ACADEMY OF SAINT GABRIEL REPORT 3190 http://www.s-gabriel.org/3190 ************************************ 29 Jan 2007 From: Aryanhwy merch Catmael Greetings from the Academy of S. Gabriel! You wanted to know what the correct Saxon form of is for a man with a Saxon mother and a Norman father living just after the Norman Conquest. Here is what we have found. The time and place that you've chosen to develop your persona in is a very complex one from the linguistic point of view. In order to fully discuss the parts of the name that you're interested in, we have to give some background on the linguistic situation in England in the years just after the Conquest. The vast majority of inhabitants were native speakers of various dialects of Old English, while the invaders themselves spoke a number of different dialects of Old French. Most records, however, were kept in Latin, and the names in them frequently appear in forms quite different from those that would have been used just before the Conquest. (Many pre-Conquest records were also written wholly or partly in Latin, but pre-Conquest scribes were more likely to retain the Old English form of the name or at least something very close to it.) Fortunately, the old documentary traditions did not immediately disappear; indeed, as late as the early 12th century the Peterborough Chronicle, a version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, was still being written in good Late West Saxon, the standard 10th and 11th century literary dialect of Old English. [1] So we have some insight into the underlying Old English forms of the Latin-language names. There are also a number of social factors which would influence the type of name that you had had. If your parents were married, the likelihood of your having been given an Old English name, as opposed to a Norman French name, would depend to some degree on your father's rank and station. If he was of very high rank, it's probably fairly unlikely, but the practice wasn't unknown among the lower ranks. [2] If your parents were not married, then the probability that you would have an Old English name could depend on whether your mother was a member of your father's household, and whether your father acknowledged you or not. We'll turn now to the particular name that you are interested in. The standard Old English form of is <{AE}{dh}elr{ae}d> or <{AE}{th}elr{ae}d>, where {AE} represents the a-e ligature, {dh} represents the letter edh, which looks like a backwards '6' with a cross-bar, and {th} represents the letter thorn, which looks like superimposed over a

. In Latin and Old English charters dating from 900 to 1100, we find the following different spellings: [3] A{dh}elred: 900 A{th}elred: 962(2), 982, 983(4), 984(2), 995(2), 996, 1002, 1015 {AE}dred: 931 {AE}{dh}elred: ~903(2), 939, 979(2), 980(3), 981(2), 982(4), 983(6), 984(2), 985(2), 986(5), 987(3), 993, 994(2), 996(6), 995x9, 997(2), 998(2), 999(2), 995x1005, 1002(5), 1004, 1005(3), 1007(2), 1009, 1012, 1014, 1019, 1065 {AE}{dh}elr{ae}d: 986, 987(2), 997 {AE}{dh}ered: 901(2), 904, 924x33(3), 931, 934(2), 939, 968, 1009 {AE}{dh}red: 931 {AE}{th}elred: 903, 904(2), 957, 984x1001, 993, 995(2), 996, 978x1016, 998(4), 995x1005, 1001(3), 1002(2), 1004(2), 1005(2), 1007, 1008, 1011(2), 1012(3) {AE}{th}elr{ae}d: 993(2), 1007, 1009 {AE}{th}ered: 904, 931, 934, 935x8, 937, 938(2), 939(3), 940(6), 941(2), 942, 943(8), 944(5), 947(2), 948, 957 {AE}{th}er{ae}d: 956 Ae{dh}elred: 996 Ae{th}elred: 994, 1002 E{dh}elred: 984(2) E{dh}ered: 983x5 [10] E{th}elred: 946, 1011 E{th}ered: 941 In this list, a number in parentheses indicates the number of examples (if more than one) found in that year. The notation ~ stands for 'circa', and a date such as 983x5 indicates that the charter dates from sometime between 983 and 985 but we cannot say more specifically. Additionally, <{AE}{th}ered> occurs in annals entries for the years 676, 866, 868, 871, 900, and 983, and the inflected form <{AE}{th}erede> in an annal entry for 886. [9] In Domesday Book, dating to 1086, we find the following spellings: [12] Adelredus, Adelredi (an inflected form) Aderet Adret[us], Adret Adred[us] Edred[us], Edred Agelred Ailred Elred Alret Aret The endings in square brackets are expansions from scribal abbreviations, and are standard Latin endings. The spellings in the first group are understandable once you know that the sound \dh\ -- i.e., the sound of in the words and -- was normally written in early Old French. (A bit later it disappeared from the language altogether.) Those in the second group don't look much like the Old English spellings at all and require more explanation. Although this doesn't show up in the citations already given, in late Old English the name element <{AE}{dh}el-> tended to lose the \dh\ sound, and the resulting element was naturally spelled <{AE}gel-> or <{AE}il-> according to standard Old English spelling conventions. [13,14] (We discuss this pronunciation and others below.) The spellings in the second group are based on this late pronunciation. So what can we conclude from this? We can group all of the examples discussed above into about half a dozen forms which can be considered typical: <{AE}{dh}elred>, <{AE}{th}elred> <{AE}{th}ered>, <{AE}{dh}ered> <{AE}gelred> <{AE}ilred> The first pair could be called classical; it's clear that they were very common in late documentary Old English, but it's not clear to what extent they represent the current pronunciations of the time. The second pair, without the , clearly do represent a late Old English pronunciation; their nearly complete disappearance from the charters after the mid-10th century reflects changed documentary conventions. The last two also represent a late Old English pronunciation, one using Old English orthography, the other using Continental orthography. Putting all of this together, we believe that the likeliest type of pronunciation for your period is represented by the <{AE}gelred> and <{AE}ilred>. <{AE}gelred> represents a pronunciation something like \A-yil-red\, where \A\ stands for the sound of the in . <{AE}ilred> represents a sort of 'run-together' version of this pronunciation, with the \A\ and \ih\ vowels combining to make a diphthong not found in most varieties of present-day English. Many people describe it as sounding halfway between the vowel of and the vowel of . The sound of is a diphthong that can be represented roughly as \AHee\, an \AH\ sound immediately slurring into an \ee\ sound. If you replace the \AH\ part of the diphthong by \A\ to get \Aee\, you have the desired diphthong. The spelling <{AE}ilred> then represents a pronunciation something like \AeeL-red\. [4] The next most likely pronunciation is probably that represented by <{AE}{th}ered> and <{AE}{dh}ered>; either of these is probably a fine choice. Both were pronounced something like \A-dh@-red\, where again \A\ is the sound of in and \@\ the sound of in or . [5] Versions of the classic pronunciation represented by <{AE}{dh}elred> and <{AE}{th}elred> are the least likely, but if they were used, they would have been pronounced roughly \A-dh@l-red\. [6] is the modern English form of a name that reached England from the Continent. Though originally of Germanic origin, it entered English via Old French. (In principle it is possible that there was also a native Old English cognate, but there is no convincing evidence for this.) In early post-Conquest documents written in Old English (or showing evidence that the scribe was accustomed to writing Old English), the name normally appears as . [1] Although the pronunciation later changed in both French and English, there is reason to think that this spelling is approximately phonetic and represents a contemporary pronunciation something like \WIL-lelm\, at least in the mouths of speakers of Old English. [7] The usual late Old English patronymic byname (i.e., one naming the bearer's father) consisted of the father's name in the genitive case, roughly the equivalent of the modern English possessive form, followed by the word 'son'; it was used both with native names and with names of foreign origin. [8] Most Old English masculine names formed their genitives by adding <-es>, and virtually all of the exceptions were names ending in vowels. Foreign masculine names not ending in a vowel were normally treated similarly and given genitives in <-es>. In particular, the late Old English patronymic based on the name was written , pronounced roughly \WIL-lel-mess SUN-@\, where \U\ stands for the vowel of and , and \@\ for the sound of in and . [15] There's another option for your byname which might interest you. Because was such a common name at this time, you might have been known not as Willelm's son but as the lord's son. The Old English word 'lord' (where the : indicates that the is long) produced the Middle English byname 1198 [17]; while we haven't found any example of the Old English form , the early Middle English example that we have strongly suggest that the word existed. In post-Conquest annals from 1075, 1086, 1087, 1090, 1093, 1104, and 1116, the root word is spelled ; the latter spelling first occurs in annal 1124, and the even later spelling in annal 1140, by which time the language was starting to take on a Middle English character. [1] From this, we believe that a scribe working in the Old English tradition shortly after the Conquest would probably have written . So, a name such as <{AE}gelred hlafording> is also suitable. We hope that this letter has been useful to you and that you won't hesitate to write us again if any part was unclear or if you have further questions. Research and commentary on this letter was provided by Adelaide de Beaumont, Talan Gwynek, Ursula Georges, and Blaise de Cormeilles. For the Academy, -Aryanhwy merch Catmael, 29 January 2007 -- References: [1] Perhaps the best example, and certainly the most extensive example of post-Conquest writing in Old English, is the post-Conquest portion of the Peterborough Chronicle, or E manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. This and other manuscripts have been made available on-line at Tony Jebson, 'The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle' (WWW: Self-published, 1996-2006). http://asc.jebbo.co.uk/ There is a general overview of the manuscripts at http://asc.jebbo.co.uk/intro.html. The Peterborough Chronicle is at http://asc.jebbo.co.uk/e/e-L.html. The Parker Chronicle, or A manuscript, is also important; it is at http://asc.jebbo.co.uk/a/a-L.html. [2] Cecily Clark, 'Women's Names in Post-Conquest England', in _Words, Names and History: Selected Writings of Cecily Clark_, Peter Jackson, ed. (Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1995), pp. 117-143; p. 118 [3] Miller, Sean. 'Anglo-Saxon Charters (WWW: Anglo-Saxons.net, no date). http://www.anglo-saxons.net/hwaet/?do=show&page=Charters [4] These pronunciations can be represented more accurately in ASCII IPA as ['&jil,rEd] and ['&IlrEd], respectively. [16] [5] This is ['&D@,rEd] in ASCII IPA. [6] This is ['&D@l,rEd] in ASCII IPA. [7] Clark, Cecily. 'Domesday Book -- A Great Red-Herring: Thoughts on Some Late-Eleventh-Century Orthographies' (in Peter Jackson, ed., _Words, Names and History: Selected Writings of Cecily Clark_ (Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1995), pp. 156-167 [8] Examples from late pre-Conquest charters include: {TH}urgar {AE}lfgares sunu 1044 x 1048 Eadric {AE}lfrices sunu 1044 x 1048 Byrhtric {AE}lfgares sunu 1046 x 1053 = Berhtric {AE}lfgares sunu 1051 x 1055 {ae}lfwine Merefinnes sunu 1053 x 1066 {ae}lfric Wihtgares sunu 1065 x 1066 Sometimes the 'son' word appears as , reflecting a late Old English change in the pronunciation: Aelfwine Wluardes sune ~1040 Alfric Withgares sune ~1040 = Alfrich Withgares sune 1052 x 1057 Scule Leofwoldes sune 1043 x 1044 Eadwine Vlfketeles sune 1043 x 1044 Eadwine Ecfer{th}es sune mid-11th c. Askyl Tokes sune 1060 Iaulf Maltes sune 1060 These are taken from charters S 1473, S 1406, S 1409, S 1138, S 1084, S 1224, S 1078, S 1468, S 1516, and S 1029, which may be seen at [3]. The Peterborough Chronicle, or E manuscript of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, offers both pre- and post-Conquest examples; here are some, each followed by the year of the annal in which it appears: [1] {th}urcytel Nafanan sunu (1016) '{TH}urcytel Nafana's son' Nor{dh}man Leofwines sunu ealdormannes (1017) 'Nor{dh}man son of Leofwine alderman' {AE}{dh}elword {AE}{dh}elm{ae}res sunu {th}{ae}s gr{ae}tan (1017) '{AE}{dh}elword son of {AE}{dh}elm{ae}r the great/stout' Brihtric {AE}lfgetes sunu on D{ae}fenanscire (1017) 'Brihtric son of {AE}lfget of Devonshire' Eadward {AE}{dh}elredes sunu cinges (1040) 'Eadward son of {AE}{dh}elred (the) king' {AE}lfgar Leofrices sunu eorles (1048) '{AE}lfgar son of Leofric (the) earl' Tostige Godwines sunu eorles (dat.) (1055) '(to) Tostig son of Godwine (the) earl' Cnut Sw{ae}gnes sunu (1075) 'Cnut Sw{ae}gn's son' Hugo Gerueises sunu (1124) 'Hugo Gerveis's son' The first and the last two of these examples show that the construction was used even with names of foreign origin: <{th}urcytel>, , , and are Old English versions of the Old Norse names <{TH}orketill>, , , and , respectively, and and are Old French. [9] Jebson, Tony. 'Parker Chronicle, ASC(A)' (WWW: Self-published, 1998-2006). http://asc.jebbo.co.uk/a/a-L.html [10] The forms without , like , are not spelling errors. They reflect a sporadic but real sound change in late Old English, in which the sequence of sounds \lr\ was simplified to \r\. [11] [11] Von Feilitzen, Olof, _The Pre-Conquest Personal Names of Domesday Book_ (Uppsala: 1937), p. 77 [12] ibid., p. 186 [13] ibid., pp. 103ff [14] Clark, Cecily, 'Willelmus rex? vel alius Willelmus?', in _Words, Names and History: Selected Writings of Cecily Clark_, Peter Jackson, ed. (Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 1995), pp. 280-298; p. 283 [15] Indeed, annal 1075 of the Peterborough Chronicle has the phrase 'William's daughter'. [16] Blaheta, Don, "Representation of IPA with ASCII" (WWW: Blahedo.org). http://www.blahedo.org/ascii-ipa.html [17] Reaney, P. H., & R. M. Wilson, _A Dictionary of English Surnames_ (London: Routledge, 1991; Oxford University Press, 1995), s.n. Lording