|
|
|
|
THE NAME AND FAMILY OF BORMAN OR BOARMAN
(Commissioned by George H. Bowerman, Captain, USGC)
COMPILED by THE MEDIA RESEARCH BUREAU WASHINGTON, D. C.
(Circa 1950)
THE NAME AND FAMILY OF BORMAN OR BOARMAN
The name of BORMAN or BOARMAN is derived from the official title bowerman, that is, “a servant who attended the room called the bower” or “an indoor servitor, a chamberlain”. It is found in ancient English and early American records in the various forms of Boureman, Bourman, Bureman, Booreman, Bowerman, Boorman, Boreman, Bowreman, Boarman, Borman, Burman, and others. Of these, the last three spelling are those most generally used in America today, while many of the others are still frequently found. The German spellings of Bormann and Burmann are also occasionally in evidence.
Families bearing this name, in its various forms, were resident at early dates in the English Counties of York, Oxford, Essex, Warwick, Somerset, and Devon, as well as in the city and vicinity of London. They appear to have been, for the most part, of the British landed gentry and yeomanry.
Among the earliest definite records of the name in England are those of Gilbert Burman, of Oxfordshire, in 1273; those of Isabella Bureman, of County Essex, about the same time; those of Johannes or John Boureman, of Yorkshire, in 1379; those of Robertus or Robert Burman, of Yorkshire, in 1379; and those of William Bowerman or Bourman, who was registered at the University of Oxford in 1506. These records are, however, only fragmentary.
The Oxfordshire branch of the family was represented about the beginning of the sixteenth century by William Boreman, of Banbury, who may possibly have been identical with the before-mentioned William Bowerman or Bourman. This William was the father of a son named Thomas, who left issue by his wife Isabell of William, Christopher, John, Thomas (called “the elder”), Ann, Thomas (called “the younger”), Sisley, Elizabeth, and Joane
William Boreman or Borman, eldest son of Thomas and Isabell, died in 1613, leaving issue by his wife Annis of Thomas, Nicholas, William, John, Annis, Alice, Joan, and Christopher. Of these, Thomas was married in 1596 to Elizabeth, daughter of Felix Carter, and was the father by her of William, Felix, Thomas (emigrant to New England about 1634, if not before), Samuel, Daniel (probably emigrated to New England, but left no issue there), John, Joseph, Job, and Sarah, of whom the son John left issue by his wife Elizabeth of William, Thomas, John, and Anne. And John, fourth son of William and Annis, married Elizabeth Poley in 1593 and had issue by her of George, Prudence, Mary Elizabeth, John, and William, of whom the son John married Katherine Beadle, who gave him four children, John, Mary, Martha, and Elizabeth
Thomas Boreman or Borman, “the elder”, son of Thomas and Isabell, died in 1593, leaving issue by his wife Alice of Robert, Annis, Frances, Mary, Elizabeth, Richard, and Margaret. Of these, Robert was married in 1596 to Mary Lampre, by whom he had issue of Edmond, Frances, John, Ann and Alice.
Thomas Boreman or Borman, “the younger”, son of Thomas and Isabell, was married in 1560 to Dorothy Gregory, by whom he was the father of Christopher and Joan. The son, Christopher, married Julian, daughter of Felix Carter, in 1`604 and was the father by her of Anne, Felix, Elizabeth, Sara, Samuel (emigrant to New England about 1638), Christopher, and Ursula.
Of the Devonshire family of the name, one John Bowerman, Bour(e)man, or Bor(e)man was married about the beginning of the sixteenth century to Joan Beckham, Birkham, or Kirkham and was the father by her of John, William, Dionisse, James, and Mary, of whom the first two sons became priests. James, the other son, married Isabel, daughter of William Carvaniell, and was the father in Devonshire of Andrew, Lawrence, William, Henry, Christopher, Alice, Cicely, Melanie, Joan, Hugh, and Simond.
Andrew Bourman, of Devonshire, eldest of the last-mentioned brothers, married Agnes Richards and was the father by her of a son named James, who left issue by his wife, Mary Ramesbury, of Henry, Edward, Andrew, William, Isabel, Joane, and Agnes. Of these, Henry married Agnes, daughter of William Gyles, and was the father of Gyles, James, Elizabeth, and Mary.
William Bourman, third son of James and Isabel (nee Carvaniell), settled at Wells, in Somersetshire. He married Elizabeth, daughter of Robert Longe and widow of Henry Glerke, and was the father of at least two children, Andrew and Margaret. Of these, Andrew married Saran, daughter of Richard Halswell, of Somersetshire, and had issue by her of William, Sarah, Andrew, henry, Robert, Bridget, Mary, and Elizabeth.
Christopher Bourman, fifth son of James and Isabel )nee Carvaniell), married Agnes Balche, by whom he had issue of George (died young), Lawrence, James, George, and three daughters, whose names are not given.
Hugh Boarman, sixth son of James and Isabel (nee Carvaniell), died at Malaga, Spain. He married Mary, daughter of Stephen Gyles, who removed from Devonshire to Spain and married Katherine dl la Salde. Hugh and Mary left issue at Malaga of Sir Andrew and Cicely, of whom the son had issue by his wife Joan of Hugh, Andrew, Paula, Joan, and Clare.
Simond Bourman, seventh and youngest son of James and Isabel (nee Carvaniell), settled at London and was the father there by his wife Isabel, daughter of Stephen Gyles and sister to Hugh’s wife, of Simonde, Hugh, Henry, Stephen, Katherine, Margaret, Elizabeth, Anne, Mary, and Maudlyne.
Other early records of the family include those of William Burman, of Warwickshire, in 1587, who was registered at that time at the university of Oxford; and those of Job Boorman, of London, before 1632, in which year he died. The records of these lines are not, however, complete.
One of the first of the family in America, the before-mentioned Thomas, was living at Ipswich, Mass., in 1634 and may have emigrated as early as 1630. He is recorded at different times as Boreman, Bourman, Burman, and Boarman and some of his descendants have also used the Bowerman, Boorman, and Borman spellings and many have changed the name to Bordman or Boardman. By his wife Margaret, Thomas was the father of Thomas, Joanna, Daniel, Mary, and Martha.
Thomas, elder son of the immigrant Thomas, left issue at Ipswich by his wife, Elizabeth Perkins, whom he married about 1667, of Thomas, Jacob, John, Offin, Margaret, and Elizabeth.
Daniel, younger son of the immigrant Thomas, married Hannah Hutchinson in 1662 and resided at Topsfield, Mass. His children were Joseph, Mary, Nathaniel, Thomas, Hannah, Wait, John David, and Jonathan.
Another Thomas Bor(e)man, Bourman, or Burman, whose records are frequently confused with those of the before-mentioned immigrant Thomas, was living at Barnstable, Mass., about 1633. He married Hannah Annable in 1644 and had issue by her of Hannah, Thomas, Samuel, desire, Mary, Mehitable, and Tristram.
Thomas, eldest son of the first Thomas of Barnstable, married Mary Harper in 1678 and had issue by her of Samuel, Thomas, Stephen, Benjamin, Hannah, and Wait.
Samuel Boreman or Borman, before-mentioned immigrant of about the year 1638, came from Oxfordshire, England, and settled at Wethersfield, Conn., after a short stay at Ipswich. He married Mary Betts before 1642 and had issue by her of Isaac, Mary, Samuel, Joseph, John, Sarah, Daniel, Jonathan, Nathaniel, and Martha. Of there, Joseph and John died unmarried.
Isaac, eldest son of the immigrant Samuel, married Abiah Kimberley about 1666 and had issue by her of Isaac, Samuel, Thomas, Sarah, Abiah, and Eunice.
Samuel, second son of the immigrant Samuel, was married in 1682 to Sarah Steele, by whom he had issue of Mary, Sarah, Hannah, David, Joseph, and Josiah.
Daniel, son of the immigrant Samuel married Hannah Wright in 1683 and had issue by her of Richard, Daniel, Mabel, John, Hannah, Martha, Israel, Timothy (died young), Timothy, Joshua, Benjamin, and Charles.
Jonathan, son of the immigrant Samuel, was married in 1685 to Mercy Hubbert or Hubbard. Their children were Mercy, Joseph, Jonathan, Abigail, and Hepzibah.
Nathaniel, youngest son of the immigrant Samuel, married Elizabeth Strong in 1707 and had issue by her of an only son, named Nathaniel.
William Boreman, who settled at Wethersfield, Conn., before 1645 and after settled at Guilford, in the same colony, probably came from County Kent, England. So far as is known, there was no close relationship between him and Samuel of Connecticut. This William died unmarried about the year 1659.
One William Boarman came from Europe (possibly of German ancestry) to America in 1645, if not before, being then fifteen years of age. He settled in St. Mary’s County, Md., and was an officer in the colonial militia, Justice of St. Mary’s County from 1663 to 1666, Presiding Justice in 1678; Sheriff in 1678 and 1679, and a member of the House of Burgesses from 1671 to 1675. By his first wife, Sarah, he was the father of a son named William; and by his second wife, Mary Matthews, he had a daughter named Ann. Shortly before 1687 he married a third wife, Mary Jarboe, by whom he had issue of Benedict Leonard, John Baptist, Francis Ignatius, Mary, Elizabeth, and Clare.
William, eldest son of the first William of Maryland, first married Jane Neale about 1680 and was the father by her of William, Jane (died young), Henrietta, Ann, and Sarah. By his second wife, Mary Pile, whom he married between 1696 and 1701, he had further issue of Joseph, Jane, Thomas, and Mary.
Of the sons of the third marriage of the first William Boarman; of Maryland, Benedict Leonard married Ann Brooke, by whom he was the father of Leonard, Mary, Richard Basil, George, Joseph, Elinor, Jane, and Catherine; John Baptist had issue by his wife, Elizabeth Edelen, of Henrietta, Richard, Joseph and Raphael; and Francis Ignatius may have left issue, but records of him are not complete.
In general a shrewd, ambitious, resourceful race, the Bo(a)rmans, Burmans, etc., have shown themselves possessed of marked business acumen and determination of purpose. In some lines there has also been artistic and literary ability.
Among those of the name who served in the War of the Revolution were Deputy Paymaster General John Boreman, of Pennsylvania; Lieutenant Henry Boarman, of Maryland; Carrol Bourman (a German), of Massachusetts; Charles and Joshua Burman, of Massachusetts; James Borman, of Massachusetts; Theodore Boreman, of Massachusetts; James Burmon or Burman, of Connecticut; Charles and Henry Burman, of Pennsylvania; Henry, John, and Peter Bowerman, of Pennsylvania; Jacob Borman of Pennsylvania; William Boreman, of Pennsylvania; Joaob Boorman or Boorman, of Pennsylvania; Basil, Clement, Daniel, Henry Jr.., Joseph, Thomas, and William Boarman, of Maryland; and many more.
John, Thomas, Robert, William, Samuel, Christopher, Andrew, Edward, Henry, George, Hugh, Daniel, Joseph, David, Jonathan, Francis, and James are some of the Christian names preferred by the family for its male progeny.
A few of the many members of the family who have been prominent in America at various times are: James Boorman (1783 – 1866), of England and New York, merchant and railroad president.
Thomas Boreman (latter eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries), of Maine, historian.
Thomas Hugh Boorman (b. 1851), of New York, engineer and author.
Marshall Ignatius Boarman (b. 1853), of Illinois, Jesuit missionary.
William Alfred Burman (latter nineteenth and early twentieth centuries), of Canada, author and historian.
Thomas Allen Borman b. 1872), of Kansas, agriculturist and author.
William Ryland Boorman ( b. 1891), of New York, psychologist and author.
Ben Lucien Burman (early twentieth century), of New York, author.
Anatole Bourman (early twentieth century), of New York, author.
Joesph C. Boarman (early twentieth century), of Massachusetts, biographer.
Martin Hollie Boarman (early twentieth century), of Michigan, clergyman and educator.
One of the several coats of arms of the English family of Borman, from which many of the families of Borman, Boarman, etc. in America are descended, is described as follows (Burke, Encyclopaedia of Heraldry, 1844):
Arms. – “Ermine, on a bend cottised sable, three boars’ heads couped or.”
Crest. – “A bull’s head erased or , attired sable.”
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bardsley. English and Welsh Surnames. 1901. Phillipps. Somerset Visitations. 1838 Weaver. Visitations of Somersetshire. 1885 Harleian Society. Somersetshire Visitation. 1876 Harleian Society. London Visitation. 1880 Savage. Genealogical Dictionary of New England. 1860 Hammatt. Early Inhabitants of Ipswich, Mass. 1880 S. L. Boardman. The Boardman Genealogy. 1895 Goldthwaite. Boardman Genealogy. 1895 Otis and Swift. Barnstable Families. 1888 Hinman. Early Settlers of Connecticut. 1852 Massachusetts Soldiers and Sailors of the Revolutionary War. 1896 Pennsylvania Muster Rolls. 1907 Maryland Muster Rolls in the Revolution. 1900 Dictionary of American Biography. 1929 Burke. Encyclopaedia of Hearldry. 1844
Ed. note: The following pages contain a short article that was attached to this document.
WHY YOU HAVE A FAMILY NAME AND WHAT IT MEANS TO YOU
Primitive personal names doubtless originated soon after the invention of spoken language, although the date of their first use is lost in the darkness of ages preceding recorded history. For thousands of years thereafter, first or given names were the only designations that men and women bore; and in the dawn of historic times, when the world was less crowded than it is today and every man knew his neighbor, on title of address was sufficient. Only gradually, with the passing centuries and the increasing complexity of civilized society, did a need arise for more specific designations. While the roots of our system of family names may be traced back to early civilized times, actually the hereditary surname as we know it today dates from a time scarcely earlier than nine hundred years ago.
A surname is a name added to a baptismal or Christian name for the purposes of making it more specific and of indicating family relationship or descent. Classified according to origin, most surnames fall into four general categories: (1) those formed from the given name of the sire; (2) those arising from bodily or personal characteristics; (3) those derived from locality or place or residence; and (4) those derived from occupation. It is easier to understand the story of the development of our institution of surnames if these classifications are borne in mind.
As early as biblical times certain distinguishing appellations were occasionally employed in addition to the given name, as, for instance, Joshua the son of Nun, Simon the son of Jonas, Judas of Galilee, and Simon the Zealot. In ancient Greece daughters were named after their fathers, as Chryseis, the daughter of Chryses; and sons’ names were usually an enlarged form of the father’s, as Hieronymus, son of Hiero. The Romans, with the rise of their civilization, met the need for hereditary designations by inventing a complex system whereby every patrician traced his descent by taking several names. None of them, however, exactly corresponded to surnames as we know them, for the “clan name”, although hereditary, was given also to slaves and other dependents. This system proved to be but a temporary innovation; the overthrow of the Western Empire by barbarian invaders brought about its end and a reversion to the primitive custom of a single name.
The ancient Scandinavians and for the most part the Germans had only individual names, and there were no family names, strictly speaking, among the Celts. But as family and tribal groups grew in size, individual names became inadequate and the need for supplementary appellations began to be felt. Among the first employed were such terms as “the Strong”, “the Hardy”, “the Stern”, “the Dreadful-in-battle”; and the nations of northern Europe soon adopted the practice of adding the father’s name to the son’s, as Oscar son of Carnuth and Dermid son of Duthno.
True surnames, in the sense of hereditary designations, date in England from about the year 1000. Largely they were introduced from Normandy, although there are records of Saxon surnames prior to the Norman Conquest. Perhaps the oldest known surname in England is that of Hwita Hatte, a keeper of bees, whose daughter was Tate Hatte. During the reign of Edward the Confessor (1042 – 1066) there were Saxon tenants in Suffolk bearing such names as Suert Magno, Stigand Soror, Siuward Rufus, and Leuric Hobbesune (Hobson); and the Domesday record of 1085 – 1086, which exhibits some curious combinations of Saxon forenames with Norman family names, shows surnames in still more general use.
By the end of the twelfth century hereditary names had become common in England. But even by 1465 they were not universal. During the reign of Edward V a law was passed to compel certain Irish outlaws to adopt surnames: “They shall take unto them a Surname, either of some Town, or some Colour, as Blacke or Brown, or some Art of Science, as Smyth or Carpenter, or some Office, as Cooke or Butler.” And as late as the beginning of the nineteenth century a similar decree compelled Jews in Germany and Austria to add a German surname to the single names which they had previously used.
As stated above, family names may be divided into four general classes according to their origin. One of the largest of these classes is that comprising surnames derived from the given name of the father. Such names were formed by means of an added prefix or suffix denoting either “son of” or a diminutive. English names terminating in son, ing, and kin are of this type, as are also the innumerable names prefixed with the Gaelic Mac, the Norman Fitz, the Welsh ap, and the Irish O’. Thus John’s sons became Johnsons; William’s sons, Williamsons or Wilsons; Richard’s sons, Richardsons or Richardses (the final “s” of “Richards” being a contraction of “son”); Neill’s sons, MacNeills; Herbert;s sons, FitzHerberts; Thomas’s sons ap Thomases (ap had been dropped from many names of which it was formerly a part); and Reilly’s sons, O’Reillys.
Another class of surnames, those arising from some bodily of personal characteristic of their first bearer, apparently grew out of what were in the first instance nicknames. Thus Peter the strong became Peter Strong, Roger of Small stature became Roger Little of Roger Small, and black-haired William or blond Alfred became William Black or Alfred White. From among the many names of this type, only a few need be mentioned: Long, Short, Hardy, Wise, Good, Gladman, Lover, and Youngman.
A third class of family names, and perhaps the largest of all, is that comprising local surnames – names derived from and originally designation the place of residence of the bearer. Such names were popular in France at an early date and were introduced into England by the Normans, many of whom were known by the titles of their estates. The surnames adopted by the nobility were mainly of this type, being used with the particles de, de la, or del (meaning “of” or “of the”). The Saxon equivalent was the word atte (“at the”), employed in such names as John atte Brook, Edmund atte Lane, Godwin atte Brigg, and William atte Bourne. A vestige of this usage survives in the names Atwell, Atwood and Atwater; in other cases the Norman de was substituted; and in still others, such as Wood, Briggs, and Lane, the particle was dropped. The surnames of some of the Pilgrim fathers illustrate place designations: for instance, Winthrop means “from the friendly village”; Endicott, “an end cottage”; Bradford, “at the broad ford”; and Standish, “a stony park”. The suffixes “ford”, “ham”, “ley”, and “ton”, denoting locality, are of frequent occurrence in such names as Ashford, Bingham, Burley, and Norton.
While England enjoyed a period of comparative peace under Edward the Confessor, a fourth class of surnames arose – names derived from occupation. The earliest of these seem to have been official names, such as Bishop, Mayor, Fawcett (judge), Alderman, Reeve, Sheriff, Chamberlain, Chancellor, Chaplain, Deacon, Latimer (interpreter), Marshall, Sumner (summoner), and Parker (park-keeper). Trade and craft names, although of the same general type, were of somewhat later origin. Currier was a dresser of skins, Webster a weaver, Wainwright a wagon builder, and Baxter a baker. Such names a Smith, Taylor, Barber, Shepherd, Carter, Mason, and Miller are self-explanatory.
Many surnames of today which seem to defy classification or explanation are corruptions of ancient forms which have become disguised almost beyond recognition. Lonfellow, for instance, was originally Longueville, Longshanks was Longchamps, Troublefield was Tuberville, Wrinch was Renshaw, Diggles was Douglas, and Snooks was Sevenoaks. Such corruptions of family names, resulting from ignorance of spelling, variations in pronunciation, or merely from the preference of the bearer, tend to baffle both the genealogist and the etymologist. Shakespeare’s name is found in some twenty-seven different forms, and the majority of English and Angle-American surnames have, in their history, appeared is four to a dozen or more variant spellings.
In America a greater variety of family names exists than anywhere else in the world. Surnames of every race and nation are represented. While the greater number are of English, Scotch, Irish, or Welsh origin, brought to this country by scions of families which had borne these names for generations prior to emigration, many others, from central and southern Europe and from the Slavic countries, where the use of surnames if generally a more recently established practice, present considerable difficulty to the student of etymology and family history.
Those Americans who possess old and honored names – who trace the history of their surnames back to sturdy immigrant ancestors, or even beyond, across the seas, and into the dim mists of antiquity – may be rightfully proud of their heritage. While the name, in its origin, may seem ingenious, humble, surprising, or matter-of –fact, its significance today lies not in a literal interpretation of its original meaning but in the many things that have happened to it since it first came into use. In the beginning it was only a word, a convenient label to distinguish one John from his neighbor John who lived across the field. But soon it established itself as a part of the bearer’s individuality; and as it passed to his children, his children’s children, and their children, it became the symbol not of one man but of a family and all that that family stood for. Handed down from generation to generation, it grew inseparably associated with the achievement, the tradition, and the prestige of the family. Like the coat of arms – that vivid symbolization of the name which warrior ancestors bore in battle – the name itself, borne through every event of a man’s life and through the lives of scores of his progenitors; became the badge of family honor – the “good name” to be proud of, to protect, and to fight for is need be. As the worthy deed so the marching generations have given it dignity and splendor, it has become an institution, a family rallying cry, and the most treasured possession of those who bear it.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, Genealogy and Surnames, 1865 Bardsley, English Surnames, 1876 Bardsley, Dictionary of English and Welsh Surnames, 1901 Baring – Gould, Family Names, 1910 Encyclopedia Americana, 1932 Finlayson, Surnames and Sirenames, 1863 Grussi, Chats of Christian Names, 1925 Harrison, Surnames of the United Kingdom, 1912 – 1918 Lower, Dictionary of Family Names, 1860 McKenna, Surnames and Their Origin, 1913 Moore, Surnames and Place – Names, 1890 Weekley, Surnames, 1927 Woulfe, Irish Names and Surnames, 1923 |
