Surnames as a Science. Robert Ferguson

ending, which is also a diminutive, is probably formed from that in el, by the addition of en. It is found in Foerstemann's list as early as the fifth century, but, as found on Roman pottery, must probably be still older. We have Bucklin, corresponding with a Buccellin, general of the Alemanni in the sixth century, and with a Buccellan on Roman pottery. Also Tomlin, corresponding with an O.G. Domlin; Applin, with an O.G. Abbilin; Franklin, with an O.G. Francolin; Papillon, with an O.G. Babolen, &c. This form of diminutive never takes a vowel-ending.

      The ending in kin.

      This diminutive ending is formed from that in ec by the addition of en. It is the youngest-born of all, not being found, unless in rare cases, before the tenth century. And it is one that is still in living use both in England and in Germany, in the latter country more especially. We have Wilkin, corresponding with an O.G. Williken, and an O.N. Vilkinr; Godkin, with an O.G. Gotichin; Hipkin, with an O.G. Ibikin or Ipcin; and Hodgkin, with an A.S. Hogcin.

      The ending in et.

      There is an ending in d or t in O.G. names, which may be taken, though perhaps not with anything like certainty, to have the force of a diminutive. Hence might be such a name as Ibbett, corresponding with O.G. names Ibed and Ibet, from an unexplained stem ib; also our names Huggett, Howitt, and Hewitt, corresponding with an Anglo-Saxon Hocget, and an O.G. Huetus, from the stem hog, hug, signifying study or thought. But some other endings are so liable to intermix, and particularly the common one had, war, that there is very seldom anything like certainty.

      The ending in es or is.

      I take this ending also to be diminutive, and to be possibly akin to our ish, as in blue-ish, which, as signifying a "little blue," seems to have the force of a diminutive. Hence we have Riches, corresponding with an O.G. Richizo, and a present French Richez; and Willis, corresponding with an O.G. Willizo. Then we have Godsoe, corresponding with an O.G. Godizo, of which Cotiso, mentioned in Horace (p. 20), is a High German form; and Abbiss, corresponding with the name, Abissa, of the son of Hengest, from, as supposed, Gothic aba, man. And we have Prentiss, corresponding with an A.S. Prentsa (=Prentisa), respecting which I have elsewhere suggested that the name should be properly Pentsa. Another name which I take to be from this ending is Daisy. There is an A.S. Dægsa, which as Dagsi, with the alternative ending in i, would give us Daisy. We have another name, Gipsy, which I take to be from Gibb or Gipp (A.S. geban, to give) with this ending. This ending in is is naturally very apt to be corrupted into ish, and it is from this source, I take it, that we have such names as Radish, Reddish, Varnish, Burnish, and Parish, the two last of which we have also in their proper form as Burness, and Parez or Paris.

      The ending in cock.

      This ending is not one that enters into the Teutonic system, unless so far as it may turn out to be a corruption of something else. I have not met with it earlier than A.D. 1400, nor do I know of anything to make me think that it is much older. There has been at different times a good deal of discussion as to its origin in Notes and Queries and elsewhere. Mr. Lower has supposed it to be a diminutive, for which I do not think that any etymological sanction can be found, unless indeed we can suppose it to be a corruption of the diminutive eck or ock before referred to, which seems not impossible. But on the whole I am disposed to agree with the suggestion of a writer in Notes and Queries that cock is a corruption of cot—not, however, in the sense which I suppose him to entertain, of cot as a local word, but of cot as an ancient ending, the High German form of gaud or got, signifying, as supposed, "Goth." So far as the phonetic relationship between the two words cock and cot is concerned, we have an instance, among others, in our word apricot, which was originally apricock.

      I am influenced very much in coming to the above conclusion by finding coq as a not unfrequent ending in French names, as in Balcoq and Billecoq, also in Aucoq, Lecoq, Videcocq, Vilcocq, which latter seem to be names corresponding with our Alcock, Laycock, Woodcock, and Willcock. They might all be formed on Teutonic stems, if we suppose Lecoq and Laycock to have lost a d, like Lewis and Lucas, from leod, people. Now, that the ending gaud, with its alternative forms got, caud, cot, is present in French names as well as in English will be clearly seen from the following. From the Old German Faregaud we have Faragut, and the French have Farcot; from the O.G. Benigaud they have Penicaud, and we have Pennycad; from the O.G. Ermingaud they have Armingaud, and from Megingaud they have Maingot; from the O.G. Aringaud we have Heringaud, from Wulfegaud we have Woolcot, from Adogoto we have Addicott, and from Madalgaud we have Medlicott. I am also disposed on the same principle to take Northcott, notwithstanding its local appearance, to represent the O.G. name Nordgaud, and in this case we have also the name Norcock to compare.

      Presuming the above derivation to be the correct one, the question then arises—Has this ending come to us through the French, or has the corruption proceeded simultaneously in both countries? That the latter has been the case, the French Videcocq, as compared with our Woodcock, goes some way to show, the one having the High German form vid or wid, and the other the Saxon form wud. I may also mention, as being, so far as it goes, in accordance with the above theory, that we have a number of names both in the form of cot and cock, as Adcock and Addicott, Alcock and Alcott, Norcott and Norcock, Jeffcock and Jeffcott. I do not, however, desire to come to a definite conclusion, though, as far as I am able to carry it, the inquiry seems in favour of the view which I have advocated. But the whole subject will bear some further elucidation.