ORIGINS: Labor and deLivery Part 2

When we hear names without knowing their original meanings, they often hit our present-day ears like an arbitrary collection of letters and sounds that were simply thought up and agreed to, for unknown reasons. But these names referred to immediate realities surrounding these early people. They could see the natural feature that connected them all to the place. They knew the ancestor who settled there. Even if they were only servants to these families, they were known as being a part of that clan, with identifying dress and symbols, showing everyone to whom they belonged.

Pretty maids preparing for a row
Queen Elizabeth II's Ladies-in-Waiting at her coronation
photo image: Cecil Beaton

But something interesting happened with surnames at a point in British history. The part of the country that you came from, or the original family that your ancestors were attached to, was no longer the only moniker available. Instead, you could establish yourself with a formal company of craftsmen, traders, and their workers. Your identity no longer needed to come down from the past, in a long unbroken line of those hatched upon the same rock or from whose first fathers you sprang forth; but, rather, what you do.

Workers of the world were uniting in very specific ways, according to a formally registered list of “companies”, signifying who you spent your days laboring alongside. The primary company you kept was not your ancestral or social connections— those to whom you had sworn your life as your liege family with heraldic crests of symbols— but rather people who shared your training and skills. This seems like a very radical change, to go from “I’m the Carpenter, Madam” to “I’m Carpenter, Madam.” In return he would be called Master or Mister Carpenter. Perhaps this shift in self-titling may have set the stage for those who desperately wanted their identity to be rooted not in the past of land ownership and lineage, which was conferred onto them, but to take up a future holding in a contemporary collective of activity and production.

It must have seemed liberating and revolutionary to these early companies, with uniforms based on the outfitting of your livelihood, and not the uniform of your household station. You could learn a trade and distinguish yourself on a course that leads to being a Master of your work, and not of people. There is a curious mix of capitalism and socialism building in all of this. Workers associate under a common goal, yet the goal is not a social movement. The goal is capital, and the pride of the new crests and uniforms lies in the ability to earn it.

Example of a livery crest of arms from bowyers.com: The Worshipful Company of Bowyers established in 1488. The bowyer is shown wearing the black and white livery of this company. He is holding a "flote", also shown in a trio on the shield, invented to plane and smooth the bow staves. The bowman, holds the bow, representing the one who puts the product to use. The pointed stakes in the ground signify an ancient defense of fortresses planted by archers against cavalry attacks. Crecy, Poitiers and Agincourt are battles against the French, whose defeat was attributed to the early bowyers new and plenteous supply of longbows that had a superior range over shortbows. 

Here is a list of the various Liveries, as copied from Wikipedia (where else?):

Mercer-- merchant

Grocer-- spices (green grocer is vegetables)

Draper-- wool and cloth

Skinner-- fur trader

Taylor- tailors

Haberdasher-- clothiers

Vintner- wine

Barbers- surgeons and dentists

Cutlers- knife, sword, utensil makers

Chandler- wax candle makers

Armourer and Brasier-- armor and brass workers

Girdler- belt and girdle makers

Cordwainer- leather workers and shoemakers

Currier-- leather dresser and tanner

Founder-- metals casters and melters

Poulters-- poulterers

Cooper- barrel and cask makers

Tyler and Bricklayers-- Builder

Bowyer-- long-bow makers

Fletcher- arrow makers

Scrivener- court scribes and notaries public

Plaister- plasterers

Stationers- journalists and publishers

Broderers- embroiderers

Upholders- upholsterers

Turner- lathe operators

Glazier-- glass painters and glazers

Horner-- horn makers and plasticians

Farriers- horseshoe makers and horse veterinarians

Paviors- highway pavers

Loriners- equestrian bit, bridle and spur suppliers

Pattenmakers-- wooden shoe makers

Gold and Silver Wyre Drawers-- thread makers for military and society clothing

Carmen-- vehicle drivers

Hackney-- taxicab drivers

Waterman-- movers of goods and passengers on the river Thames

A scrivener at his desk, miniature in wood, 15th Century France

Here are more straightforward names, and some are commonly recognized as modern English:

Goldsmith

Salter

Dyer

Brewer

Leatherman

Pewterer

Baker

Butcher

Saddler

Carpenter

Painter

Plumber

Innholder

Cook

Blacksmith

Joiner and Ceiler- wood craftsmen

Weaver

Woolman

Fruiter

Basketmaker

Shipwright

Wheelwright

Glover

Gardener

Fanmaker

Farmer

Yet, now, when we look over the list, it can seem just as antiquated, and our history of nomenclature may be in need of liberation at some point, yet again. If someone’s last name is Weaver, I don’t assume that they have anything to do with weaving. They may dislike weaving intensely, and work on an oil rig, for all I know. If they did, then they would be a “wildcat”, and now we’ve circled back around to nature names, and gotten ourselves really confused.

So, in light of this confusion, I will share a verse from the Christian scriptures that I have found intriguing. It describes an experience of entering the Kingdom of Heaven and receiving  “a white stone, with a new name written upon it, known only to him who receives it.” (Rev 2:17). While part of me would love to know what sort of spiritual identity I would have in an alternate reality, part of me thinks that I would turn over this stone and see my mother’s smile when she called me at age five, “little monkey.” To which I drew a picture of her cooking at the stove with me behind her (very telling), and wrote above us in buddha-baby fashion, “A monkey is a monkey. A monkey can be a good monkey.” If the white stone says anything more lofty than that, I’m not sure I would believe it.