LONDON-L Archives

Archiver > LONDON > 1999-02 > 0917982336


From: Lynne Tann-watson <>
Subject: Re: Given Name--FREEMAN
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 19:05:36 +0000


Hi Carole Betth,

you're not quite right about England not having slaves, we just didn't bring
them in from outside, they were British born. The feudal system in England
meant that some people were born "serfs", which meant that they belonged to
the Lord of the Manor and could not leave, marry or anything without his
permission. If they absconded, they could be hunted down and hauled back, and
I believe that it was a crime to shelter them, but I'm not sure. Consequently,
the name Freeman indicates someone who was born a free man, not a serf.

be happy,
Love Lynne
in mild NW Leicestershire

David E. Arnette wrote:

> Hello All: How common was Freeman a first name or given name. Or was it
> mainly a surname? We have FREEMAN on the LEE side. One child born in San
> Antonio was named Freeman Fairclough LEE. I have never discovered a
> Freeman on the FAIRCLOUGH side. Would appreciate any ideas, helps. Would
> Freeman refer possibly to Free Masons or a Free Man. I know England did
> not have slaves. Or was it perhaps a corruption of word for an honor or a
> title?
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Carole Beth Arnette
> San Antonio, Texas USA
>
> Searching England
> FAIRCLOUGH, LEE, BURTWELL
> HUGHES, Westmancote
> Searching Australia
> LEE
> Searching USA
> HICKLIN, JONES, RAY- KY
> ARNETTE, CULVER-CA
> JOHNSON-OK, KS, MO
> CURNELL- KS, MO, CA, WA
> CULVER-KS
> HICKLIN-CO, anywhere
> ASHER-KY
> LAY
>
> ==== LONDON Mailing List ====
> As of January 25, 1999:
> Out of 618 mail mode subscribers, 542 digest subscribers (1160 total).

This thread: