Family Names Among the Xhosa of South Africa

Family Names among the Xhosa of South Africa Bertie NEETHLING Introduction The population in South Africa is extremely diverse and many cultural or ethnic groups can be distinguished. The Xhosa people (or amaX- hosa) constitute one of these and form a significant group in terms of numbers: it is estimated that there are about 10 million Xhosa-speaking people in South Africa, making them the second biggest ethnic grouping with Zulu the biggest. The total population of South Africa is around 47 million. The Xhosa people speak Xhosa (or isiXhosa as the language is known in the Xhosa language). It forms part of the Nguni language family which is a sub-grouping of the huge Bantu language family, probably the most important Sub-Saharan language grouping in Africa. Although evidence is scant on the history of the amaXhosa, it is generally accepted that they originally moved down from Central Africa around the Great Lakes into Southern Africa and settled on the south-eastern coastline of present-day South Africa. Significant pock- ets of Xhosa-speakers are nowadays found all over the country. Xhosa speakers, like most other people all over the world, carry surnames nowadays but that was not always the case. The fact of the matter is that family names (also called surnames or last names1) have been introduced to African societies probably not that long ago. In other societies it goes back further, but one may assume that var- ious cultures and peoples went without surnames for generations. If one studies the history of old civilizations like those of the Egyptians and the Greeks, the history of the Roman Empire, and even the Bible, it becomes abundantly clear that a single name system was firmly in place originally. There were enough names for the population at the time to go around and a more complicated system was not necessary. 1 Family names and surnames will be used interchangeably in this contribution. 994566_ONOMA_44_07_Neethling_2.indd4566_ONOMA_44_07_Neethling_2.indd 110707 221/12/111/12/11 113:183:18 108 BERTIE NEETHLING The introduction of surnames The Romans were probably the first to introduce a system of more than one name for an individual (see Krige 1936, 8; Pine 1965, 11; De Stadler 1987,75). Three names were distinguished: – a praenomen or first name; – a nomen which indicated lineage or clan; – a cognomen, functioning more or less like family names today An example of such tria nomina would be Gaius Julius Ceasar. This system was implemented to counteract the inadequacy of the existing system. As the population increased, it became necessary to introduce secondary (additional) names to distinguish between the many individuals that carried the same first (personal) name. Cottle, on English surnames (1967) remarks that some first names were gaining a tire- some popularity, especially Thomas after 1170 (inspired by Thomas Beckett). It was, however, only during the Middle Ages that a surname system was introduced by the Teutons when surnames became fash- ionable but also necessary because of the population growth. The cus- tom gradually spread across the Western world. According to Dorward (1995, v) scholars recognise in every culture a ‘surname period’ i.e. a stage when society becomes too complex to make it possible to iden- tify individuals by given name alone. Whether such a period could be recognised in an African context, is dubious. The first surnames appeared in Italy and France in the 10th century, but it was only from the 14th century that the system became commonplace in certain areas. In ‘peripheral’ areas like Wales many only received surnames in the 18th century. On 18 August 1811 Napo- leon decreed that all persons should be registered under a fixed surname. This was done in order to establish the manpower available for military purposes. In the Netherlands the House of Orange realised the value of the Napoleonic decree and followed suit with a similar decree on 25 November 1825 (see Nienaber 1955, 7-8). It was therefore only in the 19th century that some permanency arose particularly regarding spelling as well as the hereditary factor. In some areas this develop- ment came sooner. In England surnames had been compulsory in church registers since 1522 and from about 1730 onwards the system was well established, in spite of comments like the following one from Sir Joseph Jekyll: 994566_ONOMA_44_07_Neethling_2.indd4566_ONOMA_44_07_Neethling_2.indd 110808 221/12/111/12/11 113:183:18 FAMILY NAMES AMONG THE XHOSA OF SOUTH AFRICA 109 I am satisfied the usage of passing acts of Parliament for the taking upon one a surname is but modern, and that anyone may take upon him what surname, and as many surnames, as he pleases, without an Act of Parliament. (Nienaber 1975, 153) These secondary names were at first little more than nicknames, apply- ing only to the individuals concerned. As time went by, however, they slowly began to be passed down from one generation to the next. According to Weekley, people in the Middle Ages had a very carefree and even flippant attitude towards naming, particularly when com- pared with German: When we consider the beauty of the oldest of these [=Germanic] names, their picturesque connection with gods and heroes, war and wilds, and with the great elementary abstract concepts we no longer understand, and compare them with the name creations of the Romans, and still more of the Middle Ages, commonplace, prosaic, spiteful or obscene, we feel thankful that there was once an age of poetic bandits and imaginative pirates. (1916, 26) The French term surnom (‘nickname’) was adapted to ‘surname’ to describe the new hereditary family name. The ‘sur’ in ‘surname’ originally comes from the Latin super which means ‘in addition/above’. A surname is essentially then an additional name (see Dunkling 1977, 58). Kaleta (1997, 51) also refers to the Latin term nomen gentile as ‘a name belonging to the same kin, family’. The rationale for bestowing a specific surname on an individual may differ; hence there is no fixed or formal rule when it comes to surname formation. Matthews remarks that it ‘…. is seldom an official affair’ (1967, 8). The creation of surnames appears to have been spon- taneous, and any distinction between individuals that carried the same first (personal) name, could serve the purpose of forming the basis for a surname. Strictly speaking then, all surnames are nicknames. One could therefore argue that family names could also be considered as additional names, which accommodated nicknames, but clearly, surnames are fulfilling different functions at present, which justify their separate treatment. 994566_ONOMA_44_07_Neethling_2.indd4566_ONOMA_44_07_Neethling_2.indd 110909 221/12/111/12/11 113:183:18 110 BERTIE NEETHLING Surnames in Africa and among the Xhosa It is obviously extremely difficult to date the introduction of surnames into African society. The compelling factors, such as population growth with the resulting great number of individuals carrying the same first name, also applied to African communities. It is nonetheless interesting to note Madubuike’s observation that ‘from time immemo- rial Africans have always had a way of distinguishing people with the same names’ (1994, 7). Herbert’s observation (1996, 1223) in this regard, is also interesting. According to him the many references by ethnographers to surnames in Africa give no indication whether surnames had always been part of an indigenous naming system, or whether it was imposed upon African societies through the efforts of the colonial administrators. Available sources on surnames usually cover the situation in the Western world, and more particularly, Britain and Europe. What is striking about these sources is that they all agree on the etymological types one can distinguish in surnames. Cottle (1967), Smith (1973), De Stadler (1987), Dorward (1995) and many others all cite the following typology that establishes a pattern underlying the formation of surnames: a) Surnames derived from the name of the father/male forbear (occa- sionally the mother/female forebear); b) Surnames derived from the holder’s/forebear’s past or present place of residence; c) Surnames derived from an occupation; and d) Surnames derived from a characteristic of the holder, i.e. a descrip- tive (nick)name, or from prevailing circumstances at a given time. The obvious question now arises: what is the situation in African, and particularly Xhosa society? Not forgetting Madubuike’s earlier com- ment that Africans always had ways of distinguishing between people who carried the same first name, it is nevertheless interesting to note that he quotes the same typology ‘for the purposes of classification’, depending on how surnames were formed or derived. His book is called A Handbook of African Names, suggesting that this typology might be useful in describing the surname phenomenon in many other African societies. He makes the following provocative and certainly debatable statement: ‘An individual usually had all four such names 994566_ONOMA_44_07_Neethling_2.indd4566_ONOMA_44_07_Neethling_2.indd 111010 221/12/111/12/11 113:183:18 FAMILY NAMES AMONG THE XHOSA OF SOUTH AFRICA 111 [= types of surnames], although it is not necessary each time to iden- tify him by all of them’ (1994, 18). He may ostensibly have been guided by the situation in Nigeria, being a Nigerian himself. Koopman, in his recent book on Zulu names (2002), prefers the term ‘clan name’ to ‘surname’ when it comes to Zulu society. It is clear that Zulu clan names function as surnames. This may also cause confusion, because a Zulu individual may have more than one clan name, and hence more than one surname. In such cases where surnames might be used interchangeably for one individual, the predict- able result can only be administrative chaos. Koopman also comes to the conclusion that ‘On the balance of evidence, it is fair to say that the origins of Euro Western surnames and the origins of Zulu clan names belong to decidedly different cultural patterns.

Load more