Why are 'Son' surnames always common in Lancashire?

The Red Rose of Lancashire

Edwardson is most common in Lancashire, and seems to have been since records began. We point this out several times on the website, because it's one of the factors which stands out most prominently about our rare and strangely concentrated name. Early references to people called Edwardson, from the 1400s on, are overwhelmingly centred in Lancashire and neighbouring parts of northern Cheshire. Most Edwardsons seem to be north-westerners, there's little doubt. But what if we look at other rare patronymic surnames? Should we not compare Edwardson with, for example, the surname Georgeson? Or Stewardson? These names are similarly scarce - will they also be concentrated in a particular area?

The answer is - yes they are. And funnily enough, they are often concentrated in the county of the red rose.

In the 1891 census, both names were even rarer than Edwardson. There were only 332 Stewardson families, and Lancashire had the most of any county with 76 (the next closest was Westmoreland with 42). Georgeson was even rarer - only 279 families bore that name, with 161 of those based in Lancashire, more than any other county by some margin.

In that case, perhaps Georgeson and Stewardson originated in Lancashire too? But when we also look at far more common patronymic surnames, the trend continues.

For example:

Nixon (a name most often associated with the Scottish Borders)

• Families in 1891: 8,144

• County with most Families: Lancashire (1,430)

Williamson:

• Families in 1891: 21,237

• County with most Families: Lancashire (4,609)

Johnson:

• Families in 1891: 110,490

• County with most Families: Lancashire (17,173)

So even amongst common patronymic names, Lancashire is often the county with the greatest number. Granted, it does not always lead the pack. Thompson and Grayson were more common in Yorkshire, Robson more common in County Durham, and London had more Andersons. But even in these cases, Lancashire tends to run these counties a close second or at least a competitive third.

So what does this tell us?

Well, most obviously, this might simply be because 'son' names were always much more common in the north of England. That's a well known fact. Lancashire, as a large northern county, is therefore bound to lead the pack in many cases.

But Lancashire does seem to have had a special affinity for several rarer patronymics. Edwardson and Georgeson are two prime examples. Roughly three quarters of their bearers lived in Lancashire. Again, why was that?

Both Edward and George would have been relatively rare names in northern England during the middle ages. We mention elsewhere that Edward only became a popular given name in England from the late13th century onward, when the succession of Kings called Edward popularised the name. However, Edward likely took longer to catch on in the north, which was more isolated from courtly trends than the south. Similarly, George was not a native English name, and would have been extremely rare until Edward III made St George the patron of the Order of the Garter in 1348. Again, the north would likely have been slower to adopt the name George owing to its distance from the influence of the court.

As such, both Edward and George were rare names in the north at the time that surnames were becoming fixed, broadly between 1200 - 1400. It seems that either:

1. Only a handful of northern men were called Edward and George, leaving their sons to adopt the permanent surnames of Edwardson and Georgeson in the northern patronymic style. Though rare, more of these men lived in Lancashire than any other northern county.

   
   

2. The rare men who adopted the names Edwardson and Georgeson were at first evenly scattered throughout the north, but they later concentrated in Lancashire and/or largely disappeared elsewhere.

   
   

In our opinion, option 1 is more likely. In that case, why were Edward and George more common names in Lancashire than other parts of the north? There's almost no evidence with which to answer that question - perhaps there were moderately prominent local figures in Lancashire who bore those names, such as a couple of minor nobles or administrators, and a few men were named after them. But here we are well into the realms of supposition!

That's about all we can say on the subject - for now. It is simply interesting to note the strong connection between patronymic names, especially several rare ones like Edwardson, and the County of Lancashire. There is, I suspect, more work to be done here.

*1891 Census date from Ancestry.com

**If you're wondering, there is a 'short' version of Georgeson - 'Georges'. In a stark reversal of the trend, it is even rarer than Georgeson. Only 107 families were called Georges in 1891. There were more of them in the south than the north, and were most common in London, where there were 35 of them.