Famous first names

slip79 said:
How about Classical Greek and Roman names?...
Plato...
and the list just goes on..... and on.......... :)
Again though this is because most of them probably didn't have what we would call "surnames".

And I've already pointed out that "Plato" is a nickname. It refers to the breadth of his forehead.
 
Well, Hannibal is one. Although this isn't so much due to the fact that his surname was never used, but rather that most people don't need the surname to differentiate him from other Carthaginians, as there are no Carthaginians of the same name with comparable fame.
 
Rembrandt, the Dutch artist had Van Rijn for surname, though he is known as "Rembrandt" and not "Van Rijn". Maybe Caesar, although Caesar really was a surname nor a first name. Same for Cicero and many other Romans.
 
In communities where the population was small enough (whatever that means depends on the communities in question, I guess), there was no real need for surnames as people could be recognized by their given names alone. As Plotinus pointed out, "great people" from these eras are only known by a single name.

When population increased, it may be that surnames became necessary to distinguish individuals. But if the habit had become ingrained that great people were only referred to with a single name, then they would pick one of the given name or the surname. It's such a random process, you would almost expect a 50-50 distribution amongst communities.

Heck, now 2 names aren't enough anymore, in North America, most people have middle names that they use...

Just a thought.
 
what about famous people remembered by their first names from the 20th century?
 
like who.... OJ?lol
 
Ringo is a nickname as well!

But I don't think that performers like that count, because they are deliberately using their first names as their stage names. It gets a little more interesting when you're talking about the first name *of* a stage name, as in Cliff (Richard).
 
Dreadnought said:
Uhh, that was not his first name...

JULIUS Caesar... :p

Sorry, Caesar and Pompey, and even Marius, shouldn't really have been in that list.
But if we wanna get picky Caesar's first name wasn't Julius either. It was Gaius. Gaius Julius Caesar. I know Gaius is pretty much just the name given to first born sons, but still...

How about the anglicised name of Marcus Antonius? Mark Antony. Although again he's kinda known by both his first and last names together. Cleopatra as well is a good one.
 
Famous people known by their first name is a Western thing. In China famous historical figures tend to be known by their full name, "honourary" name, Taoist name (if applicable), pen-names etc. For example Zhuge Liang is known by his full name or his honourary name namely, Kong Ming [I think the Kong is from the word for peacock which is a very symbolic bird in China and Ming means to understand], he is also often known by his Taoist name, "Sleeping Dragon" (I get confused which one is which actually). Emperors are often known by their posthumous title and/or their full names. I guess this is because in China traditionally first names are very rarely used unless you are in a very familiar relationship. Even siblings didn't usually use given names with each other. Also full Chinese names are at most 3 syllables and often only two so it's not exactly a mouthful to say unlike Western full names.

Also lots of people are mentioning Julius Caesar. Other people have pointed this out but a fuller explanation - Caesar is *not* his given name. It is his cognomen. His full name is Gaius Julius Caesar.

The "cognomen" is more akin to a *nickname* than a given name (from Wikipedia):

The cognomen ("name known by" in English) was originally the third name of a Roman in the Roman naming convention. The term is also occasionally seen in modern times as an obscure synonym for nickname or epithet.

Because of the limited nature of Roman names, the cognomen developed to distinguish branches of the family from one another, and occasionally, to highlight an individual's achievement, typically in warfare. Some Romans – notably general Gaius Marius – had no cognomen at all. By the Late Roman Republic, however, the use of cognomen even in daily conversation had become typical.

In contrast to the honorary cognomen adopted by successful generals, most cognomen were based on a physical or personality quirk; for example, 'Rufus' meaning red-headed or 'Scaevola' meaning left-handed.

Today, we refer to many prominent ancient Romans by only their cognomen; for example, 'Cicero' serves as a shorthand for Marcus Tullius Cicero.

A cognomen can also be inherited rather than describing a physical or personality trait. In this case it signified a branch of a family rather than a nickname. I believe this was the case for Julius Caesar.

"Gaius" is the praenomen and is more akin to a modern "first name". However there were only a very limited number of them and it was traditionally not very important in the Roman world and was rarely used on its own. I mean seriously, how many Gaius' would there have been in the Roman political world when Caesar was alive? Probably a zillion. Julius is his nomen gentile which signifies he was a member of the patrician Julian clan so I guess it is closest to the modern concept of surname though it still isn't really a surname. I guess in the Roman world people would have said he was a member of the Caesar branch of the patrician Julian clan. So that denotes his "family".
 
@Uiler. Exactly. Thanks for explaining it more succinctly than I could. I tried to tell people that his name was Gaius Julius Caesar.

Alas.... no one listens...... ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom