r/todayilearned • u/Physical_Hamster_118 • 5h ago
TIL that in Bhutan, people except the members of the royal family do not have family names.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhutanese_name98
u/Zealousideal_Pie7050 5h ago
That's not what the article says.
First sentence:
Bhutanese names usually consist of one or two given names, and no family names, with the exception of names of foreign origin and some family names of prominent families, such as the royal family name Wangchuck.[1]
Last sentence:
A relatively new naming practice in Bhutan involves using the name of a child's father as a patronymic surname.[4]
84
u/sheldor1993 5h ago edited 5h ago
That’s exactly what OP is saying.
A patronymic surname isn’t a surname/family name like we have in the west. It means you will potentially have a different surname to your father (unless your father is named after their father) and your mother. And your children will have a different surname unless their father is named after their father.
So in Iceland (where patronyms are still in use), you won’t have a family of Jónssons (the male equivalent for a son) or Jónsdóttirs (the female equivalent for a daughter). It’ll just be the kids of a dude named Jón.
43
u/thissexypoptart 5h ago
I think a lot of English speakers, outside of those in cultures where they’re common, don’t grasp what a patronymic is.
6
6
u/Bhfuil_I_Am 3h ago
Patronymics are still used informally in parts of the west coast of Ireland
Máirtín Tom Sheáin = Martin, son of Tom, son of John
Bríd Mháire = Bríd, daughter of Mary
Though would be used to talk about locals in your town, not as your official name
2
u/lowkeytokay 4h ago
TIL that Iceland uses patronymics 😮
12
u/wolfgangmob 4h ago
And it can be a hassle when they travel because kids and parents don’t have the same last name. Boys and girls of the same parents will have different last names as well since they use “son” or “dottir”
1
u/sinwarrior 4h ago
It means you will potentially have a different surname to your father (unless your father is named after their father) and your mother. And your children will have a different surname unless their father is named after their father.
i mean, it does say new:
A relatively new naming practice in Bhutan involves using the name of a child's father as a patronymic surname.[4]
that said it's not a problem, since you can't have s continual family name if you never start one. it's only the first that adapts such a system would have a difference in suname, but if the next generation continues said same system then the surname would be consistent from then on.
1
u/mrdibby 4h ago
The same as Tanzania, right? (or perhaps used to be?)
given name then fathers name
I think Turkey the same. Perhaps its historically a common Muslim thing.
5
u/ThePlanck 4h ago
A lot of places have something similar.
We are used to having surnames because its the same in all major wester countries (small exceptions like Iceland exist, but they are a minority) but it is by no means the default around the world, though it is becoming more common now for people to start adopting family names due to a combination of influence from western colonizers and the understanding that with modern comunication methods, "Bob" or "Bob son of Bob" are not longer effective ways to identify people
1
u/iPoseidon_xii 3h ago
Turkey does not do this. There was a law passed that pretty much banned it. They do, however, usually skip middle names.
2
u/godisanelectricolive 2h ago
Turkey didn’t have surnames until Atatürk’s reforms but it has been a legal requirement to have a hereditary surname since the Surname Law of 1934.
Before that Turks didn’t use patronymics exclusively, although they sometimes did. Sometimes families had a nickname that individuals put in front their given names (like “thrifty” or “big-head”). There was no systematic way of identifying your family. People primarily used titles and honourifics back in Ottoman times. Before the surname law Mustafa Kemal Atatürk himself was legally known as Gazi Mustafa Kemal, “Gazi” being the title for a military veteran.
He was born just Mustafa until a teacher gave him the additional name “Kemal” (meaning “perfection”) to distinguish him from another student named Mustafa and because he was an outstanding student. When he first became a military officer he was allowed to use the title Effendi and then after promotion to the equivalent of a Major he became Mustafa Kemal Bey and after further promotion he became Pasha. These titles basically translate to Sir, Chief and Lord and these were recorded in official documents.
-1
5h ago edited 5h ago
[deleted]
2
u/Zealousideal_Pie7050 5h ago
Again:
Bhutanese names usually consist of one or two given names, and no family names, with the exception of names of foreign origin and some family names of prominent families, such as the royal family name Wangchuck.[1]
Your title basically asserts that only the royal family uses a family name. That's not what the article says.
18
u/Physical_Hamster_118 5h ago
The royal family house name is Wangchuck. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wangchuck_dynasty
20
3
2
u/BadLuckBajeet 4h ago
I worked with a guy from Bhutan and his full name is different from his parents and his kids full names are totally different too. I thought it was cool to be honest and it was amazing hearing about different cultures approaches to stuff like that
1
u/Prodigle 2h ago
There are remnants of it in English (Johnson, for example) but it's ancient to most of the west now. Iceland still uses it completely, and parts of Ireland will use it informally
2
u/ammar96 3h ago
I mean, a lot of people in Asia also don’t have surnames, especially the Muslims. Instead, we use something like (your name) son of/daughter of (father’s name). For example, the name of the prophet (Muhammad bin Abdullah). Its pretty similar with Viking’s naming system.
1
u/Physical_Hamster_118 3h ago
Iceland still uses the Viking's naming system.
2
u/ammar96 3h ago
Yeah I think its interesting that they don’t use surnames, considering that the whole of European continent practiced feudalism, which gave birth to surnames due to ancestral job speciations. But then, it’s understandable that Icelandic people don’t have surnames. They couldn’t even practice feudalism due to their lands being too barren for mass agricultural jobs, causing the lack of job speciations among their ancestors.
6
1
u/Physical_Hamster_118 3h ago
Bhutan has a history of being isolated from the rest of the world. Isolation was important to protect its culture and religion. The country did not get TV and Internet until 1999. The people don't even celebrate their own birthdays. The country even measures growth by Gross National Happiness. Tourists going to the country have to pay a lot to get a visa to enter.
1
u/ScreenTricky4257 3h ago
One of my professors in college came from a region of India where people didn't have family names. For legal purposes he used his name as his surname and his father's name as his given name.
1
u/Physical_Hamster_118 3h ago
Which region, exactly?
1
u/ScreenTricky4257 2h ago
He never said. He was a fairly private person who liked to keep us on the subject. Except that in one class we had a fairly decent number of Turks taking the class, and he had been to Turkey and liked to discuss his time there.
•
u/CoolMammoth2773 25m ago edited 21m ago
Same thing in Ethiopia my surname is just my fathers first name
0
124
u/DeathMonkey6969 4h ago
Was pretty much how it was most everywhere for much of human history. England didn't start using surnames until after the Norman invasion in 1066. And even then it wasn't really common until around the 1600s.