"Jim Benedict" <jim.benedict@shaw.ca> said: > For those not following the Guild on Google+, you may have missed this > interesting posting on relating surnames to social standing over the > centuries. The intro says: > > "If your surname reveals that you descended from the 'in' crowd in the > England of 1066-the Norman Conquerors-then even now you are more likely than > the average Brit to be upper class." > > The article is titled, "How England's 1% remained the same since 1066 " and > can be found at: > > http://www.medievalists.net/2014/11/26/englands-1-remained-since-1066/ > > My interest is the many ways to look at surname studies. There are members > within the Guild who are skilled at analysing a one-name as a study, and > this article illustrates one more surprising revelation. The original paper, cited by Rennison Vayro, isn't quite so surprising. Assortative mating, the result of which is what appears to have been observed here, is nothing new. Is it really a great revelation that it's been going on for centuries? People with similar backgrounds tend to marry each other. The social status of families is therefore maintained, to a greater extent than if people married at random. Peter Alefounder.