS total of 7,7 in this period). Surnames beginning with Ha were about 3,4% of all surnames at this time. Ha does not include any of the most common surnames such as Smith or Brown, but has a good scatter of names in the top 200. Table 1 summarises the distribution of the sample within the population:

Table 1 – Sample characteristics

Name*	Percentage with main spelling*	Frequency in 1867-86 sample	1867-86 sample	All names in 1853	Percentage of 1867-86 sample
			Rankings
Hall	100	17387	1	19	9,00%
Harris	91	15862	2	21	8,21%
Harrison	99	13360	3	34	6,92%
Harvey	99	6171	4	87	3,19%
Hart	99	4691	5	134	2,43%
Hawkins	100	4532	6	135	2,35%
Harding	99	4292	7	150	2,22%
Hayes	100	4108	8	136	2,13%
Hartley	99	4010	9	243	2,08%
Hardy	96	3776	10	188	1,95%
Haynes	63	3731	11	>300	1,93%
Hammond	99	3529	12	194	1,83%
Harper	100	3210	13	185	1,66%
Hayward	100	3014	14	252	1,56%
Hancock	100	2968	15	257	1,54%
Haigh	66	2919	16	>300	1,51%
Hargreaves	93	2797	17	>300	1,45%
Hanson	92	2303	18	>300	1,19%
Hale	100	1980	19	>300	1,02%
Hamer	68	1843	20	>300	0,95%
All others (2166 names)		86696			55,12%
Total sample	93	193179			100,00%

*including homonyms such as Haynes/Haines, Haigh/Hague, etc. NB: IN 1853 the most common surname, Smith, was 1,36% of all names or slightly more than 4 times as frequent as Hall.

Because of the large samples involved, the analysis here excluded the most frequently occurring surnames; only Hart, Harding, Hartley, Haigh, Hale and Hamer were included from the list above. A one third sub-sample of Hall, the most common name, was added to test for any bias – none was found, and the same was the case with Smith. In total the sample used for this analysis comprised (after correction for incomplete entries) 93732 surnames (excluding the 6693 sub-sample for Hall), almost equally split between men and women.

This sample of 93732 names covered a large variety of forenames, many of which only occurred once or twice. However, 13 of the male forenames and 21 of the female ones accounted for 80% of all persons. 53 male names and 63 female names accounted for ±95% of the sample. In total 507 male and 429 female names were identified. 90 male and 57 female names occurred only once or twice in the sample.

Diminutives and homonyms

To arrive at these totals of 507 and 429 separate names it was necessary to decide which diminutives (e.g. Daniel and Dan) and homonyms (names that sound the same but are spelled differently, e.g. Sydney and Sidney) should be considered as one name or as separate names. To a certain extent this is an arbitrary process. The Appendix summarises the classification used. In total only about 1200 persons, (a little more than 1%), including both males and females, had (registered) names that were classified as diminutives or homonyms.

Analysis

The relative frequency or infrequency with which a particular forename was combined with a particular surname was revealed by drawing up a table in which the actual frequency of an individual name, or of groups of names, could be compared with the expected level. The top forenames and surnames were compared individually, followed by groupings into “common”, “unusual” and “rare” in the following way:

Table 2 Classification of forenames and surnames

	Individuals	Common	Unusual	Rare	Total
Forenames	Top ±50%	50-80%	80-95%	Last 5%	100%
Nr of individual names (m/f)	05-Jun	Aug-15	40 / 42	454 / 366	507 / 429
Surnames	Top ± 20%	20-70%	70-95%	Last 5%	100%
Nr of individual names	7	94	434	1651	2186

Tables 3 and 4 give an extract / condensation of this analysis.

Table 3 Male names

	male sample	%	Cu %	Wm %	John %	Thos %	Jas %	Geo %	Common fore- names%	Unusual fore- names%	Rare fore- names%
Smith*	3206*			15,7	12,9	7,9	7,1	8,6	26,8	15,3	5,7	100
Hall*	3309*			16,1	13,6	9,3	7,8	7,7	26,1	14,3	5,1	100
Hart	2244	4,8	4,8	15,3	12,7	7,4	7,5	7,3	26,5	18,0	5,3	100
Harding	2123	4,5	9,3	16,2	12,1	8,2	7,2	8,4	26,5	16,5	4,9	100
Hartley	1908	4,1	13,4	14,5	16,6	7,9	9,3	6,1	24,7	15,5	5,5	100
Hale	968	2,1	15,5	14,6	11,0	9,8	7,4	7,3	26,7	17,9	5,4	100
Haigh	869	1,9	17,4	12,4	15,0	6,1	8,1	7,8	21,3	23,6	5,8	100
Hamilton	842	1,8	19,2	13,1	15,1	6,7	13,4	8,1	25,7	13,4	4,6	100
Common surnames	23394	50,1	69,3	14,6	14,4	9,0	8,4	7,7	25,9	15,6	4,5	100
Unusual surnames	11917	25,5	94,8	14,3	13,4	7,8	7,3	8,0	27,1	16,4	5,8	100
Rare surnames	2441	5,2	100	13,5	14,5	8,5	8,1	8,4	26,1	15,5	5,4	100
All surnames excl Hall	46706	100		14,5	14,0	8,4	8,1	7,8	26,1	16,1	5,0	100
Total excl Hall				6773	6531	3934	3786	3633	12199	7524	2326	46706

Table 4 Female names

	female sample	%	Cu %	Mary %	Eliz’th %	Sarah %	Ann %	Jane %	Emma %	Common fore- names%	Unusual fore- names%	Rare fore- names%
Smith*	3231*			14,8	8,7	8,9	5,0	3,9	4,1	31,6	17,0	6,0	100
Hall*	3384*			16,0	10,0	9,5	5,0	5,2	3,9	30,1	15,2	5,1	100
Hart	2375	5,1	5,1	15,6	9,3	86	4,1	3,5	3,5	33,1	17,1	5,2	100
Harding	2016	4,3	9,3	16,5	9,2	7,3	4,7	4,4	3,9	32,1	17,1	4,8	100
Hartley	1939	4,1	13,5	16,9	10,6	11,3	5,0	4,7	3,3	30,7	12,9	4,6	100
Hale	1029	2,2	15,6	12,4	12,1	10,7	4,7	3,2	3,8	32,1	15,9	5,2	100
Haigh	942	2,0	17,7	15,8	7,2	12,4	4,6	3,6	5,9	30,9	16,0	3,5	100
Hamilton	852	1,8	19,5	13,7	10,1	5,4	4,1	4,7	1,9	33,3	19,8	6,9	100
Common surnames	23547	50,1	69,5	16,2	10,1	8,9	4,7	4,3	3,9	32,5	15,1	4,3	100
Unusual surnames	11824	25,1	94,7	16,0	9,1	8,5	4,4	4,3	3,5	31,4	16,5	6,4	100
Rare surnames	2502	5,3	100	16,7	9,2	8,5	3,8	4,1	3,2	33,0	16,1	5,3	100
All surnames excl Hall	47026	100		16,1	9,7	8,8	4,5	4,3	3,7	32,2	15,7	5,0	100
Total excl Hall				7552	4572	4154	2134	1999	1750	15124	7398	2343	47026

* Excluded from the main analysis and added later as a ( +-) 8 % sub sample of Smith and a one-third sub sample of Hall to check for bias by analysing a very common and a common name

The tables do not suggest that there was any great tendency for parents with common surnames to choose forenames that were unusual or vice versa. For example, on average 14,5% of all parents named a male child William. The six most common surnames in the sample (Hart to Hamilton) with 19% of all persons, chose between 12 and 16% for William. The parents with the rarest surnames, the group of 5% of all persons (2441 persons with about 1000 individual surnames) chose nevertheless just as frequently,13,5%, for William.

Figures 1 and 2 illustrate these distribution patterns.

Figure 1 Forenames by rarity of surnames, Males

For example, the name John is relatively common as John Hartley, but relatively uncommon as John Hale. James, a Scottish name, is relatively common with Hamilton, also Scottish. The rarest forenames show no particular tendency to be used more or less for any particular type of surname. Even the stereotype name John Smith does not occur significantly less often than would be expected, 13% compared with 14% for all Ha names. With a population in 1875 of about 24.4 million persons in England and Wales, this suggests there were about 2200 John Smiths (24.4 x 1,36% (share of Smith name) x 0.5 (males) x 12,9% (share of males with forename John)). Even more common were William Smith with ± 2600 persons and Mary Smith with ± 2400. On the same basis there would have been ± 150 Emma Hamiltons; the 1881 census gives only 108 entries}

Figure 2 Forenames by rarity of surnames, Females

Table 5. Forename / surname combinations with marked divergence from average

Males*				Females*
Forename	Surname	Relative frequency**		Forename	Surname	Relative frequency**
Relatively frequently occurring names				Relatively frequently occurring names
Samuel	Hayman	3,4		Margaret	Harries	3,7
Richard	Hambly	4,2		Margaret	Hannah	3,3
Richard	Hawker	3,7		Margaret	Hayhurst	5,5
David	Harries	10,0		Alice	Hayworth	3,3
Benjamin	Haigh	3,1		Catherine	Harry	3,9
Benjamin	Hainsworth	6,9		Catherine	Hanley	7,0
Daniel	Hambleton	7,0		Catherine	Hanlon	4,2
Peter	Hamer	4,1		Isabelle	Harling	5,7
Peter	Halsall	11,0		Agnes	Hayton	5,7
Michael	Hanley	10,8		Rebecca	Hartwell	5,9
Michael	Hanlon	17,3		Rachel	Hallas	7,2
Patrick	Hanley	18,3		Ada	Hallas	11,2
Patrick	Hanlon	33,3		Bridget	Haley	6,6
Alexander	Hamilton	7,4		Bridget	Hanley	15,1
Alexander	Hay	14,5		Bridget	Hanlon	9,4
Alexander	Hannah	9,5		Betty	Haworth	14,5
Matthew	Hawksworth	11,3		Jemima	Hartshorn	11,3
Andrew	Hannah	11,2		Rhoda	Hann	15,3
Joshua	Hainsworth	20,1		Nancy	Haworth	11,1
Relatively infrequently occurring names				Relatively infrequently occurring names
Thomas	Hansford	0,2		Sarah	Hawke	0,3
Thomas	Hann	0,2		Ann	Hammett	0,2
George	Hamer	0,3		Ann	Harden	0,2
George	Harries	0,3		Emma	Haworth	0,3
George	Hanlon	0,0		Emma	Harries	0,3
Henry	Harry	0,3		Eliza	Haworth	0,3
Harry	Harry	0,0		Emily	Hamer	0,0

*in order of forename frequency
** e.g. the name Richard Hambly occurs 4,2 times more frequently than its expected frequency, (actually 10 times out of 107 Hambly’s or 9,3%, instead of the expected 2,2% since Richard occurs 1029 times in the sample of 46706. 9,3% / 2,2% = 4,2).

Amongst the most significant high frequency names are David Harris, with 46 occurrences instead of the expected 4,6 (453 Davids out of 46706 names (1%) times 472 Harris) and Alice Haworth with 64 occurrences instead of the expected 19,4 (1194 Alices out of 47206 names (2,5%) times 766 Haworths). Names that were avoided were Harry Harry with no occurrences against the expected 1, but this is scarcely significant. The absence of any Emily Hamers when 15 would have been expected is however notable. A number of graphs have been provided to show the degree to which the frequency of occurrence of a particular name varies across all the names considered; e.g. for the name Hall, which forenames differ from the expected levels for this surname? These graphs cover the most frequently occurring surnames and forenames for both men and women. In some cases the unusual combinations can be found on two graphs, e.g. James Hamilton under both ” James” and “Hamilton”}

Appendix – Names treated as homonyms or diminutives

Preferred	%		First variant	%		2nd variant	%
main spelling
Albert	99%		Bertie	1%		Bert	0%
Ann	86%		Anne	14%
Benjamin	96%		Ben	4%
Bessie	94%		Bessy	6%
Betsy	80%		Betsey	20%
Bryan	80%		Brian	20%
Catherine	86%		Catharine	9%		Katherine	4%
Cecily	63%		Cicely	38%
Charles	100%		Charlie	0%		Charley	0%
Daniel	96%		Dan	4%
Dennis	76%		Denis	24%
Elizabeth	100%		Elisabeth	0%
Ellen	99%		Ellie	1%
Emeline	67%		Emmelina	17%		Emelina	17%
Emily	100%		Emely	0%
Emmanuel	64%		Emanuel	36%
Evelyn	78%		Eveline	22%
Frank	99%		Franc	1%
Frederick	88%		Fred	8%		Frederic	4%
Georgina	64%		Georgiana	36%
Harriet	74%		Harriett	26%
James	100%		Jim	0%
Jeffrey	83%		Geoffrey	17%
Jemima	99%		Jem	1%
Jessie	97%		Jess	3%
Joanne	96%		Joan	4%
Johanna	57%		Joanna	43%
Joseph	98%		Joe	2%
Kate	99%		Katie	1%
Lawrence	88%		Laurence	12%
Lilian	65%		Lillian	35%
Lily*	34%		Lilly	34%		Lillie	21%
Madeline	67%		Madeleine	33%
Maggie	62%		Margery	31%		Marjory	8%
Margaret	100%		Margret	0%
Mark	99%		Marc	1%
Maurice	61%		Morris	39%
Neil	50%		Niel	50%
Norah	70%		Nora	30%
Philippa	50%		Phillipa	17%		Phillippa	33%
Phillis	96%		Phyllis	4%
Phoebe	88%		Phebe	11%		Pheobe	1%
Samuel	97%		Sam	3%
Silvester	69%		Sylvester	31%
Stewart	83%		Stuart	17%
Susan	46%		Susannah	44%		Susanna	10%
Sybil	75%		Sibyl	25%
Sydney	73%		Sidney	27%
Teresa	57%		Theresa	43%
Thomas	96%		Tom	4%
Timothy	97%		Tim	3%

* also Lilley 10%

Names treated as separate names

Main variant	Less common variants
Alice	Alicia
Allen	Allan	Alan
Ann	Annie	Anna	Annette
Betsy	Betty
Christina	Christine
Clara	Clare
Dorothy	Dorothea
Eleanor	Eleanora
Eva	Eve
Isabella	Isabel
Jean	Jeanie	Jeanette
Jenny	Jennifer
Julia	Julie	Juliet
Katherine	Kathleen
Elizabeth	Lizzie
Louisa	Louise
Marian	Marion	Marianne
Mary	Marie
Max	Maximilian
Nathaniel	Nathan
Percy	Percival
Rose	Rosa
Simeon	Simon
Sophia	Sophie

Supporting graphs for individual names (PDF file 266 kB)

Copyright © Donald Hatch, Bilthoven, Netherlands, 12 August 2003