Nor Jacke of Dover, that grand jury Jacke, Nor Jack-sauce, the worst knave amongst the pack, But of the Jacke of Jackes, great Jack-a-Lent, To write his worthy acts is my intent.[32] Altogether, we may claim for ‘John’ a prominent, if not distinguished, position in the annals of English nomenclature. Nor must we forget ‘Joan,’ until Tudor days the general form of the present ‘Jane.’ Then ‘some of the better and nicer sort,’ as Camden saith, ‘misliking the former, turned it into “Jane”;’ and in testimony of this he adds that ‘Jane’ is never found in older records. This is strictly true. There can be little doubt that when the fair queen of Henry VIII. gave distinction to the name it became a courtly fashion to give it a different form from that borne by the multitude, and thus ‘Jane’ arose. Thus ‘Joan’ was left, as Miss Yonge says, ‘to the cottage and the kitchen;’ and there, indeed, it lingered on for a long period.[33] Of many another could Shakespeare have sung:— Then nightly sings the staring owl, To-who. To-whit, to-who, a merry note, While greasy Joan doth keel the pot. Previously to this, anyway, both queens and princesses had been content with ‘Joan.’ I doubt not, with regard to several of the surnames above-mentioned, ‘John’ must, if the truth be told, share the honours of origination with ‘Joan;’ nor do I think ‘Jennison’ peculiar to the latter. What with ‘John’ and ‘Jean’ for the masculine, and ‘Joan’ and ‘Jenny’ for the feminine, I do not see how the two could possibly escape confusion. ‘Jones’ and ‘Joanes,’ and ‘Jane’ and ‘Jayne,’ to say nothing of ‘Jennings,’ seem as like hereditary from the one as the other.[34] Two feminines from ‘Jack,’ viz. ‘Jacquetta’ and ‘Jacqueline,’ were not unknown in England; ‘Jacquetta Knokyn’ (AA 3), ‘Jackett Toser’ (Z). The latter was the more common, and bequeathed us a surname ‘Jacklin,’ which still exists. It is found on an old bell:— This bell was broke and cast againe, as plainly doth appeare, John Draper made me in 1618, wich tyme churchwardens were, Edward Dixson for the one, who stood close to his tacklin, And he that was his partner there was Alexander Jacklin. (_Book of Days_, i. 303.) The peasant’s leather jerkin, corresponding to the more lordly coat of mail, was a _jack_ whence the diminutive _jacket_. The more warlike dress gave rise to the name of ‘Jackman,’ of which more anon.