Ballantine (surname)

Ballantine is a surname of Scottish Gaelic origin. It is first found in Lanarkshire, where the family had been settled since ancient times. The name has also been variously spelled Ballantyne, Bannatyne, Ballanden.

Origin of the name

In his book The Clans, Septs, and Regiments of the Scottish Highlands (1908), Sir Thomas Innes Learney states that the original family name was Bannatyne, and was a sept associated with both Clan Campbell and Clan Stuart of Bute. In the Fourth Edition (1952) of that book, the Bannatyne association with Clan Campbell is stated to have begun in 1538, formalized in a bond signed May 10, 1547, in which the Chief of the MacAmelynes (aka Bannatynes) and Sir John Stuart, ancestor of the Marquis of Bute, engaged to stand by and support each other against all persons except the King and the Earl of Argyll, the latter reservation made so that the Chief of the Bannatynes couldfulfill the conditions of a bond of manrent give to the Early of Argyll, dated April 14, 1538.

The etymology, given in William Arthur’s An Etymological Dictionary of Family and Christian Names with an Essay on their Derivation and Import (1857), derives the name from Bal, the name of a deity, and teine, meaning fire, and relating to a place where Belenus, or Bal, was worshiped by the Celts.[1]

Notable people

gollark: I mean, it's better than C and stuff, and I wouldn't mind writing simple apps in it.
gollark: Speaking specifically about the error handling, it may be "simple", but it's only "simple" in the sense of "the compiler writers do less work". It's very easy to mess it up by forgetting the useless boilerplate line somewhere, or something like that.
gollark: Speaking more generally than the type system, Go is just really... anti-abstraction... with, well, the gimped type system, lack of much metaprogramming support, and weird special cases, and poor error handling.
gollark: - They may be working on them, but they initially claimed that they weren't necessary and they don't exist now. Also, I don't trust them to not do them wrong.- Ooookay then- Well, generics, for one: they *kind of exist* in that you can have generic maps, channels, slices, and arrays, but not anything else. Also this (https://fasterthanli.me/blog/2020/i-want-off-mr-golangs-wild-ride/), which is mostly about the file handling not being good since it tries to map on concepts which don't fit. Also channels having weird special syntax. Also `for` and `range` and `new` and `make` basically just being magic stuff which do whatever the compiler writers wanted with no consistency- see above- Because there's no generic number/comparable thing type. You would need to use `interface{}` or write a new function (with identical code) for every type you wanted to compare- You can change a signature somewhere and won't be alerted, but something else will break because the interface is no longer implemented- They are byte sequences. https://blog.golang.org/strings.- It's not. You need to put `if err != nil { return err }` everywhere.
gollark: Oh, and the error handling is terrible and it's kind of the type system's fault.

References

  1. "Ballantyne FYI". Archived from the original on 23 October 2008. Retrieved 2008-11-05.

See also


This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.