We'll have to agree to disagree about this, Peter. The word "forename" is indeed a lot older than the C19, but I still believe that it didn't come into general use (on application forms, etc.) until about 20 years ago. (I was wrong to say 10 years.) I even found it on my Church in Wales parish electoral roll form recently, though it was changed after I protested. The proportion of non-Christians in the period of our GRO transcriptions was miniscule, and the term "Christian name" would, I'm sure, have been much more familiar to the vast majority, including those who were not actual Church- or Chapel-goers, than "forename". However, I'd be very interested to know whether there's any evidence to back up what is only a suspicion on my part. Anyway, I'll go on using my favoured term, just as I still refer to my wife as "my wife"! As an ex-teacher of English, I still see it as my duty to slow up linguistic change as best I can, though as a linguist I know that such change is inevitable. In the context of the FreeBMD project, the issue is, of course, unimportant; in the broader context of family history, I believe we need to avoid imposing current values or preoccupations (including language) on our ancestors and their world. Here too, the "forename" issue pales into insignificance beside attempts to get "pardons" for those soldiers executed in the Great War. But I don't want to start that hare off! Now .... back to those 1866 deaths. Barry Johnson ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Hendy-Ibbs" <peter.hendy-ibbs@ntlworld.com> To: <FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2003 11:50 PM Subject: Re: Unusual Christian name > Certainly the term 'forename' has been in common use since I was a child > several decades ago. A Christian name is that 'given' through baptism > and has little to do with the secular process of civil registration. > Even in the nineteenth century there were many people who did not follow > a Christian faith. The term forename is therefore a much more accurate term > rather than a gesture of political correctness. It also contrasts with > those societies where the family name is placed first. An even more > accurate term is 'given name', but I suspect that would upset Barry even > more! :-) > > Peter Hendy-Ibbs > > >BTW - just out of interest, why the use of "forenames"? This is a word I'd > >never heard of until about ten years ago. The people whose names we are > >transcribing were overwhelmingly Christian, and would certainly have used > >the term "Christian name" themselves, as I have always done and still do. > >"Forename" seems to me to be anachronistic; an imposition of political > >correctness. If I were given to using the language of the politically > >correct, I'd say that the use of the term "forename" in a C19 context was > >offensive. But I'm not, so I don't. I just refuse to use the term myself. > > > >I hope that doesn't offend anyone. > > > >Barry Johnson > >Monmouthshire > > > > > > > > ______________________________

I would wholeheartedly agree that we should not apply current values on our ancestors. But by the same token we should not apply a religious, and specifically Christian, term on the entire population just because the country was/is a Christian nation. The fact is that registration is a secular process and baptism a religious one. An analogy may be the comparison between 'wife' and 'partner' where both occupy the same position but not all partners are wives. Peter Barry and Mary Johnson wrote: >The proportion of non-Christians in the period of our GRO transcriptions was >miniscule, and the term "Christian name" would, I'm sure, have been much >more familiar to the vast majority, including those who were not actual >Church- or Chapel-goers, than "forename". > >Anyway, I'll go on using my favoured term, just as I still refer to my wife >as "my wife"! > >I believe we need to avoid imposing current values or preoccupations (including language) on our ancestors and their world. > >

I believe that the practice in past times was to use just "name" for what would now be specified as "christian name", "forename", or "given name". The Census books for the 1851 Census (which any serious family historian will get to sooner or later) instruct the enumerator to enter the "Name and Surname" of each individual. Looking at my own birth certificate (not quite that old but less than 100 years after 1851!), I see that column 2 (headed "Name, if any") has just my christian names (ie "John Stephen") and column 4 (headed "Name and Surname of Father") has my Father's full name ("Geoffrey Parker"). I note that the final column is headed "Baptismal Name if added after Registration of Birth". The Penguin Dictionary of English Surnames, first published in 1967, has a very readable introduction which treats "forename" as an established term. The Oxford English Dictionary has examples of "forename" used in its present sense from both the 16th and the early 17th centuries. J S Parker