The name Dzungar people written as Zunghar, referred to the several Oirat tribes who formed and maintained the Dzungar Khanate in the 17th and 18th centuries. They were one of major tribes of the Four Oirat confederation, they were known as the Eleuths or Ööled, from the Qing dynasty euphemism for the hated word "Dzungar", called "Kalmyks". In 2010, 15,520 people claimed "Ööled" ancestry in Mongolia. An unknown number live in China and Kazakhstan; the Dzungars were a confederation of several Oirat tribes that emerged in the early 17th century to fight the Altan Khan of the Khalkha, the Jasaghtu Khan, the Manchu for dominion and control over the Mongolian people and territories. This confederation rose to power in what became known as Dzungaria between the Altai Mountains and the Ili River Valley; the confederation consisted of the Oöled and Khoit tribes. On, elements of the Khoshut and Torghut tribes were forcibly incorporated into the Dzungar military, thus completing the re-unification of the West Mongolian tribes.
According to oral history, the Oöled and Dörbed tribes are the successor tribes to the Naiman, a Mongol tribe that roamed the steppes of Central Asia during the era of Genghis Khan. The Oöled shared. "Zuun gar" and "Baruun gar" formed the Oirat's administrative organization. The Dzungar Olots and Choros became the ruling clans in the 17th century. In 1697, two relatives of Galdan Boshugtu Khan and Rabdan, surrendered to the Qing Kangxi Emperor, their people were organized into two Oolod banners and resettled in modern Bayankhongor Province, Mongolia. In 1731, five hundred households fled back to Dzungar territory while the remaining Oolods were deported to Hulun Buir. After 1761 some of them were resettled in Arkhangai Province; the Dzungars who lived in an area that stretched from the west end of the Great Wall of China to present-day eastern Kazakhstan and from present-day northern Kyrgyzstan to southern Siberia, were the last nomadic empire to threaten China, which they did from the early 17th century through the middle of the 18th century.
After a series of inconclusive military conflicts that started in the 1680s, the Dzungars were subjugated by the Manchu-led Qing dynasty in the late 1750s. Clarke argued that the Qing campaign in 1757–58 "amounted to the complete destruction of not only the Dzungar state but of the Dzungars as a people." After the Qianlong Emperor led Qing forces to victory over the Dzungar Oirat Mongols in 1755, he was going to split the Dzungar Khanate into four tribes headed by four Khans, the Khoit tribe was to have the Dzungar leader Amursana as its Khan. Amursana rejected the Qing arrangement and rebelled since he wanted to be leader of a united Dzungar nation. Qianlong issued his orders for the genocide and eradication of the entire Dzungar nation and name, Qing Manchu Bannermen and Khalkha Mongols enslaved Dzungar women and children while slaying the other Dzungars; the Qianlong Emperor ordered the genocide of the Dzungars, moving the remaining Dzungar people to the mainland and ordering the generals to kill all the men in Barkol or Suzhou, divided their wives and children to Qing forces, which were made out of Manchu Bannermen and Khalkha Mongols.
Qing scholar Wei Yuan estimated the total population of Dzungars before the fall at 600,000 people, or 200,000 households. Oirat officer Saaral battled against the Oirats. In a cited account of the war, Wei Yuan wrote that about 40% of the Dzungar households were killed by smallpox, 20% fled to Russia or Kazakh tribes, 30% were killed by the Qing army of Manchu Bannermen and Khalkha Mongols, leaving no yurts in an area of several thousands li except those of the surrendered. During this war Kazakhs attacked dispersed Altays. Based on this account, Wen-Djang Chu wrote that 80% of the 600,000 or more Dzungars were destroyed by disease and attack which Michael Clarke described as "the complete destruction of not only the Dzungar state but of the Zungars as a people." Historian Peter Perdue attributed the decimation of the Dzungars to an explicit policy of extermination launched by Qianlong, but he observed signs of a more lenient policy after mid-1757. Mark Levene, a historian whose recent research interests focus on genocide, has stated that the extermination of the Dzungars was "arguably the eighteenth century genocide par excellence."
The Dzungar genocide was completed by a combination of a smallpox epidemic and the direct slaughter of Dzungars by Qing forces made out of Manchu Bannermen and Mongols. Anti-Dzungar Uyghur rebels from the Turfan and Hami oases had submitted to Qing rule as vassals and requested Qing help for overthrowing Dzungar rule. Uyghur leaders like Emin Khoja were granted titles within the Qing nobility, these Uyghurs helped supply the Qing military forces during the anti-Dzungar campaign; the Qing employed Khoja Emin in its campaign against the Dzungars and used him as an intermediary with Muslims from the Tarim Basin to inform them that the Qing were only aiming to kill Dzungars and that they would leave the Muslims alone, to convince them to kill the Dzungars themselves and side with the Qing since the Qing noted the Muslims' resentment of their former experience under Dzungar rule at the hands of Tsewang Araptan. It was not until generations that Dzungaria rebounded from the destruction and near liquidation of the Dzungars after the mass slay
The Mongols are an East-Central Asian ethnic group native to Mongolia and to China's Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region. They live as minorities in other regions of China, as well as in Russia. Mongolian people belonging to the Buryat and Kalmyk subgroups live predominantly in the Russian federal subjects of Buryatia and Kalmykia; the Mongols are bound together by ethnic identity. Their indigenous dialects are collectively known as the Mongolian language; the ancestors of the modern-day Mongols are referred to as Proto-Mongols. Broadly defined, the term includes the Mongols proper, Oirats, the Kalmyk people and the Southern Mongols; the latter comprises the Abaga Mongols, Aohans, Gorlos Mongols, Jaruud, Khuuchid and Onnigud. The designation "Mongol" appeared in 8th century records of Tang China to describe a tribe of Shiwei, it resurfaced in the late 11th century during the Khitan-ruled Liao dynasty. After the fall of the Liao in 1125, the Khamag Mongols became a leading tribe on the Mongolian Plateau.
However, their wars with the Jurchen-ruled Jin dynasty and the Tatar confederation had weakened them. In the thirteenth century, the word Mongol grew into an umbrella term for a large group of Mongolic-speaking tribes united under the rule of Genghis Khan. In various times Mongolic peoples have been equated with the Scythians, the Magog, the Tungusic peoples. Based on Chinese historical texts the ancestry of the Mongolic peoples can be traced back to the Donghu, a nomadic confederation occupying eastern Mongolia and Manchuria; the identity of the Xiongnu is still debated today. Although some scholars maintain that they were proto-Mongols, they were more a multi-ethnic group of Mongolic and Turkic tribes, it has been suggested that the language of the Huns was related to the Hünnü. The Donghu, can be much more labeled proto-Mongol since the Chinese histories trace only Mongolic tribes and kingdoms from them, although some historical texts claim a mixed Xiongnu-Donghu ancestry for some tribes. See Genetic history of East Asians The Donghu are mentioned by Sima Qian as existing in Inner Mongolia north of Yan in 699–632 BCE along with the Shanrong.
Mentions in the Yi Zhou Shu and the Classic of Mountains and Seas indicate the Donghu were active during the Shang dynasty. The Xianbei formed part of the Donghu confederation, but had earlier times of independence, as evidenced by a mention in the Guoyu, which states that during the reign of King Cheng of Zhou they came to participate at a meeting of Zhou subject-lords at Qiyang but were only allowed to perform the fire ceremony under the supervision of Chu since they were not vassals by covenant; the Xianbei chieftain was appointed joint guardian of the ritual torch along with Xiong Yi. These early Xianbei came from the nearby Zhukaigou culture in the Ordos Desert, where maternal DNA corresponds to the Mongol Daur people and the Tungusic Evenks; the Zhukaigou Xianbei had trade relations with the Shang. In the late 2nd century, the Han dynasty scholar Fu Qian wrote in his commentary "Jixie" that "Shanrong and Beidi are ancestors of the present-day Xianbei". Again in Inner Mongolia another connected core Mongolic Xianbei region was the Upper Xiajiadian culture where the Donghu confederation was centered.
After the Donghu were defeated by Xiongnu king Modu Chanyu, the Xianbei and Wuhuan survived as the main remnants of the confederation. Tadun Khan of the Wuhuan was the ancestor of the proto-Mongolic Kumo Xi; the Wuhuan are of the direct Donghu royal line and the New Book of Tang says that in 209 BCE, Modu Chanyu defeated the Wuhuan instead of using the word Donghu. The Xianbei, were of the lateral Donghu line and had a somewhat separate identity, although they shared the same language with the Wuhuan. In 49 CE the Xianbei ruler Bianhe raided and defeated the Xiongnu, killing 2000, after having received generous gifts from Emperor Guangwu of Han; the Xianbei reached their peak under Tanshihuai Khan who expanded the vast, but short lived, Xianbei state. Three prominent groups split from the Xianbei state as recorded by the Chinese histories: the Rouran, the Khitan people and the Shiwei. Besides these three Xianbei groups, there were others such as the Murong and Tuoba, their culture was nomadic, their religion shamanism or Buddhism and their military strength formidable.
There is still no direct evidence that the Rouran spoke Mongolic languages, although most scholars agree that they were Proto-Mongolic. The Khitan, had two scripts of their own and many Mongolic words are found in their half-deciphered writings. Geographically, the Tuoba Xianbei ruled the southern part of Inner Mongolia and northern China, the Rouran ruled eastern Mongolia, western Mongolia, the northern part of Inner Mongolia and northern Mongolia, the Khitan were concentrated in eastern part of Inner Mongolia north of Korea and the Shiwei were located to the north of the Khitan; these tribes and kingdoms were soon overshadowed by the rise of the Turkic Khaganate in 555, the Uyghur Khaganate in 745 and the Yenisei Kirghiz states in 840. The Tuoba were absorbed into China; the Rouran
In philosophy, the matter of personal identity deals with such questions as, "What makes it true that a person at one time is the same thing as a person at another time?" or "What kinds of things are we persons?" Personal identity is the unique numerical identity of a person in the course of time. That is, the necessary and sufficient conditions under which a person at one time and a person at another time can be said to be the same person, persisting through time. In contemporary metaphysics, the matter of personal identity is referred to as the diachronic problem of personal identity; the synchronic problem concerns the question of what features and traits characterize a person at a given time. In continental philosophy and in analytic philosophy, enquiry to the nature of Identity is common. Continental philosophy deals with conceptually maintaining identity when confronted by different philosophic propositions and presuppositions about the world and its nature. One concept of personal persistence over time is to have continuous bodily existence.
However, as the Ship of Theseus problem illustrates for inanimate objects there are difficulties in determining whether one physical body at one time is the same thing as a physical body at another time. With humans, over time our bodies age and grow and gaining matter, over sufficient years will not consist of most of the matter they once consisted of, it is thus problematic to ground persistence of personal identity over time in the continuous existence of our bodies. This approach has its supporters which define humans as a biological organism and asserts the proposition that a psychological relation is not necessary for personal continuity; this personal identity ontology assumes the relational theory of life-sustaining processes instead of bodily continuity. Derek Parfit's teletransportation problem is designed to bring out intuitions about corporeal continuity; this thought experiment discusses cases. The inability to specify where on a spectrum does the transmitted person stop being identical to the initial person on Earth appears to show that having a numerically identical physical body is not the criterion for personal identity In another concept of mind, the set of cognitive faculties are considered to consist of an immaterial substance, separate from and independent of the body.
If a person is identified with their mind, rather than their body—if a person is considered to be their mind—and their mind is such a non-physical substance personal identity over time may be grounded in the persistence of this non-physical substance, despite the continuous change in the substance of the body it is associated with. The mind-body problem concerns the explanation of the relationship, if any, that exists between minds, or mental processes, bodily states or processes. One of the aims of philosophers who work in this area is to explain how a non-material mind can influence a material body and vice versa. However, this is not uncontroversial or unproblematic, adopting it as a solution raises questions. Perceptual experiences depend on stimuli which arrive at various sensory organs from the external world and these stimuli cause changes in mental states. A desire for food, for example, will tend to cause a person to move their body in a manner and in a direction to obtain food; the question is how it can be possible for conscious experiences to arise out of an organ possessing electrochemical properties.
A related problem is to explain how propositional attitudes can cause neurons of the brain to fire and muscles to contract in the correct manner. These comprise some of the puzzles that have confronted epistemologists and philosophers of mind from at least the time of René Descartes. John Locke considered personal identity to be founded on consciousness, not on the substance of either the soul or the body. Book II Chapter XXVII entitled "On Identity and Diversity" in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding has been said to be one of the first modern conceptualizations of consciousness as the repeated self-identification of oneself. Through this identification, moral responsibility could be attributed to the subject and punishment and guilt could be justified, as critics such as Nietzsche would point out. According to Locke, personal identity "depends on consciousness, not on substance" nor on the soul. We are the same person to the extent that we are conscious of the past and future thoughts and actions in the same way as we are conscious of present thoughts and actions.
If consciousness is this "thought" which "goes along with the substance which makes the same person" personal identity is only founded on the repeated act of consciousness: "This may show us wherein personal identity consists: not in the identity of substance, but in the identity of consciousness". For example, one may claim to be a reincarnation of Plato. However, one would be the same person as Plato only if one had the same consciousness of Plato's thoughts and actions that he himself did. Therefore, self-identity is not based on the soul. One soul may have various personalities. Neither is self-identity founded on the body substance, argues Locke, as the body may change while the person remains the same; the identity of animals is not founded on their body: "animal identity is preserved in identity of life, not of substance", as the body of the animal grows and changes during its life. On the other hand, identity of humans is based on their consciousness, but this interesting border-case leads to this problematic thought that since persona
The Manchu are an ethnic minority in China and the people from whom Manchuria derives its name. They are sometimes called "red-tasseled Manchus", a reference to the ornamentation on traditional Manchu hats; the Later Jin, Qing dynasty were established and ruled by Manchus, who are descended from the Jurchen people who earlier established the Jin dynasty in China. Manchus form the largest branch of the Tungusic peoples and are distributed throughout China, forming the fourth largest ethnic group in the country, they can be found in 31 Chinese provincial regions. They form the largest minority group in China without an autonomous region. Among them, Liaoning has the largest population and Hebei, Jilin, Inner Mongolia and Beijing have over 100,000 Manchu residents. About half of the population live in one-fifth in Hebei. There are a number of Manchu autonomous counties in China, such as Xinbin, Qinglong, Yitong, Weichang, Benxi, Huanren, Fengcheng and over 300 Manchu towns and townships; the Jiu Manzhou Dang contains the earliest use of Manchu.
However, the actual etymology of the ethnic name "Manju" is debatable. According to the Qing dynasty's official historical record, the Researches on Manchu Origins, the ethnic name came from Mañjuśrī; the Qianlong Emperor supported the point of view and wrote several poems on the subject. Meng Sen, a famous scholar of the Qing dynasty, too. On the other hand, he thought the name "Manchu" was related to Li Manzhu, the chieftain of the Jianzhou Jurchens, it was just the most respectful appellation in the society of the Jianzhou Jurchens in Meng's mind. Another scholar, Chang Shan, thinks. "Man" was from the word "mangga". So Manju means "intrepid arrow". There are other hypotheses, such as Fu Sinian's "etymology of Jianzhou"; the Manchus are descended from the Jurchen people who earlier established the Jin dynasty in China, but as early as the semi-mythological chronicles of the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors there is mention of the Sushen, a Tungusic people from the northern Manchurian region of northeast Asia, who paid bows and arrows as tribute to Emperor Shun and to the Zhou dynasty.
The Sushen used flint-headed wooden arrows, farmed and fished, lived in caves and trees. The cognates Sushen or Jichen again appear in the Shan Hai Jing and Book of Wei during the dynastic era referring to the Tungusic Mohe tribes of the far northeast; the Mohe practiced pig farming extensively and were sedentary, used both pig and dog skins for coats. They were predominantly farmers and grew soybeans, wheat and rice, in addition to hunting. In the 10th century AD, the term Jurchen first appeared in documents of the late Tang dynasty in reference to the state of Balhae in present-day northeastern China. Following the fall of Balhae, the Jurchens became vassals of the Khitan-led Liao dynasty; the Jurchens in the Yalu River region were tributaries of Goryeo since the reign of Wang Geon, who called upon them during the wars of the Later Three Kingdoms period, but the Jurchens switched allegiance between Liao and Goryeo multiple times, taking advantage of the tension between the two nations. In the year 1114, Wanyan Aguda established the Jin dynasty.
His brother and successor, Wanyan Wuqimai defeated the Liao dynasty. After the fall of the Liao dynasty, the Jurchens went to war with the Northern Song dynasty, captured most of northern China in the Jin–Song wars. During the Jin dynasty, the first Jurchen script came into use in the 1120s, it was derived from the Khitan script. The Jurchens were sedentary, settled farmers with advanced agriculture, they farmed grain and millet as their cereal crops, grew flax, raised oxen, pigs and horses. Their farming way of life was different from the pastoral nomadism of the Mongols and the Khitans on the steppes. In 1206, the Mongols, vassals to the Jurchens, rose in Mongolia, their leader, Genghis Khan, led Mongol troops against the Jurchens, who were defeated by Ögedei Khan in 1234. Under the Mongols' control, the Jurchens were divided into two groups and treated differently: the ones who were born and raised in North China and fluent in Chinese were considered to be Chinese, but the people who were born and raised in the Jurchen homeland without Chinese-speaking abilities were treated as Mongols politically.
From that time, the Jurchens of North China merged with the Han Chinese while those living in their homeland started to be Mongolized. They adopted Mongolian customs and the Mongolian language; as time went on, fewer and fewer Jurchens could recognize their own script. The Mongol-led Yuan dynasty was replaced by the Ming dynasty in 1368. In 1387, Ming forces defeated the Mongol commander Naghachu's resisting forces who settled in the Haixi area and began to summon the Jurchen tribes to pay tribute. At the time, some Jurchen clans were vassals to the Joseon dynasty of Korea such as Odoli and Huligai, their elites served in the Korean royal bodyguard. The Joseon Koreans tried to deal with the military threat posed by the Jurchen by using both forceful means and incentives, by launc
Cuyen was a Manchu prince and eldest son of the Jurchen ruler Nurgaci, the early patriarch of the Qing dynasty. An accomplished warrior, Cuyen was instrumental in the consolidation of Nurgaci's authority among rival Jurchen clans, he served as the primary civil administrator for intermittent periods in the regime founded by Nurgaci. However, he lost favour with his father because he tried to cast sorcery spells against other princes, was placed in solitary confinement, he died in captivity a few years later. Cuyen was born in 1580 somewhere in the present-day Jilin province in northeastern China, to a prominent family of Jianzhou Jurchens, he is the grandson of Taksi and eldest son of Nurgaci, who at the time was just beginning to rise to prominence in the Jurchen tribe he belonged. Cuyen's mother was Hahana Jacing of the Tunggiya clan, Nurgaci's primary wife, who gave birth to the prince Daišan. Cuyen was an able warrior, spent much of his youth assisting his father in consolidating power in the Manchuria region.
His fought in his first major battle against the Anculakit, a rival Jurchen tribe, in 1598, when he was 18 years old. When he returned victorious from the field, his father Nurgaci bestowed upon him high honours, granting him the title of Hung Baturu; this led to some Chinese accounts to refer to Cuyen by the nickname Hong Batu. Cuyen's next major expedition was sometime around 1608, he and his brother Daišan stormed the town of Fio Hoton in an attempt to complete the resettlement of another Jurchen tribe, said to be suffering oppression from the Ula clan, a strategic rival to Nurgaci. However, this put Cuyen at odds with his uncle Šurhaci, a younger brother of Nurgaci, whose daughters had married men from the Ula clan and who had wanted to leverage this alliance with Ula to challenge Nurgaci politically. Cuyen again went to war against Ula several years and took a mountain fortress in the process. Nurgaci had named Cuyen his heir apparent sometime during Cuyen's youth, by the early 1600s, Cuyen held significant political authority during periods when his father left the Jurchen capital for military excursions to outlying areas.
However, Cuyen's involvement in civil and administrative affairs evoked jealousy and resentment from his brothers and other prominent princes that comprised the elite Jurchen inner circle. Several of his brothers and male cousins petitioned Nurgaci to complain about Cuyen's behavior. Chief among the grievances was the unequal distribution of loot from battle and Cuyen's supposed propensity to grant large holdings for himself. In response, Nurgaci implored him to be more magnanimous towards his brothers. In 1612, when Nurgaci left on another military campaign against the Ula, he gave Daišan an prominent role at court to "assist" Cuyen while the latter was serving as a de facto chief administrator in the Jurchen capital. In practice, Daišan acted as a check on Cuyen who had at this point lost the confidence of his father. Nurgaci had realized at some point that it was no longer tenable to give Cuyen a special position without alienating other princes who had served with equal levels of distinction and merit.
As a result of Cuyen's own incompetence at balancing the interests of the princes at court, Nurgaci had, in his years, shown a preference towards governing by consensus of the'roundtable' of princes instead of giving primacy to one prince. During the 1612 Ula campaign, it was said that Cuyen had attempted using sorcery to curse the other princes in an attempt to enhance his own position; this turned out to be the final straw. Infuriated by the fact that Cuyen did not heed lessons from the past and continued to engage in hostilities against other princes, Nurgaci sentenced Cuyen to solitary confinement, he died in captivity two years later. His official biography stated that he was executed by Nurgaci, though the true circumstances of his death was not clear. An unconfirmed Ming dynasty account believed that Cuyen counseled against incursions into Ming territory in China proper, thereby incurring the wrath of Nurgaci. However, this version is not supported by evidence. Cuyen was created a beile before 1598.
He was posthumously granted the title Crown Prince Guanglue. It is not clear; the title was changed to Beile Guanglue during the reign of Huangtaiji. The title beile was standardized to a "third-grade prince"; the title was successively downgraded in generations. His descendants were a unremarkable branch of the Aisin Gioro clan. Parents: Nurgaci, Taizu Primary consort, of the Tunggiya clan, personal name Hahana Jacing Consorts and Issue: Primary consort, of the Gorolo clan Primary consort, of the Yehe Nara clan First daughter Married Fiongdon of the Manchu Gūwalgiya clan in December 1614 or January 1615 Unknown Dudu, Prince Anping of the Third Rank, first son Guohuan, second son Nikan, Prince Jingjinzhuang of the First Rank, third son Second daughter, personal name Jinai Married Manzhuxili Royal and noble ranks of the Qing dynasty Ranks of imperial consorts in China#Qing Zhao, Erxun. Draft History of Qing. 216. China. Fang, Chaoying. "Cuyen", Eminent Chinese of the Ch'ing Period, Dartmouth Col
A given name is a part of a person's personal name. It identifies a person, differentiates that person from the other members of a group who have a common surname; the term given name refers to the fact that the name is bestowed upon a person to a child by their parents at or close to the time of birth. A Christian name, a first name, given at baptism, is now typically given by the parents at birth. In informal situations, given names are used in a familiar and friendly manner. In more formal situations, a person's surname is more used—unless a distinction needs to be made between people with the same surname; the idioms "on a first-name basis" and "being on first-name terms" refer to the familiarity inherent in addressing someone by their given name. By contrast, a surname, inherited, is shared with other members of one's immediate family. Regnal names and religious or monastic names are special given names bestowed upon someone receiving a crown or entering a religious order; such a person typically becomes known chiefly by that name.
The order given name – family name known as the Western order, is used throughout most European countries and in countries that have cultures predominantly influenced by European culture, including North and South America. The order family name – given name known as the Eastern order, is used in East Asia, as well as in Southern and North-Eastern parts of India, in Hungary; this order is common in Austria and Bavaria, in France, Belgium and Italy because of the influence of bureaucracy, which puts the family name before the given name. In China and Korea, part of the given name may be shared among all members of a given generation within a family and extended family or families, in order to differentiate those generations from other generations; the order given name – father's family name – mother's family name is used in Spanish-speaking countries to acknowledge the families of both parents. Today the order can be changed in Spain and Uruguay using given name – mother's family name – father's family name.
The order given name – mother's family name – father's family name is used in Portuguese-speaking countries to acknowledge the families of both parents. In many Western cultures, people have more than one given name. One of those, not the first in succession might be used as the name which that person goes by, such as in the cases of John Edgar Hoover and Mary Barbara Hamilton Cartland. A child's given name or names are chosen by the parents soon after birth. If a name is not assigned at birth, one may be given at a naming ceremony, with family and friends in attendance. In most jurisdictions, a child's name at birth is a matter of public record, inscribed on a birth certificate, or its equivalent. In western cultures, people retain the same given name throughout their lives. However, in some cases these names may be changed by repute. People may change their names when immigrating from one country to another with different naming conventions. In certain jurisdictions, a government-appointed registrar of births may refuse to register a name that may cause a child harm, considered offensive or which are deemed impractical.
In France, the agency can refer the case to a local judge. Some jurisdictions, such as Sweden, restrict the spelling of names. Parents may choose a name because of its meaning; this may be a personal or familial meaning, such as giving a child the name of an admired person, or it may be an example of nominative determinism, in which the parents give the child a name that they believe will be lucky or favourable for the child. Given names most derive from the following categories: Aspirational personal traits. For example, the name Clement means "merciful". English examples include Faith and August. Occupations, for example George means "earth-worker", i.e. "farmer". Circumstances of birth, for example Thomas meaning "twin" or the Latin name Quintus, traditionally given to the fifth male child. Objects, for example Peter means "rock" and Edgar means "rich spear". Physical characteristics, for example Calvin means "bald". Variations on another name to change the sex of the name or to translate from another language.
Surnames, for example Winston and Ross. Such names can honour other branches of a family, where the surname would not otherwise be passed down. Places, for example Brittany and Lorraine. Time of birth, for example day of the week, as in Kofi Annan, whose given name means "born on Friday", or the holiday on which one was born, for example, the name Natalie meaning "born on Christmas day" in Latin. Tuesday, May, or June. Combination of the above, for example the Armenian name Sirvart means "love rose". In many cultures, given names are reused to commemorate ancestors or those who are admired, resulting in a limited repertoire of names that sometimes vary by orthography; the most familiar example of this, to Western readers, is the use of Biblical and saints' names in most of the Christian countries (with Ethiopia, in which names were ideals or abstractions
A nobiliary particle is used in a surname or family name in many Western cultures to signal the nobility of a family. The particle used varies depending on the country and period of time. However, in some languages the nobiliary particle is the same as a regular prepositional particle, used in the creation of many surnames. In some countries, it became customary to distinguish the nobiliary particle from the regular one by a different spelling, although in other countries these conventions did not arise resulting in ambiguity; the nobiliary particle can be omitted in everyday speech or certain contexts. In Denmark and Norway, there is a distinction between nobiliary particles in family names and prepositions denoting an individual person's place of residence. Nobiliary particles like af, de are integrated parts of family names; the use of particles was not a particular privilege for the nobility. On the other hand, particles were exclusively used by and associated with them. In the late 17th and 18th centuries, a person would receive a particle along with his or her old or new family name when ennobled.
Examples are families like von Munthe af Morgenstierne. Otherwise, particles would arrive together with immigrants. Examples are families like von Ahnen. Prominent non-noble families having used particles are von Cappelen, von der Lippe, de Créqui dit la Roche; the preposition til is placed behind a person's full name in order to denote his or her place of residence, for example Sigurd Jonsson til Sudreim. In France the particle de precedes a nom de terre in many families of the French nobility. A few do not have this particle; the particle can be du, d', or des. In French, de indicates a link between the land and a person -- either peasant. Never in French history was this particle proof of nobility; the nobleman was always designated an escuyer or, better, a chevalier. Only knights could be designated by the spoken style monseigneur or messire, as, for example, "monseigneur Bertrand du Guesclin, chevalier". So, in fact and by convention, surnames with the nonnoble use of the particle de are spelled as a single word, though many such conserved the de as a separate word.
From the sixteenth century, surnames among the French nobility have been composed of a combination of patronymic names, titles, or noms de terres joined by the preposition de, as in "Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord". The use of this particle began to be an essential appearance of nobility. But, after the end of the kingdom of France, the use of de has not invariably evidenced nobility, as shown in Valéry Giscard d'Estaing's grandfather's change of name in the early twentieth century. Earlier in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries many middle-class families adopted the particle without being ennobled. In Germany and Austria, von or zu precedes the surname of a noble family. If it is justified, they can be used together: the present ruler of Liechtenstein, for example, is Johannes Adam Ferdinand Alois Josef Maria Marko d'Aviano Pius von und zu Liechtenstein; as in France and Spain, not all noble families use a nobiliary particle. The names of the most ancient nobility, the Uradel, but names of some old untitled nobility do not contain the particle von or zu, such as Grote, Knigge or Vincke.
Conversely, the prefix von occurs, in the names of 200 to 300 non-noble families, much like van in the Netherlands. In northwestern Germany and in German-speaking Switzerland, von is a frequent element in non-noble surnames. In Austria and Bavaria, non-noble surnames containing von were altered by compounding it to the main surname element in the 19th century, such as von Werden → Vonwerden. Although Hungary was part of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, Hungarian nobility used a different particle, de, which had no meaning in Hungarian and was borrowed from French. In Portugal there are not, never were, any special naming conventions to show nobility. Personal titles like Dom may be used by the clergy, for instance, before their Christian name, not implying nobility, except if one knows the name as belong to a commoner. Furthermore, Portuguese nobility is traditionally recognised just to people being born to four noble quarters: both grandfathers and both grandmothers must have been noble for their grandson or granddaughter to be considered a noble at birth, independently of any noble name, with or without particle.
Portuguese surnames do not indicate nobility, as the same surnames exist in noble and non-noble families. The restriction to nobility and the clergy of bearing arms at the beginning of the 16th century, when king Manuel I extinguished the previous bourgeoisie armorial shows someone to be noble i