Skip to main content

Righting my name

According to Mr Yahoo a currant is a specific kind of berry. So therefore when people south of the border describe a fruit as a "blackberry", we might, as a tease, ask "which one?". I suspect we all know they really mean a bramble.

So therefore a blackcurrant is a black berry but not a blackberry. But is a blackcurrant the only black currant?

The whole issue of fruits and their naming is a complex one. There won't be a week in our household without a tomato on the table. But most people would suggest that's a vegetable. And indeed the US Supreme Court ruled in 1893 that it is. Biologists continue to hold the view that it's a fruit. As are cucumbers, marrows and many other "vegetables".

The 1893 decision is a perfect example of imperfect law.

But it doesn't stand alone.

Four years later Indiana considered a "Pi Bill" at the behest of Taylor Record. This Bill sought to express in law the squaring of the circle and hence, by implication, define Pi as a Rational Number. That's our everyday, plain vanilla numbers, with which we are all familiar. Pi is not a Rational Number. Neither is it an Imaginary Number which is a number derived by multiplying a Rational Number by the square root of minus one. No, it is a Transcendental Number. They live in the cracks between our familiar numbers.

Confused? That's just fine. You will be in a substantial majority.

The bottom line is that the names we give to things can be a source of considerable confusion. A grapefruit may be a fruit but has never been near a grape in its genesis. A blackberry (English usage) is far from being the only black berry. A gooseberry was created without the intervention of any fowl.

For my part, confusion starts right with my name. If I go to the Scotland's People web site ( and put in my name, Stewart Stevenson, you will get 588 results. That's from 1855 up to about yesterday. It has databases of Scotland's Births, Marriages, Deaths, Valuation Rolls and much else. Examination of the detail will reveal that I do not appear on their list, despite my birth having been registered at the Haymarket Registry Office in Edinburgh in 1946.

Like nearly 20% of the population who have three or more forenames, I have three and Stewart is the third; too many computer systems are blind to the correct use of more complex names.

There is no legal maximum for the length of the name you can use to register a birth. In practice, Registers of Scotland, last time I asked, had computer systems that could accept surnames up to fifty characters long and had 200 characters for recording as many of these as would fit. If your choice exceeds these limits, can't imagine many would, I have been told that they have a manual backup system.

But the web site has much stricter limits for name lengths. My "Stewart" gets abbreviated to "S". Hence the computer search fails to find me.

But that's far from the only system that lets down the 20% of "three or morers" like me.

HMRC refuses to send a tax return with my proper name on it. And given that the missing forename is the one by which I am commonly known, I periodically contemplate asserting that there is no one of the name they choose to use, at my address. But the tax ladies and gentleman have previously pointed out to me that I retain liability to pay even if I am sent no form at all. I posted my 2019-20 form off recently.

Late update: Three minutes after writing the above, our postie arrived with HMRC's response to my submission. And, yes, I owe them money - pretty much what I calculated.

For a number of years, Parliament employed a contractor who could only put up to two initials on our payslips. I sent them back as not being for me. Eventually, they stopped sending them. Didn't matter much as they kept on making the payments. The new payroll system is much better.

My bank can get my name correct on my debit cards but only accommodate two initials on my MasterCard.

DVLA get it half right by shortening my last forename to an initial. But in calculating my licence identity code, they ignore the last bit of my name.

The Passport Office is much more forgiving and has always got my name correct. But their error is to use the English rather than the Scottish coat of arms on the cover. Nemo me impune lacessit.

The Stuart dynasty also suffered, but not at the hands of cognomen terrorists, rather at the absence of a "w" in the French alphabet. When I worked at Bank of Scotland, the strict name was The Governor and Company of Adventurers of the Bank of Scotland - you can see why it was shortened, we owned 10% of Banque Worms in France. I always imagined Worms was a place, but I now know it was the surname of the founder. He was not French.

The point is that when Mary of Guise took her infant daughter, Mary Stewart - later Mary Queen of Scots, to France for safety, they had to dispense with the "w" and she became Mary Stuart. So if your name is spelt Stuart, you are or aspire to, royalty. My spelling is from a clan the many of whom are, and were, travelling folk.

In my family, my mother and father and my sister, all have three forenames. Ony brother escaped with two. But say "Stewart" at a family gathering and very many heads will come up. My siblings and I all have it.

Phonetically it can be misheard and occasionally misread. For quite a long time my name was clearly next to Struan Stevenson MEP's name in many a journalist's list of telephone numbers on their phone. On more than one occasion, it was only halfway through an interview that the caller twigged that he was talking to Stewart not Struan. Apparently, the former MEP had exactly the same experience in reverse.

But if we want to find spelling diversity within a family, it is to my spouse's Gemlo ancestors from Arbroath we need to go. I have found thirteen spellings so far. Even to the extent of one death certificate spelling the deceased's surname one way, the father's name another and the son who was registering the death a third way.

I haven't bought a copy of the Economist since they had "Skintland" on the cover.

And I will continue to ask for all three of my forenames to be on anything that purports to record my name.

I may explain on another occasion why I initial things as "ZS".


Popular posts from this blog

Russia et al

After yesterday's publication of a Westminster report into foreign state meddling in UK democratic decisions, my mind turns to the issue of leadership. Perhaps the fundamental failing identified, and I am assuming that the Parliamentary Committee had access to information that underpinned their conclusions but which is not necessarily shared with us, lay with the Security Service (MI5) and the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6).

The first thing on MI6's web pages is the statement that "We work overseas to help make the UK a safer and more prosperous place". There is much worth a read ( but what stands out is their statement that "Everything we do is tasked and authorised by senior government ministers".

Buried at little deeper on MI5's web site ( it says, "we formulate our own set of plans and priorities, which the Home Secretary approves."

But there is also GCHQ who on its web site (https://www.gchq.…


While I am pretty confident that we are far from being on a majority in our household, I am also sure that we are not unduly exceptional. We sit down to lunch each day at 1230 so that we can simultaneously masticate and educate. The first refuelling the body. The latter refuelling the intellect.

And the source of brain food? The daily press conference on the pandemic from the Government. The traditional being from fridge and food cupboard.

It's a bit like the family sitting around the radio 75 plus years ago to hear news of the battles against the nazis. Today is remarkably similar. Not a single front of battle but many. Not just fought by those on the front line, but supported by the actions of those on the home front.

Even more than then, the home front is a critical part of the front line. Each citizen's actions, or inaction, directly contributing to or hindering our ability to eliminate COVID-19 from our country.

For me, with an interest in DNA as a tool in my family histo…

Tome for a new keybiard

Today is the one hundred and eighth daily episode of my reports from an 8th decader's lockdown.

For a mathematician, 108 is a "good" number. Having three digits just locks into parts of the brain that tune into threes. And at a glance, it is a number that is divisible by three. Why, at a glance? Because if you add up the digits one, zero and eight, the answer is nine. Any number whose digits add up to a number that divides by three is itself divisible by three.

If after the first add, you have answer bigger than nine, add the digits together and keep doing that until you have a single digit. This is a digit sum.

If the final digit is a nine, then the original number will be divisible by three and by nine. If it's a six, then it's divisible by two and by three. And finally, if it's a three, then it is an odd number which is divisible by three.

I am far from sure, but my memory is trying to persuade me that I was taught this at school. I am certain about the ru…