Names and Natures.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XL, Issue 1, 4 January 1908, Page 51

Names and Natures.

What’s in a name? Everything, says M. de Rochetal, who has invented onomatology. His peculiarity (says the Paris correspondent of the “Daily Telegraph”) is that he pays no attention to the history or etymology of surnames, as any ordinary scholar without originality might do, but considers only Christian names. He has been at work on these for 20 years. The results of his researches are positive, though he does not explain by what scientific process he reached them. He merely lays down the law. All Marys are weak, melancholy, and unlucky; Peters are strong and constant; Pauls are active, lively, and eloquent; but impulsive; Georges, “like the dragon-slayer,” whom the onomatologist seems to have known well, are all big, fine men, and usually think a good deal of themselves; a Louis is exceedingly sensitive and irritable; but active and intelligent; Leons are gentle and warm-hearted, and would be superior men if they had stronger characters; Henry is the ideal name; and Henrys have deep, passionate hearts, and wonderful energy, but are a trifle irritable; Johns are strong, passionate, full of go, and well armed for the battle of life; but they are not always easy to get on with. Is this a dig at John Bull? Among women other than Marys, Helens are, as a rule, like Helen of Troy, pretty, but fickle; Susans a»3 not much more to be relied upon; Juliets are constant in love or hatted; whil6 Louisas are nice girls, but without force of character,- and “want looking after”; Elizabeths are dreiuriy and quiet natures, and are'often unhappy; Marthas are good-hearted, but pgnacious as foes; and as for Alices, beware of them, f<" they are dangerously passionate, and “have a reprehensible love of independence.” They are also subject to fits of depression—perhaps 1 when not allowed to have their own way.