| <<< SYS$SYSDEVICE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]NOTES$SAMPLE.NOTE;1 >>>
-< VAX Notes Sample Conference >-
================================================================================
Note 10.1 TEST test 1 of 1
OSL09::MAURITZ "DTN(at last!)872-0238; @NWO" 75 lines 23-JAN-1990 10:27
-< Emergency saved text >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting that you should bring up the last name issue.
My intention a few weeks ago was to formulate a REPLY to the Swedish
naming convention not, as the Norwegian ones give a slightly different
flavour to it. Now I have forgotten which base note the comment
was made, but I suppose this answer to you must also be considered
a REPLY to the one we are talking about.
First of all, what is said about patronymics (-son, -sen) is generally
true for all of Scandinavia; Iceland still uses them exclusively,
i.e., they do not have the concept of "family names" at all. (The
Reykjavik telephone directory is sorted alphabetically by FIRST
name).
Where the situation differes from the afore mentioned note with
regard to Norway, is in the non-patronymic type names: to wit, here
these are NOT solely the result of either a) aristocratic heritage
or b) formation of "artificial" family names in the last century
from occupations, etc. (S�ren Kirkegaard (Churchyard/graveyard)
being an example of the latter). A very large portion of our names
are a category c) Place names of the family farm (and these can
be small plots indeed).
The interesting thing about these farm names is that they are (at
least some of them) incredibly old; in some cases they go back to
the bronze age. (Incredibly, but there has been some very thorough
research on this; though space & time hinders a full rendition of
background, evidence, etc.). Old farm names are the oldest verbal
"history" that we have in Norway. Their types and composite parts
can give clues as to when they came into being, and even what "social
status" these farms had in the early iron age (for us, prehistoric
period).
Regretably for your personal purposes, Enger is not an uncommon
name. I just looked it up in the Oslo phone book and there are two
full columns of Engers (+ one column of Eng's) there. In addition,
there are a number of names with the Eng- prefix. The good news
with regard to your name is that it may indicate high social status
in the early iron age. I shall explain (very briefly):
(Again, regrettably) your type name does NOT (most old ones do not)
have a specific regional origin. (contrast this with Walter Mondale,
whoose family comes from Mundal, a very specific place). The word
"eng" means "meadow" in modern Norwegian; though I am not sure that
it had exactly that meaning in pre- old Norse. Assuming, however,
that it was similar, this would be a typical name for the early
agricultural period, and would indicate the name of a peice of land
with favourable growing (possibly more pastoral) conditions. As
agriculture spread in the iron age, and as forest was cleared and
land settled, the names (all over the country) trace a clear pattern
of the nature of the specific farm-land. Examples -vin and -heim
suffixes are the oldest; both indicating very good and easily
accessible farm land in the pre old Norse language, implicit theat
the land did not have to be cleared---therefore typically the first
(and best) farms in a given area. I would see the Eng name in such
a context, though I will look it up to see if I can find something
more on it. Examples of later names are those with a suffix -rud,
which commes from "ryddet", i.e., "cleared" (for settlement/farming);
these would be somewhat less favourable farm plots, having been
cleared for trees in the 0-500 AD period, when iron tools to do
the job were available. (i.e., your name could go back into the
BC period). There are lots of other examples of even lower status,
where a suffix can indicate a tenant-farmer status, etc.
Now, when all this is said, it must be noted that these origins
I speak of are very old; a caveat to be remembered is that the original
social status of way back has no relation to later social status;
certainly not today's. In most cases, probably not the last century
either, though in very many cases, sizes of farms and their basic
growing conditions could relate to the names even in modern times.
I'll take a furhter look in my books at leisure and report the results.
Mauritz
|