The history of human thought or simple commitment is plagued and sometimes supported, in terms of rational reasoning, by thinkers or historians who, either they, or outside analysts, chose for the identification of illustrious people, more than their personal names, those of the towns where they were born or where they settled.

Such is the case, in the early days, of geometricians like Thales of Miletus, poets like Sappho of Lesbos and, above all, philosophers like Zeno of Elea. And then, already at different times, many other cases such as those of the musician Guido of Arezzo, the physicist Marsilio of Inghem, the writer Adam of Bremen, the physician Filipo of Cos, the theologian Juan of Fidanza, the artist Leonardo da Vinci, the mathematicians Pappo of Alexandria and Marino of Neapolis, the chronologist Victorio of Aquitaine, or the translator Gerardo of Cremona.

Although it is also true that there have been less specific professions such as the ambassador Giles of Verraccio, the builder Adam of Straunton, the soothsayer Alexandro of Abonutico, the theorist Lucas de Tuy, apart from those qualified as wise in the examples of

Victorio of Roven,
Eusoperio of Toulouse,
Hadrian of Africa
or
Theodore of Tarsus,
Characters all of them inextricably linked to the epic of knowledge.

But since it is not a question of specifying professions, let’s start with a list of personalities that illustrated the thinking in the centuries before our era.

Thus, we will have:
Pherecydes of Tyre
or
Diogenes of Apollonia,
Euclid of Megara
or
Eudoxus of Knidos,
Diogenes of Sinope
or
Hippodamus of Miletus,
Eudemus of Rhodes
or
Dicearchus of Messina,
Stilpo of Megara
or
Eubulides of Miletus.

Likewise, more than twenty centuries ago they were:

Demetrius of Falera,
Theodoret of Cyrus,
Menedemus of Eretria,
Zeno of Citio,
Lampsaco Metrodoro,
Philo of Megara,
Ariston of Chios
or
Narsífenes de Teo.
Later appeared
Straton of Lampsaco,
Protagoras of Abdera,
Austarch of Samos,
Menippus of Gadara,
Crates of Athens,
Bión of Boristenes,
Hipparchus of Samos,
Philo of Larisa,
Andronicus of Rhodes,
Antiochus of Ashkelon,
Philodemus of Gadara,
Nicholas of Damascus
and
Entering the Alexandrian dynasty,
Nicholas of Alexandria,
Ariston of Alexandria
Eudorus of Alexandria
and

Already in the first centuries of our era, we could also start with the same citizen peculiarity, so that we would have:

Philo of Alexandria,
Maximus of Alexandria
Hierocles of Alexandria,
Asdepiodotus of Alexandria
and some more.
Going back to those times, the names of:
Moderate of Gades,
Aaron of Gallis,
Abbon of Fleury,
Demonax of Cyprus,
Theon of Smyrna,
Nicomachus of Gerasa
and
Oinomao of Gadara.

But equally, it will be necessary to bear in mind:

Numenio of Apanea,
Lucian of Samosata,
Maximus of Tyre,
Bardesano of Edessa,
Alexander of Aphrodisias,
Diogenes of Oionanda
etc.
And to end the fifth century,
Eusebius of Caesarea,
Alexander of Licopolis,
Theodore of Asine,
Chrisanto of Sardis
and
Eunapius also from Sardis.

From what we have seen so far, this spontaneous identification practice, providing these two conclusive data, is at the same time a poetic gesture, even if it was involuntary.

After this time, the frequency decreases a lot, so much so that in the 7th and 8th centuries, hardly anyone is registered with the preposition of provenance, except in cases such as Isidore of Hispalis. Although we still have a multitude of examples such as:

Leontius of Byzantium,
Heiric D’Auxerre
and
Remigio also from Auxerre,
Gerbert of Aurillac,
Fulbert of Chartres,
Anselm of Laon,
and more.

But it is already between the twelfth and fourteenth centuries when an avalanche of names identified by their origin or also by the school or trend to which they belonged is launched, as are the cases in which the union of both names has become an axiom not always respected. Thus, we have:

William of Champeaux,
Adelard of Bath
and
Gilbert de la Forrée,
More immediately:
Bernard of Chartres
and
Thierry also of Chartres,
William of Conches,
Hugo of Saint-Victor,
William of Saint-Thierry
Or Robert de Melún,

all of which were followed in those days by:

Otto of Freising,
John of Salisbury,
Richard of Saint-Victor,
Adam of Balsham,
Clrebaud of Arras,
Petrus de Maricourt,
Alain de Lille
or
Isaac of Stella

But naturally, this long period XII-XIV does not end here; let’s see a brief selection of what is still missing:

Godfrey of Saint Victor,
Simon of Tournai,
Joachim of Fiore
Amalavico de Béne
And some more of which amuse us.

Although names with these characteristics are losing their presence, the continuous appearance of many of them in times that even approach the sixteenth century is still striking, reflected in the multitude of historical and philosophical collections consulted; What could be a mechanical data, becomes an essential deposit, to the point that often it is not the name of the place that is added, but rather the expression “the land of” is imposed to give value to the place.

So we find:

William of Auregne,
Alexander of Hales,
Vincent of Beauvais,
Roland of Cremona,
Thomas of York,
Aurique of Ghent
and
Ulrich of Strasbourg.

But continuing with other equally representative:

John of Dacia,
Thomas Aquinas,
Sigerius of Brabant,
Matthew of Acquasparta
Pietro d’Abano,
Nicholas of Autrecourt
and
John de Mirecourt.

Now, to conclude this century, add these notable names:

Nicole Oresme,
and
Peter de Candía,
Paul of Venice
Y
Gaetano dei Conti di Thiene,
Nicholas of Cusa
Y
George of Trebizond.

Let us pass, finally, to a brief reference to the 16th and 17th centuries, already in the decline of the fashion for the names that could be called territorial.

We have here:

Agrippa von Nettesheim,
Cardillo de Villalpando,
Herbert of Cherbury

And few more already in these times in which respect or recourse to places of origin seems to be obliviated, in a trend that today has almost disappeared in the name of a diffuse territoriality.

In many cases, it is impossible to remember the name of the person without having the place in mind… and vice versa.