CHAPTER II

THE NAME

REFERENCES: Marquardt, 7-27; Voigt, 311, 316 f., 454; Pauly-Wissowa, under _cognōmen_; Smith, Harper, and Lübker, under _nōmen_.

See also: Egbert, "Latin Inscriptions," Chapter IV; Cagnat, "Cours d'Epigraphie Latine," Chapter I; Hübner, "Römische Epigraphik," pp. 653-680 of Müller's _Handbuch_, Vol. I.

§38. The Triple Name.--Nothing is more familiar to the student of Latin than the fact that the Romans whose works he reads first have each a threefold name, Caius Julius Caesar, Marcus Tullius Cicero, Publius Vergilius Maro. This was the system that prevailed in the best days of the Republic, but it was itself a development, starting with a more simple form in earlier times and ending in utter confusion under the Empire. The earliest legends of Rome show us single names, Romulus, Remus, Faustulus; but side by side with these we find also double names, Numa Pompilius, Ancus Marcius, Tullus Hostilius. It is possible that single names were the earliest fashion, but when we pass from legends to real history the oldest names that we find are double, the second being always in the genitive case, representing the father or the Head of the House: Marcus Marci, Caecilia Metelli. A little later these genitives were followed by the letter _f_ (for _fīlius_ or _fīlia_) or _uxor_, to denote the relationship. Later still, but very anciently nevertheless, we find the freeborn man in possession of the three names with which we are familiar, the _nōmen_ to mark the clan (_gēns_), the _cognōmen_ to mark the family, and the _praenōmen_ to mark the individual. The regular order of the three names is _praenōmen_, _nōmen_, _cognōmen_, although in poetry the order is often changed to adapt the name to the meter.

§39. Great formality required even more than the three names. In official documents and in the state records it was usual to insert between a man's _nōmen_ and _cognōmen_ the _praenōmina_ of his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather, and sometimes even the name of the tribe to which he belonged. So Cicero might write his name: M. Tullius M. f. M. n. M. pr. Cor. Cicero; that is, Marcus Tullius Cicero, son (_fīlius_) of Marcus, grandson (_nepōs_) of Marcus, great-grandson (_pronepōs_) of Marcus, of the tribe Cornelia. See another example in §427.

§40. On the other hand even the triple name was too long for ordinary use. Children, slaves, and intimate friends addressed the citizen, master, and friend by his _praenōmen_ only. Ordinary acquaintances used the _cognōmen_ with the _praenōmen_ prefixed for emphatic address. In earnest appeals we find the _nōmen_ also used, with sometimes the _praenōmen_ or the possessive _mī_ prefixed. When two only of the three names are thus used in familiar intercourse the order varies. If the _praenōmen_ is one of the two, it always stands first, except in the poets for metrical reasons and in a few places in prose where the text is uncertain. If the _praenōmen_ is omitted, the arrangement varies: the older writers and Cicero put the _cognōmen_ first, _Ahāla Servilius_ (Cic. Milo, 3, 8: cf. _C. Servilius Ahāla_, Cat. I., 1, 3). Caesar puts the nōmen first; Horace, Livy, and Tacitus have both arrangements, while Pliny adheres to Caesar's usage. It will be convenient to consider the three names separately, and to discuss the names of men before considering those of the other members of the _familia_.

§41. The Praenomen.--The number of names used as _praenōmina_ seems to us preposterously small as compared with our Christian names, to which they in some measure correspond. It was never much in excess of thirty, and in Sulla's time had dwindled to eighteen. The full list is given by the authorities named above, but the following are all that are often found in our school and college authors: _Aulus_ (_A_), _Decimus_ (_D_), _Gāius_ (_C_), _Gnaeus_ (_CN_), _Kaesō_ (_K_), _Lūcius_ (_L_), _Mānius_ (_M'_), _Mārcus_ (_M_), _Pūblius_ (_P_), _Quīntus_ (_Q_), _Servius_ (_SER_), _Sextus_ (_SEX_), _Spurius_ (_SP_), _Tiberius_ (_TI_), and _Titus_ (_T_). The forms of these names were not absolutely fixed, and we find for _Gnaeus_ the forms _Gnaivos_ (early), _Naevos_, _Naeus_, and _Gnēus_ (rare); so also for _Servius_ we find _Sergius_, the two forms going back to an ancient _Serguius_. The abbreviations also vary: for _Aulus_ we find regularly _A_, but also _AV_ and _AVL_; for _Sextus_ we find _SEXT_ and _S_ as well as _SEX_, and similar variations are found in the case of other names.

§42. But small as this list seems to us the natural conservatism of the Romans found in it a chance to display itself, and the great families repeated the names of their children from generation to generation in such a way as to make the identification of the individual very difficult in modern times. Thus the Aemilii contented themselves with seven of these _praenōmina_, _Gāius_, _Gnaeus_, _Lūcius_, _Mānius_, _Mārcus_, _Quīntus_, and _Tiberius_, but used in addition one that is not found in any other gens, _Māmercus_ (_MAM_). The Claudii used six, _Gāius_, _Decimus_, _Lūcius_, _Pūblius_, _Tiberius_, and _Quīntus_, with the additional name _Appius_ (_APP_), of Sabine origin, which they brought to Rome. The Cornelii used seven, _Aulus_, _Gnaeus_, _Lūcius_, _Mārcus_, _Pūblius_, _Servius_, and _Tiberius_. A still smaller number sufficed for the Julian gens, _Gāius_, _Lūcius_, and _Sextus_, with the name _Vopiscus_, which went out of use in very early times. And even these selections were subject to further limitations. Thus, of the _gēns Claudia_ only one branch (_stirps_), known as the _Claudiī Nerōnēs_, used the names _Decimus_ and _Tiberius_, and out of the seven names used in the _gēns Cornēlia_ the branch of the Scipios (_Cornēliī Scīpiōnēs_) used only _Gnaeus_, _Lūcius_, and _Pūblius_. Even after a _praenōmen_ had found a place in a given family, it might be deliberately discarded: thus, the Claudii gave up the name _Lūcius_ and the Manlii the name _Mārcus_ on account of the disgrace brought upon their families by men who bore these names; and the Antonii never used the name _Mārcus_ after the downfall of the famous triumvir, Marcus Antonius.

§43. From the list of names usual in his family the father gave one to his son on the ninth day after his birth, the _diēs lūstricus_. It was a custom then, one that seems natural enough in our own times, for the father to give his own _praenōmen_ to his firstborn son; Cicero's name (§39) shows the name _Mārcus_ four times repeated, and it is probable that he came from a long line of eldest sons. When these names were first given they must have been chosen with due regard to their etymological meanings and have had some relation to the circumstances attending the birth of the child: Livy in speaking of the mythical Silvius Aeneas gives us to understand that he received his first name because he was born in a forest (_silva_).

§44. So, _Lūcius_ meant originally "born by day," _Mānius_, "born in the morning"; _Quīntus_, _Sextus_, _Decimus_, _Postumus_, etc., indicated the succession in the family; _Tullus_ was connected with the verb _tollere_ in the sense of "acknowledge" (§95), _Servius_ with _servāre_, _Gāius_ with _gaudēre_. Others are associated with the name of some divinity, as _Mārcus_ and _Māmercus_ with Mars, and _Tiberius_ with the river god Tiberis. But these meanings in the course of time were forgotten as completely as we have forgotten the meanings of our Christian names, and even the numerals were employed with no reference to their proper force: Cicero's only brother was called _Quīntus_.

§45. The abbreviation of the _praenōmen_ was not a matter of mere caprice, as is the writing of initials with us, but was an established custom, indicating perhaps Roman citizenship. The _praenōmen_ was written out in full only when it was used by itself or when it belonged to a person in one of the lower classes of society. When Roman names are carried over into English, they should always be written out in full and pronounced accordingly. In the same way, when we read a Latin author and find a name abbreviated, the full name should always be pronounced if we read aloud or translate.

§46. The Nomen.--This, the all-important name, is called for greater precision the _nōmen gentīle_ and the _nōmen gentīlicium_. The child inherited it, as one inherits his surname now, and there was, therefore, no choice or selection about it. The _nōmen_ ended originally in _-ius_, and this ending was sacredly preserved by the patrician families: the endings _-eius_, _-aius_, _-aeus_, and _-eus_ are merely variations from it. Other endings point to a non-Latin origin of the gens. Those in _-ācus_ (_Avidiācus_) are Gallic, those in _-na_ (_Caecīna_) are Etruscan, those in _-ēnus_ or _-iēnus_ (_Salvidiēnus_) are Umbrian or Picene. Some others are formed from the name of the town from which the family sprang, either with the regular terminations _-ānus_ and _-ēnsis_ (_Albānus_, _Norbānus_, _Aquiliēnsis_), or with the suffix _-ius_ (_Perusius_, _Parmēnsius_) in imitation of the older and more aristocratic use. Standing entirely apart is the _nōmen_ of the notorious _Gāius Verrēs_, which looks like a _cognōmen_ out of place (§55).

§47. The _nōmen_ belonged by custom to all connected with the gens, to the plebeian as well as the patrician branches, to men, women, clients, and freedmen without distinction. It was perhaps the natural desire to separate themselves from the more humble bearers of their _nōmen_ that led patrician families to use a limited number of _praenōmina_, avoiding those used by their clansmen of inferior social standing. At any rate it is noticeable that the plebeian families, as soon as political nobility and the busts in their halls gave them a standing above their fellows, showed the same exclusiveness in the selection of names for their children that the patricians had displayed before them (§42).

§48. The Cognomen.--Besides the individual name and the name that marked his _gēns_, the Roman had often a third name, called the _cognōmen_, that served to indicate the family or branch of the _gēns_ to which he belonged. Almost all the great _gentēs_ were thus divided, some of them into numerous branches. The Cornelian gens, for example, included the plebeian Dolabellae, Lentuli, Cethegi, and Cinnae, in addition to the patrician Scipiones, Maluginenses, Rufini, etc. The recognition of a group of clansmen as such a branch, or _stirps_, and as entitled to transmit a common _cognōmen_ required the formal consent of the whole _gēns_, and carried with it the loss of certain privileges as _gentīlēs_ to the members of the _stirps_.

§49. From the fact that in the official name (§39) the _cognōmen_ followed the name of the tribe, it is generally believed that the oldest of these _cognōmina_ did not go back beyond the time of the division of the people into tribes. It is also generally believed that the _cognōmen_ was originally a nickname, bestowed on account of some personal peculiarity or characteristic, sometimes as a compliment, sometimes in derision. So, we find many pointing at physical traits, such as _Albus_, _Barbātus_, _Cincinnātus_, _Claudus_, _Longus_ (all originally adjectives), and the nouns _Nāsō_ and _Capitō_ ("the man with a nose," "with a head"); others refer to the temperament, such as _Benignus_, _Blandus_, _Catō_, _Serēnus_, _Sevērus_; others still denote origin, such as _Gallus_, _Ligus_, _Sabīnus_, _Siculus_, _Tuscus_. These names, it must be remembered, descended from father to son, and would naturally lose their appropriateness as they passed along, until in the course of time their meanings were entirely lost sight of, as were those of the _praenōmina_ (§44).

§50. Under the Republic the patricians had almost without exception this third or family name; we are told of but one man, Caius Marcius, who lacked the distinction. With the plebeians the _cognōmen_ was not so common, perhaps its possession was the exception. The great families of the Marii, Mummii, and Sertorii had none, although the plebeian branches of the Cornelian gens (§48), the Tullian gens, and others, did. The _cognōmen_ came, therefore, to be prized as an indication of ancient lineage, and individuals whose nobility was new were anxious to acquire it to transmit to their children. Hence many assumed _cognōmina_ of their own selection. Some of these were conceded by public opinion as their due, as in the case of Cnaeus Pompeius, who took _Magnus_ as his _cognōmen_. Others were derided by their contemporaries, as we deride the made-to-order coat of arms of some nineteenth century upstart. It is probable, however, that only nobles ventured to assume _cognōmina_ under the Republic, though under the Empire their possession was hardly more than the badge of freedom.

§51. Additional Names.--Besides the three names already described, we find not infrequently, even in Republican times, a fourth or fifth. These were also called _cognōmina_ by a loose extension of the word, until in the fourth century of our era the name _agnōmina_ was given them by the grammarians. They may be conveniently considered under four heads:

In the first place, the process that divided the gens into branches might be continued even further. That is, as the _gēns_ became numerous enough to throw off a _stirps_, so the _stirps_ in process of time might throw off a branch of itself, for which there is no better name than the vague _familia_. This actually happened very frequently: the _gēns Cornēlia_, for example, threw off the _stirps_ of the _Scīpiōnēs_, and these in turn the family or "house" of the _Nāsīcae_. So we find the quadruple name _Pūblius Cornēlius Scīpiō Nāsīca_, in which the last name was probably given very much in the same way as the third had been given before the division took place.

§52. In the second place, when a man passed from one family to another by adoption (§30) he regularly took the three names of his adoptive father and added his own _nōmen gentīle_ with the suffix _-ānus_. Thus, Lucius Aemilius Paulus, the son of Lucius Aemilius Paulus Macedonicus (see §53 for the last name), was adopted by Publius Cornelius Scipio, and took as his new name _Pūblius Cornēlius Scīpiō Aemiliānus_. In the same way, when Caius Octavius Caepias was adopted by Caius Julius Caesar, he became _Gāius Iūlius Caesar Octāviānus_, and is hence variously styled Octavius and Octavianus in the histories.

§53. In the third place, an additional name, sometimes called _cognōmen ex virtūte_, was often given by acclamation to a great statesman or victorious general, and was put after his _cognōmen_. A well known example is the name of Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, the last name having been given him after his defeat of Hannibal. In the same way, his grandson by adoption, the Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus mentioned above, received the same honorable name after he had destroyed Carthage, and was called _Pūblius Cornēlius Scīpiō Africānus Aemiliānus_. Such a name is Macedonicus given to Lucius Aemilius Paulus for his defeat of Persens, and the title Augustus given by the senate to Octavianus. It is not certainly known whether or not these names passed by inheritance to the descendants of those who originally earned them, but it is probable that the eldest son only was strictly entitled to take his father's title of honor.

§54. In the fourth place, the fact that a man had inherited a nickname from his ancestors in the form of a _cognōmen_ (§49) did not prevent his receiving another from some personal characteristic, especially as the inherited name had often no application, as we have seen, to its later possessor. To some ancient Publius Cornelius was given the nickname _Scīpiō_ (§49), and in the course of time this was taken by all his descendants without thought of its appropriateness and became a _cognōmen_; then to one of these descendants was given another nickname for personal reasons, _Nāsīca_, and in course of time it lost its individuality and became the name of a whole family (§51); then in precisely the same way a member of this family became prominent enough to need a separate name and was called _Corculum_, his full name being _Pūblius Cornēlius Scīpiō Nāsīca Corculum_. It is evident that there is no reason why the expansion should not have continued indefinitely. Such names are Publius Cornelius Lentulus Spinther, Quintus Caecilius Metellus Celer, and Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica Serapio. It is also evident that we can not always distinguish between a mere nickname, one belonging strictly to this paragraph, and the additional _cognōmen_ that marked the family off from the rest of the _stirps_ to which it belonged. It is perfectly possible that the name Spinther mentioned above has as good a right as Nasica to a place in the first division (§51).

§55. Confusion of Names.--A system so elaborate as that we have described was almost sure to be misunderstood or misapplied, and in the later days of the Republic and under the Empire we find all law and order disregarded. The giving of the _praenōmen_ to the child seems to have been delayed too long sometimes, and burial inscriptions are numerous which have in place of a first name the word _pūpus_ (_PVP_) "child," showing that the little one had died unnamed. One such inscription gives the age of the unnamed child as sixteen years. Then confusion was caused by the misuse of the _praenōmen_. Sometimes two are found in one name, e.g., _Pūblius Aelius Aliēnus Archelāus Mārcus_. Sometimes words ending like the _nōmen_ in _-ius_ were used as _praenōmina_: Cicero tells us that one _Numerius Quīntius Rūfus_ owed his escape from death in a riot to his ambiguous first name. The familiar Gāius must have been a _nōmen_ in very ancient times. Like irregularities occur in the use of the _nōmen_. Two in a name were not uncommon, one being derived from the family of the mother perhaps; occasionally three or four are used, and fourteen are found in the name of one of the consuls of the year 169 A.D. Then by a change, the converse of that mentioned above, a word might go out of use as a _praenōmen_ and become a _nōmen_: Cicero's enemy _Lūcius Sergius Catilīna_ had for his gentile name _Sergius_, which had once been a first name (§41). The _cognōmen_ was similarly abused. It ceased to denote the family and came to distinguish members of the same family, as the _praenōmina_ originally had done: thus the three sons of Marcus Annaeus Seneca, for example, were called _Mārcus Annaeus Novātus_, _Lūcius Annaeus Seneca_, and _Lūcius Annaeus Mela_. So, too, a word used as a _cognōmen_ in one name might be used as a fourth element in another: for example in the names _Lūcius Cornēlius Sulla_ and _Lūcius Cornēlius Lentulus Sura_ the third and fourth elements respectively are really the same, being merely shortened forms of _Surula_. Finally it may be remarked that the same name might be arranged differently at different times: in the consular lists we find the same man called _Lūcius Lūcrētius Tricipitīnus Flāvus_ and _Lūcius Lūcrētius Flāvus Tricipitīnus_.

§56. There is even greater variation in the names of persons who had passed from one family into another by adoption. Some took the additional name (§52) from the _stirps_ instead of from the _gēns_, that is, from the _cognōmen_ instead of from the _nōmen_. A son of Marcus Claudius Marcellus was adopted by a certain Publius Cornelius Lentulus and ought to have been called _Pūblius Cornēlius Lentulus Claudiānus_; he took instead the name _Pūblius Cornēlius Lentulus Marcellīnus_, and this name descended to his children. The confusion in this direction is well illustrated by the name of the famous Marcus Junius Brutus. A few years before Caesar fell by his hand, Brutus, as we usually call him, was adopted by his mother's brother, Quintus Servilius Caepio, and ought to have been called _Quīntus Servīlius Caepiō Iūniānus_. For some reason unknown to us he retained his own _cognōmen_, and even his close friend Cicero seems scarcely to know what to call him. Sometimes he writes of him as _Quīntus Caepiō Brūtus_, sometimes as _Mārcus Brūtus_, sometimes simply as _Brūtus_. The great scholar of the first century, Asconius, calls him _Mārcus Caepiō_. Finally it may be noticed that late in the Empire we find a man struggling under the load of forty names.

§57. Names of Women.--No very satisfactory account of the names of women can be given, because it is impossible to discover any system in the choice and arrangement of those that have come down to us. It may be said in general that the threefold name was unknown in the best days of the Republic, and that _praenōmina_ were rare and when used were not abbreviated. We find such _praenōmina_ as _Paulla_ and _Vibia_ (the masculine forms of which early disappeared), _Gāia_, _Lūcia_, and _Pūblia_, and it is probable that the daughter took these from her father. More common were the adjectives _Maxuma_ and _Minor_, and the numerals _Secunda_ and _Tertia_, but these unlike the corresponding names of men seem always to have denoted the place of the bearer among a group of sisters. It was more usual for the unmarried woman to be called by her father's _nōmen_ in its feminine form, _Tullia_, _Cornēlia_, with the addition of her father's _cognōmen_ in the genitive case, _Caecilia Metellī_, followed later by the letter _f_ (=_filia_) to mark the relationship. Sometimes she used her mother's _nōmen_ after her father's. The married woman, if she passed into her husband's hand (_manus_, §35) by the ancient patrician ceremony, originally took his _nōmen_, just as an adopted son took the name of the family into which he passed, but it can not be shown that the rule was universally or even usually observed. Under the later forms of marriage she retained her maiden name. In the time of the Empire we find the threefold name for women in general use, with the same riotous confusion in selection and arrangement as prevailed in the case of the names of men at the same time.

§58. Names of Slaves.--Slaves had no more right to names of their own than they had to other property, but took such as their masters were pleased to give them, and even these did not descend to their children. In the simpler life of early times the slave was called _puer_, just as the word "boy" was once used in this country for slaves of any age. Until late in the Republic the slave was known only by this name corrupted to _por_ and affixed to the genitive of his master's first name: _Mārcipor_ (=_Mārcī puer_), "Marcus's slave." When slaves became numerous this simple form no longer sufficed to distinguish them, and they received individual names. These were usually foreign names, often denoting the nationality of the slave, sometimes, in mockery perhaps, the high-sounding appellations of eastern potentates, such names as Afer, Eleutheros, Pharnaces. By this time, too, the word _servus_ had supplanted _puer_. We find, therefore, that toward the end of the Republic the full name of a slave consisted of his individual name followed by the _nōmen_ and _praenōmen_ (the order is important) of his master and the word _servus_: _Pharnacēs Egnātiī Pūbliī servus_. When a slave passed from one master to another he took the _nōmen_ of the new master and added to it the _cognōmen_ of the old with the suffix _-ānus_: when Anna the slave of Maecenas became the property of Livia, she was called _Anna Līviae serva Maecēnātiāna_.

§59. Names of Freedmen.--The freedman regularly kept the individual name which he had had as a slave, and was given the _nōmen_ of his master with any _praenōmen_ the latter assigned him. Thus, Andronicus, the slave of Marcus Livius Salinator, became when freed _Lūcius Līvius Andronīcus_, the individual name coming last as a sort of _cognōmen_. It happened naturally that the master's _praenōmen_ was often given, especially to a favorite slave. The freedman of a woman took the name of her father, e.g., _Mārcus Līvius Augustae l Ismarus_; the letter _l_ stands for _lībertus_, and was inserted in all formal documents. Of course the master might disregard the regular form and give the freedman any name he pleased. Thus, when Cicero manumitted his slaves Tiro and Dionysius he called the former in strict accord with custom _Mārcus Tullius Tīrō_, but to the latter he gave his own _praenōmen_ and the _nōmen_ of his friend Titus Pomponius Atticus, the new name being _Mārcus Pomponius Dionysius_. The individual names (Pharnaces, Dionysius, etc.) were dropped by the descendants of freedmen, who were anxious with good reason to hide all traces of their mean descent.

§60. Naturalized Citizens.--When a foreigner was given the right of citizenship, he took a new name, which was arranged on much the same principles as have been explained in the cases of freedmen. His original name was retained as a sort of _cognōmen_, and before it were written the _praenōmen_ that suited his fancy and the _nōmen_ of the person, always a Roman citizen, to whom he owed his citizenship. The most familiar example is that of the Greek poet Archias, whom Cicero defended under the name of _Aulus Licinius Archiās_ in the well-known oration. He had long been attached to the family of the Luculli and when he was made a citizen took as his _nōmen_ that of his distinguished patron Lucius Licinius Lucullus; we do not know why he selected the first name Aulus. Another example is that of the Gaul mentioned by Caesar (B. G., I, 47), _Gāius Valerius Cabūrus_. He took his name from Caius Valerius Flaccus, the governor of Gaul at the time that he was given his citizenship. It is to this custom of taking the names of governors and generals that is due the frequent occurrence of the name Julius in Gaul, Pompeius in Spain, and Cornelius in Sicily.