Etymology: Isengard and Helms Deep

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Well, as CT commented with regard to a possible link between the athel- in athelas and Anglo-Saxon æðele "noble, royal" - it wouldn't have still been an Anglo-Saxon word by the time he was done with it! Rather like A-S ent "giant" became something rather different....

I think the history of "Isengard" is well enough attested that it's pointless to look around for alternate histories. AFAIK Tolkien only ever lifted one name wholesale from a RW language, aside from Shire/Bree names (and The Hobbit's dwarf-names), and that back at the very beginning: Earendel. This isn't to say that certain elements weren't borrowed: ond "stone" he consciously used, as being what apparently is the only known word from the language of Britain's pre-Celtic inhabitants. And he admitted that he might have subconsciously been influenced by Gaelic nasc ("ring," but also "bond") when BS nazg came to him.

[Huinesoron]

Originally Posted by Formendacil

But if you don't post the inaccuracies of Danish radio commentary for us, how will we get to demonstrate our vast and superior knowledge?

Speaking for myself, I always love leafing through HoME to find out if a question is answerable. I run into all sorts of stuff that I'd otherwise gloss over. ^_^

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hicklin

This isn't to say that certain elements weren't borrowed: ond "stone" he consciously used, as being what apparently is the only known word from the language of Britain's pre-Celtic inhabitants.

Waitwhat?

[Five minutes of book-diving later]

Huh! So, after being sent by Tolkien Gateway to both Letters (where Tolkien indeed claims this, and says he remember it from when he was eight) and The History of the Hobbit, I've landed on Wikipedia's Ivernic/Ivernian language page. Or rather section, because sadly the theory - that ond ("stone") and fern ("good thing") entered Irish from proto-Celtic British invaders - has been generally discredited.

I really should read the Rateliff History again at some point...

hS

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

Apparently the guy who made the claims have now had a book published on the topic.

From the debate surrounding it, it seems to be a substandard piece of work that assumes correlation also implies causation.

I am very curious, but I don't want to help spread misinformation... Do I buy the book, so that I have something to fume about?

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

Apparently the guy who made the claims have now had a book published on the topic.

Not surprising. Slap the "Tolkien" name on something, and fame and money are yours, is the thinking.

Originally Posted by Rune Son of Bjarne

I am very curious, but I don't want to help spread misinformation... Do I buy the book, so that I have something to fume about?

I wouldn't. There's quite enough to fume about as it is.

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

It just got worse.

Apparently after these claims got a bit of media attention a local library started an initiative to put up signs at placenames Tolkien supposedly borrowed. The mayor got involved, and now it is an official municipal project.

It is a bit of a backwater, so probably a desperate attempt at attracting tourists.


https://www.syddjurs.dk/da/nyheder/g...2975333014667/

https://www.tv2ostjylland.dk/syddjur...-paa-djursland

[Rune Son of Bjarne]

I borrowed the book at the library.

Basically his argument is:

• Tolkien had intimate knowledge of Jutish history from his scholarly work (Finn & Hengest) and actively used this in his writing (Cottage of Lost Play).

• Tolkien really liked maps.

Therefore Tolkien had to be aware of the place names Aros, Hjelms Dyb, Eskerod and Isengård when writing his tales.

To get to this very compelling argument one has to read through 170 pages of the author (badly) retelling the pre-Danish conquest history of Jutland, and outlining Tolkien's work on the Finnsburg fragment.

As an extra slap in the face, he introduces his argument by admitting that he has absolutely no proof of his theory...

[Mithadan]

During my sophomore year in high school (I was 15 or 16) I wrote a paper on Tolkien's "sources." While I relied, in part, upon several then popular analyses, I also did some independent research, matching the Valar to the Greek and Roman pantheons (Norse and other northern European information regarding their respective pantheons were far less available then), using Greek and Latin dictionaries to seek matches for Elvish names and places, etc. I was awarded a "B" because, as I learned, my teacher was not a "fan" of Tolkien. But I remain convinced that Dwarvish is loosely based upon Hebrew... However, I have no knowledge regarding Tolkien's exposure to that language.

I no longer have a copy of that paper but I recall the analyses I cited. Each theorized that Tolkien was familiar with Finnish, Greek, Latin, Old and Middle English, Norse mythology and the Eddas, and maps, northern European geography, Egyptian architecture (or was it Mayan architecture?), the Alps, the Black Forest and possibly the Himalayas, the Andes and the dark side of the moon. Each analysis conclusively determined that Tolkien's "sources" had been identified. Yes, he had inspirations. But he wanted to tell a good story, a story that flowed from his soul and his imagination. I long ago decided that his sources were completely irrelevant. Just read his writing and appreciate it!