Etrusco-romano
Regular Member
Commoners did not use the three nomina, only nobles did, if you find examples of commoners with three nomina then they were Roman officials who had priviledges beyond that of a mere freeman.
The cognomen for a commoner was patronymic, you are not wrong when you say this is a surname, I am emphasizing two things you do not seem to know:
1. Patronymics never stayed the same as the fathers changed - This means the patronymic was not passed down for very long!
2. Patronymics have limitations - To claim a patronym as a Roman surname is pointless ... it changed the following generation.
The idea of a surname is when a patronym is passed down despite the name of the following paternal praenomen being different. This is what I mean when I say strincly speaking there were NO Roman surnames! The patronymic as a surname was established after the Roman period. Your professors need to give you half your tuition back, they only taught you half the story.
Language barrier, definitely a problem. It also helps when we know the difference between a constant and a differential.
As we say here in Italy: "to each his own!"; better if a greek care about greek history and italian care about italian history.
Anyway, go di Professor Cavalli-Sforza and say to him that the history lessons of "studio della cognomistica applicata alla Storia romana: il cognome è nel DNA" it was wrong becouse romans don't have surname, and tell to him that my history preparation is half