Onomastic Puzzle in Maryland

Question

Onomastic = Referring to the study of proper names…. I know, I know, please don't heckle me - I'm just trying to appeal to your curiosity

Thousands of census pages down the road and I'm still surprised at the new and unusual.

In Allegany county Maryland, 1820, plus or minus 10 years, there were lots of people with similar given names and surnames: Cheney, Twigg, Robinette, Wilson/Willson are examples. In several places the enumerator designated individuals like this:1820 Maryland census page

John Willson of W
George Robinette of N
John Twigg of Jno
Thomas Cheney of N
John Twigg of R
Thomas Crabtree of J

In another census he is "John Twigg of Robert"

I've not seen this elsewhere or at other times, and I'm not sure what this means. What I THINK it means is that particular "John Twigg of Jno" is the son of Jonathan Twigg, but I don't know this for a fact. Do any of you know this pattern which seems to extend beyond just the census.

What led me to this is "Thomas Cheney of N" (my ancestor I think) is probably the son of Nathan Cheney. Even in his will he is referred to as "Thomas Cheney of N" and further, in an equity court case filed by grandchildren in 1900, he is again referred to as "Thomas Cheney of N"

Comments

10/10 for the click bait!! . Not having much dealings with American censuses I can only say that what you suggest makes sense.

Answer 1

I saw this a lot in the early tax records of Fauquier county, Virginia. The tax collector when noting two men of the same name would add senior to the elder one and junior to the younger and then add s/o (son of) and the father's first name. It was one of the only ways I was ever able to sort out all the Sanders of that county.

Answer 2

That appears to be quite similar to the patronymic pattern used in old Scotland and Wales, where “of <father’s name>” was typically appended to the child’s (usually just first) name to identify the family.

Perhaps this community were recent transplants from Wales or Scotland, and that’s how they identified themselves to the census taker? The census taker may have made a decision to record the names as he was told, rather than be put in the position of having to “reformulate” them.

I’d be curious to see how this community was enumerated in the 1830 and/or the 1810 census, to see if it was resolved in those instances.