Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Haywards

Expand Messages
  • Wayne G. Hammond
    ... should have pointed to Tolkien s own gloss in the Nomenclature , as indeed we do in our gloss for Hob Hayward (LR p. 998, our p. 655). Our note on p. 35
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 6, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      In regard to Fredrik and Pat's comments, our gloss:

      > "haywards -- The term _hayward_ originally referred to
      > one who protected the fences around lands enclosed for
      > growing hay (Old English _hegeweard_), later more
      > generally applied to one who prevents cattle from
      > breaking through into enclosed fields with growing
      > crops." (p. 35)

      should have pointed to Tolkien's own gloss in the "Nomenclature", as
      indeed we do in our gloss for "Hob Hayward" (LR p. 998, our p. 655).
      Our note on p. 35 was written early in the project, and forgotten 620
      pages later. Even early on, however, we knew that Hob Hayward would
      be coming along, with a name derived from an occupation, and so for
      our first note consulted the Oxford _Dictionary of English Surnames_
      by Reaney and Wilson, which says: "The original duties of the hayward
      seem to have been to protect the fences round the Lammas lands when
      enclosed for hay (Coulton), hence his name, OE _hegeweard_ 'guardian
      of the fence or hedge'." "Coulton" is nowhere identified by Reaney
      and Wilson (probably the writer on medieval history G.G. Coulton),
      and it may be that an element of folk etymology is present.

      Wayne and Christina
    • F. Strÿfffff6m
      ... The text of the Guide is also printed in the _Reader s Companion_ itself. [The page reference in Beregond s post was added by your humble moderator, who
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 6, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Beregond wrote:

        > See Tolkien's _Guide to the Names_, Persons,
        > _Hayward_: "The word is derived from _hay_
        > 'fence' (_not_ 'grass') + _ward_ 'guard'."
        > (TC:168)

        The text of the "Guide" is also printed in the
        _Reader's Companion_ itself.

        [The page reference in Beregond's post was added
        by your humble moderator, who decided to cite the
        _Tolkien Compass_ edition as currently the most
        familiar. The version in _Reader's Companion_ differs
        from this in that "it has been newly transcribed from
        the professional typescript as corrected by Tolkien, with
        reference also to an earlier version in manuscript and
        typescript" (RC:751). I have no doubt that in the future
        the version in the RC will become the standard text of
        reference for Tolkienian linguistics. -- PHW]

        I might point out a possible misprint in this context.
        On p. 655, entry for Hob Hayward, there is a reference
        to a "note for p. 107". However, Hob Hayward is not
        mentioned in the notes for page 107 (although the Hay
        Gate is, as correctly noted in the next entry on page
        655 in the _Reader's Companion_). Possibly the
        reference should read "(See also note for p. 10.)",
        referring to the note for "haywards"?

        Speaking of possible errors in the _Reader's
        Companion_, Magnus Åberg, whose "Analysis of Khuzdul"
        was read at the Omentielva Minya, made an interesting
        observation regarding the following text on page 269:

        "_Azan_ [in _Azanulbizar_] was probably a plural of
        _uzu_ 'dimness, shadow' (cf. _Khazad_ - _Khuzd_)".

        Magnus points out that *_'uzn_ as the singular
        of _'azan_ would fit the pattern of _khuzd_ - _khazad_
        better than _uzu_ does. Could it be that the word was
        misread in the manuscript of the _Nomenclature_?

        Kind regards,
        /Fredrik Ström
      • Wayne G. Hammond
        ... No, I don t think so. Too many details have passed by now to be sure, but I think that we meant to point to the mention of the Hay Gate. If we had meant
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 6, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Fredrik wrote:

          > I might point out a possible misprint in this context.
          > On p. 655, entry for Hob Hayward, there is a reference
          > to a "note for p. 107". However, Hob Hayward is not
          > mentioned in the notes for page 107 (although the Hay
          > Gate is, as correctly noted in the next entry on page
          > 655 in the _Reader's Companion_). Possibly the
          > reference should read "(See also note for p. 10.)",
          > referring to the note for "haywards"?

          No, I don't think so. Too many details have passed by now to be sure,
          but I think that we meant to point to the mention of the Hay Gate. If
          we had meant the note for p. 10 we would have picked up on the
          duplication of comments on _hayward_ and dealt with it.

          > Magnus points out that *_'uzn_ as the singular
          > of _'azan_ would fit the pattern of _khuzd_ - _khazad_
          > better than _uzu_ does. Could it be that the word was
          > misread in the manuscript of the _Nomenclature_?

          Yes, it was. It should be _uzn_.

          Wayne
        • F. Str�
          On p. 580 in _The Lord of the Rings: A Reader s Companion_, Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull writes: _athelas_ in the noble tongue [...] In the following
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 13, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            On p. 580 in _The Lord of the Rings: A Reader's
            Companion_, Wayne Hammond and Christina Scull writes:
            "_athelas_ in the noble tongue [...] In the following
            paragraph Aragorn gives the corresponding name of the
            plant in Quenya, _asea aranion_ 'leaf of kings'."

            The Sindarin name is discussed on p. 183:
            "Athelas [...] The first element is problematic;
            according to Arden R. Smith, an unpublished etymology
            connects it with Quenya _asea_, as in _asea aranion_
            'kingsfoil' (but if so, _athelas_ = 'leaf-leaf')."

            The translation 'leaf of kings' does not seem to be
            attested. The only translation of _asea_ that I know
            of is the one quoted by William C. Hicklin on the
            art.fan.tolkien newsgroup:
            <http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books.tolkien/browse_thread/thread/34fc7f494c7ff868/3fad9c3c879f5a2c?lnk=st&q=athelas+hicklin&rnum=1&hl=en#3fad9c3c879f5a2c>

            "Christopher Tolkien and I have had an ongoing discussion about the origins of
            this word. It plainly contains -las 'leaf'. It is possible (but entirely
            speculative) that what Tolkien had in mind at that time (1938-39) was the Old
            English word aethele 'noble, royal.' This would translate 'kingsfoil,' near
            enough. At any rate, a very late note (1970 or later) says that Asea (cf.
            Aragorn, 'asea aranion') was the name in Quenya, regularly adapted and
            compounded with -las in Sindarin. The plant was known to the medical
            loremasters of the Noldor. The root is *ATHAYA, 'helpful, kindly,
            beneficial.' "

            From this it would seem that _asea_ is in fact an
            adjective (perhaps substantivized) meaning *'beneficial'
            and that the 'leaf'(or 'foil') part is understood in the
            Quenya name:_asea [?lasse] aranion_, 'the beneficial
            (leaf) of kings'. But perhaps there are other explanations
            as well.

            /Fredrik
          • Arden R. Smith
            ... Strictly speaking, that s true. It s really just an extrapolation, based on the gloss of _athelas_ as kingsfoil and the transparent meaning of _aranion_
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 13, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              On Nov 13, 2005, at 3:20 PM, F. Ström wrote:

              > The translation 'leaf of kings' does not seem to be
              > attested.

              Strictly speaking, that's true. It's really just an extrapolation,
              based on the gloss of _athelas_ as 'kingsfoil' and the transparent
              meaning of _aranion_ 'of kings'.

              > "Christopher Tolkien and I have had an ongoing discussion about the
              > origins of this word. It plainly contains -las 'leaf'. It is possible
              > (but entirely speculative) that what Tolkien had in mind at that time
              > (1938-39) was the Old English word aethele 'noble, royal.' This
              > would translate 'kingsfoil,' near enough. At any rate, a very late
              > note (1970 or later) says that Asea (cf. Aragorn, 'asea aranion') was
              > the name in Quenya, regularly adapted and compounded with -las
              > in Sindarin. The plant was known to the medical loremasters of the
              > Noldor. The root is *ATHAYA, 'helpful, kindly, beneficial.' "

              Interesting. I was unaware of this. The unpublished etymology that I
              cited derives _athelas_ and _asea_ from a similar form (though spelling
              TH with thorn), but unfortunately leaves it unglossed. This etymology,
              incidentally, is considerably earlier than that mentioned by Bill
              Hicklin, dating from sometime between the publication of the first
              edition (1954-55) and the publication of the second edition (1965).

              ***************************************************
              Arden R. Smith erilaz@...

              Perilme metto aimaktur perperienta.
              --Elvish proverb

              ***************************************************
            • F. Ström
              ...
              Message 6 of 11 , Nov 14, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                --- "F. Ström" <frestro@...> skrev:
                > The translation 'leaf of kings' does not seem to be
                > attested. The only translation of _asea_ that I know
                > of is the one quoted by William C. Hicklin on the
                > art.fan.tolkien newsgroup:
                >
                <http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.books.tolkien/browse_thread/thread/34fc7f494c7ff868/3fad9c3c879f5a2c?lnk=st&q=athelas+hicklin&rnum=1&hl=en#3fad9c3c879f5a2c>

                The URL in my post was editorially changed, but the
                reference to the "art.fan.tolkien" newsgroup was not
                updated to "rec.arts.books.tolkien" along with it.

                [Quite right; sorry! The link you sent originally didn't work for me, so I googled it myself, and didn't notice the discrepancy. CFH]

                Forconvenience I quote the first post by William C.
                Hicklin as well:

                <http://groups.google.se/group/alt.fan.tolkien/browse_thread/thread/7b7287d31cfa1e77/bdb4b12467dc0ad1?lnk=st>

                "The herb was known to the Noldor, who termed it
                "athea" from *ATHAYA 'helpful, kindly, beneficial.' A
                later sound shift rendered it "asea" (cf. Aragorn's
                "asea aranion" in "The Houses of Healing.") In
                Middle-earth the word was converted into regularized
                Sindarin form as athe- plus -las 'leaf.'"

                /Fredrik
              • F. Strÿfffff6m
                On his Addenda and Corrigenda page to RC (http://bcn.net/~whammond/addenda/readers.html), Wayne Hammond writes: On the Lambengolmor forum,
                Message 7 of 11 , Dec 2, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  On his 'Addenda and Corrigenda' page to RC (http://bcn.net/~whammond/addenda/readers.html), Wayne Hammond writes:

                  'On the Lambengolmor forum, message 850 [...], Fredrik Ström correctly comments that our gloss asëa aranion 'leaf of kings' is not attested in Tolkien's writings. In message 851, however, Arden R. Smith defends this translation as an extrapolation from the gloss of athelas 'kingsfoil' in an unpublished etymology by Tolkien together with 'the transparent meaning of aranion "of kings"'.'

                  What Arden wrote was:
                  >The unpublished etymology that I cited derives _athelas_ and _asea_ from a
                  >similar form [..] but unfortunately leaves it unglossed

                  I think no-one queries the translation *'of kings'. However, in the light of Tolkien's gloss on _athea_ (regularly > _asea_ after the change of Q. _th_ > _s_ described in 'The Shibboleth of Feanor' [XII:331]), I'm not sure that the translation *'leaf' should be defended (and I don't think Arden said so, either). I think that the note on RC:183 is correct except for the parenthesis, '(but if so, _athelas_ = ''leaf-leaf'')', since the attested etymological connection between _athe-_ and _asea_ does not imply that _athe-_ means 'leaf'. In the note on RC:580 ll. 2-3 from bottom, perhaps one should substitute Tolkien's actual gloss ('beneficial') for 'leaf' (or simply omit the words 'leaf of kings')?

                  /Fredrik



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • William Cloud Hicklin
                  You know, I ve felt guilty for the better part of a decade for my unthinking and unauthorized posting of that snippet on Usenet- especially since soon
                  Message 8 of 11 , Oct 26, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    You know, I've felt guilty for the better part of a decade for
                    my unthinking and unauthorized posting of that snippet on
                    Usenet- especially since soon therafter the copyright-law war
                    erupted with the Salo/Star/Fauskanger axis. Fortunately it seems
                    that it hasn't spread that far, since even Arden appears to have
                    been unaware of it (although it has turned up in a couple of
                    online "encyclopedias").

                    In any event, it's out, and surely there would be no harm if Wayne
                    Hammond and Christina Scull were to use it, since they carry the
                    Imprimatur.

                    I suspect that _asea aranion/athelas_ is one of those Q-S pairs
                    that aren't literal translations. Now, I'm no linguist; but we
                    can at least be certain that _asea_ and _athe-_ are equivalent
                    elements, and, as Frederik points out, that the Quenya assumed
                    or omitted the leaf-element. Or, viewed the other way around,
                    that the leaf-element was added by the Exiles when they formed
                    their Sindarin equivalent (acc. to the late note, the plant was
                    known to the medical loremasters of the Noldor- with no
                    indication whether the Sindar were aware of its properties, or
                    even if it was native to Middle-earth). The snippet's wording
                    has _asea_ regularly > _athe-_, "compounded with _-las_," which
                    to me suggests that the _-las_ element only entered with the
                    Sindarin conversion. Why would this be? Another note cited by
                    Wayne and Christina indicates that only the leaves were used,
                    which may be relevant. Or perhaps the linguistic loremasters
                    found "athe" alone to be ugly?

                    [Tolkien wrote in his note on "Stress" in Section I of Appendix E
                    that words in which the stress falls on the third syllable from the
                    end -- e.g. _Denethor, Fëanor_ -- "are favoured in the Eldarin
                    languages, especially Quenya." It seems natural then that the
                    medical loremasters of the Noldor, whose native tongue was
                    Quenya, would expand _athe-_ to the more euphonious (not to
                    mention distinctive) _athelas_. PHW]

                    One might speculate whether "aranion" was a pre- or post-
                    Downfall Numenorean addition ("balm" > "kingsbalm"), since the
                    specific association of healing with the King appears to have
                    been theirs, not the Elves'. This leads to yet another
                    question- whether Ad/CS _kingsfoil_ followed or in fact underlay
                    the hypothesised Num. addition of _aranion_ .

                    -- William Cloud Hicklin

                    > I think no-one queries the translation *'of kings'. However,
                    in the light of Tolkien's gloss on _athea_ (regularly > _asea_
                    after the change of Q. _th_ > _s_ described in 'The Shibboleth
                    of Feanor' [XII:331]), I'm not sure that the translation
                    *'leaf' should be defended (and I don't think Arden said so,
                    either). I think that the note on RC:183 is correct except for
                    the parenthesis, '(but if so, _athelas_ = ''leaf-leaf'')',
                    since the attested etymological connection between _athe-_ and
                    _asea_ does not imply that _athe-_ means 'leaf'. In the note on
                    RC:580 ll. 2-3 from bottom, perhaps one should substitute
                    Tolkien's actual gloss ('beneficial') for 'leaf' (or simply omit
                    the words 'leaf of kings')?
                    >
                    > /Fredrik
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.