UK surname
A descriptive surname referring to someone from a low-lying area or who lived in a valley.
In the 1881 census there were 86 people recorded with the Lows surname, ranking it #21,449 among surnames in the records. By 2016, the modern count was 6, ranked #38,110, down from #21,449 in 1881.
The strongest historical links point to Lanchester (Collierley, Kyo, Billingside, Medomsley, Ebchchester, Benfieldside, Heelyfield, Conside, Durham St Oswald and Wigan. In the modern distribution records, the strongest local clusters include No data.
Across the surname records, the highest recorded count for Lows is 266 in 1861. Compared with 1881, the name has fallen by 93.0%.
1881 census count
86
Ranked #21,449
Modern count
6
2016, ranked #38,110
Peak year
1861
266 bearers
Map years
1
1861 to 1861
Key insights
Map
Back to topThe map shows where the Lows surname is concentrated in each census or modern distribution year. Darker areas mean a stronger local concentration.
Distribution map
Lows surname density by area, 1861 census.
Timeline
Back to topThe table below tracks recorded surname counts and rank from the 19th-century census years through the modern adult-register period.
| Year | Period | Count | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1851 | historical | 70 | #21,020 |
| 1861 | historical | 266 | #9,318 |
| 1881 | historical | 86 | #21,449 |
| 1891 | historical | 93 | #24,965 |
| 1901 | historical | 41 | #29,602 |
| 1911 | historical | 40 | #28,913 |
| 1997 | modern | 4 | #38,094 |
| 1998 | modern | 2 | #38,550 |
| 2004 | modern | 2 | #38,464 |
| 2005 | modern | 1 | #38,814 |
| 2006 | modern | 2 | #38,590 |
| 2007 | modern | 3 | #38,372 |
| 2008 | modern | 3 | #38,396 |
| 2009 | modern | 4 | #38,287 |
| 2010 | modern | 4 | #38,371 |
| 2011 | modern | 4 | #38,338 |
| 2012 | modern | 3 | #38,530 |
| 2013 | modern | 4 | #38,359 |
| 2014 | modern | 4 | #38,376 |
| 2015 | modern | 5 | #38,221 |
| 2016 | modern | 6 | #38,110 |
Geography
Back to topHistorical parish links are strongest around Lanchester (Collierley, Kyo, Billingside, Medomsley, Ebchchester, Benfieldside, Heelyfield, Conside, Durham St Oswald, Wigan, Liverpool and Tynemouth. These are the places where the surname stands out most clearly in the older records.
The modern local-area list points to No data. Treat these as concentration signals, not proof that every family line began there.
| Rank | Parish | Area |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lanchester (Collierley, Kyo, Billingside, Medomsley, Ebchchester, Benfieldside, Heelyfield, Conside | Durham |
| 2 | Durham St Oswald | Durham |
| 3 | Wigan | Lancashire |
| 4 | Liverpool | Lancashire |
| 5 | Tynemouth | Northumberland |
| Rank | Area | District |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | No data | No data |
Forenames
Back to topThese lists show first names that appear often with the Lows surname in historical and recent records.
Recent female names
Recent male names
Modern profile
Back to topModern surname records can be compared with neighbourhood classifications. For Lows, this points to the kinds of places where the surname is most concentrated today.
These neighbourhood labels describe areas, not individual people. They are useful because surnames often cluster through family history, migration, housing patterns and local work. A surname can be strongest in one type of neighbourhood even when people with that name live across the country.
The UK classification gives the national picture. The London classification is more specific to the capital, where housing, age profile, tenure and population mix can look quite different from the rest of the UK.
UK neighbourhood type
Supergroup
No data
Group
No data
Nationally, the Lows surname is most associated with neighbourhoods classed as No data, within No data. This does not mean every Lows household fits that profile, but it gives a useful signal about where the modern surname distribution is strongest.
London neighbourhood type
Supergroup
No data
Group
No data
Within London, Lows is most associated with areas classed as No data, part of No data. This gives the surname a London-specific profile rather than forcing the capital into the same pattern as the rest of the country.
Broadband speed
The modern neighbourhood pattern for Lows is most associated with a typical fixed broadband download band of No data.
Area snapshot
This describes the area pattern most associated with Lows, not the ethnicity of every person with the surname.
Origin
Back to topThe surname LOWS has its origins in England and can be traced back to the 14th century. It is believed to have derived from the Old English word "low," which referred to a small hill or mound. Those who lived near such geographical features may have adopted the name as a way to identify their place of residence.
One of the earliest recorded instances of the name can be found in the Hundredorum Rolls of 1273, where a Richard de la Lowe is mentioned. This reference suggests that the name may have initially been spelled with an additional "e" at the end.
During the Middle Ages, the LOWS surname was particularly prevalent in the counties of Derbyshire and Staffordshire, where several small villages and hamlets bore names like Low Hill, Low Meadow, and Low Farm. These place names likely influenced the development and spread of the LOWS surname in the surrounding areas.
In the late 16th century, a notable figure bearing the name was William LOWS, a merchant and landowner from Warwickshire. Born in 1568, he was known for his successful trading ventures and philanthropic efforts within his local community.
The LOWS name also has connections to the literary world. John LOWS, a poet and playwright from Yorkshire, lived from 1671 to 1738. Although his works were not widely recognized during his lifetime, some of his plays were performed in London theaters.
Another historical figure of note was Sir Thomas LOWS, a military officer who served in the British Army during the Napoleonic Wars. Born in 1772 in Gloucestershire, he participated in several major battles, including the Battle of Waterloo in 1815.
During the 19th century, the LOWS surname gained prominence in the field of education. George LOWS (1810-1884), a renowned scholar and educator, was the headmaster of a prestigious school in Liverpool for over 30 years.
Throughout its history, the LOWS surname has been associated with various occupations and professions, from merchants and landowners to poets and military officers. Although its origins can be traced back to the rural landscapes of medieval England, the name has since spread across the globe, carrying with it a rich legacy of diversity and achievement.
Sourced from namecensus.com.
1881 census detail
Back to topThese tables use 1881 census entries for people recorded with the Lows surname. Use the location tables for concentration, then the name and occupation tables for the people behind the surname.
Total is the county count. Frequency and index adjust for local population size, so they are better concentration signals. Durham leads with 27 Lows' recorded in 1881 and an index of 10.82x.
| County | Total | Index |
|---|---|---|
| Durham | 27 | 10.82x |
| Northumberland | 18 | 14.42x |
| Middlesex | 11 | 1.31x |
| Lancashire | 9 | 0.90x |
| Cumberland | 7 | 9.69x |
| Yorkshire | 5 | 0.60x |
| Angus | 3 | 3.86x |
| Cambridgeshire | 1 | 1.88x |
| Derbyshire | 1 | 0.76x |
| Gloucestershire | 1 | 0.61x |
| Nottinghamshire | 1 | 0.88x |
| Staffordshire | 1 | 0.35x |
| Surrey | 1 | 0.24x |
Districts give a more local view than counties. Total shows raw records, while frequency and index show local concentration. Crossgate in Durham leads with 9 Lows' recorded in 1881 and an index of 825.69x.
| Place | Total | Index |
|---|---|---|
| Crossgate | 9 | 825.69x |
| Didsbury | 8 | 606.06x |
| Edmondsley | 8 | 2962.96x |
| Tynemouth | 8 | 119.76x |
| Bishopwearmouth | 7 | 32.68x |
| Skelton In Guisbrough | 5 | 222.22x |
| Wallsend | 5 | 126.26x |
| Kinnel | 3 | 1500.00x |
| North South Gosforth | 3 | 1875.00x |
| Collierley | 2 | 180.18x |
| Hackney London | 2 | 4.25x |
| Holme St Cuthbert | 2 | 952.38x |
| Newcastle On Tyne All Sts | 2 | 26.85x |
| Penrith | 2 | 74.91x |
| Poplar London | 2 | 12.63x |
| Allestree | 1 | 588.24x |
| Bromley London | 1 | 5.42x |
| Cleator | 1 | 33.22x |
| Edgware | 1 | 434.78x |
| Hampton London | 1 | 72.46x |
| Healeyfield | 1 | 1000.00x |
| Kirkdale | 1 | 5.97x |
| March | 1 | 56.18x |
| Moreton In Marsh | 1 | 243.90x |
| Oxted | 1 | 204.08x |
| Paddington London | 1 | 3.24x |
| Radford | 1 | 17.42x |
| St Andrew Holborn London | 1 | 27.55x |
| St Cuthbert W O Upperby | 1 | 500.00x |
| St George Bloomsbury | 1 | 20.79x |
| St George Hanover Square | 1 | 6.77x |
| Tallentire | 1 | 1666.67x |
| Wolverhampton | 1 | 4.59x |
These are the female first names most often recorded with the Lows surname in 1881. Names are not merged, so initials, variant spellings and transcription quirks can appear as separate rows.
These are the male first names most often recorded with the Lows surname in 1881. Names are not merged, so initials, variant spellings and transcription quirks can appear as separate rows.
FAQ
In 1881, 86 people were recorded with the Lows surname. That placed it at #21,449 in the surname rankings for that year.
The latest modern count shown here is 6 in 2016. That gives Lows a modern rank of #38,110.
A descriptive surname referring to someone from a low-lying area or who lived in a valley.
The map shows local surname concentration for the selected year. Darker areas have a stronger concentration of Lows bearers relative to the surrounding population.
The historical counts come from census surname records. The modern counts and neighbourhood summaries come from later surname distribution records. Counts are recorded bearers in those records, not a live estimate of everyone with the name today.