New Post
Search
Help[Facts] Re: Origin of name: "Arthur"
in reply to a message by Mike
It's highly unlikely that Arthur would be related to Thor in any way. The early references to Arthur are from Welsh sources of the 9th and 10th centuries, whereas Thor, and Thursday, descend from Germanic sources.
Quasi-historic and mythological names are often of obscure origin.
https://nanowrimo.org/participants/christine-seaforth-finch
http://christineseaforthfinch.blogspot.com/
Quasi-historic and mythological names are often of obscure origin.
http://christineseaforthfinch.blogspot.com/
1
Replies
The Saxon sources for individuals named Arthur/Arthor are also from the 9th and 10th centuries and are both more numerous and can be more securely dated to this period (the "early" Welsh sources are known from 12th and 13th C Latin manuscript copies with many late additions). Many "Welsh" names are of Germanic origin, as the individuals from which they derive were not native Britons, but former Roman officers, who by the 4th and 5th centuries, were commonly Germanic. German forces were recruited first by Julius Caesar and several inscriptions from Roman Britain were made by German troops.
This message was edited 8/27/2020, 2:44 PM
1
Searle uses secondary compilations, but the primary sources are all 11th C. - Arthor, a bondsman of Aelfric archbishop of York, Arthur, a moneyer of William I in the York mint, Arnthor/Arthur, moneyer of AEthelred II (these from coins, that of William I appears as Althur or arthul [since -thul is nonsense it must be Arthur or Harthulf, the latter moneyer in York appears as Haroulf, artholf and Hrthoulf]), and an Artur mentioned in the Domesday book as Lord in Boxsted, Essex (open Domesday records the name as Arthur, but the manuscript has Artur). There is also an "Arthur the Frenchman" in this period (I have no context for this though and it may be the same as the Artur of Boxsted) The balance of evidence points to it being a Danish name introduced to Britain (esp. York) by Danish settlers in the 9th C. and similarly to France in the 10th C.
This message was edited 8/29/2020, 9:31 AM
1
Almost all the names from this era have disappeared completely, and many were never recorded (the same goes for contemporary Welsh names). "Ubiquitous" is a stretch, a mention in a few poems and mythologoical histories of one individual, later expanded and made popular in Medieval romances, v. 4 or 5 rather anonymous individuals in Anglo-Danish Britain and France. We know of a number only because their names are recorded on coins as the "moneyer" - as new hoards are found, new names are discovered nowhere else recorded. There are, at a minimum, probably 100,000 Germanic dithematic names. But the names, and (gendered deuterothemes) recorded are almost always the of important men, less often women, rarely those of common men such as the moneyers and bondsman we know named Arthor/Arnthor, practically never those of common women. Consider Hals- (holy), by the number of places named Helsing (including Helsinki) once a very common prototheme in Scandinavia, but otherwise completely unrecorded except for a single name, and that not in Scandinavia, but Britain.
1
Everything about the fictional Arthur, and the Arthur of the Welsh poems and mythologies is pure conjecture. What is not pure conjecture is several real individuals, not in Wales or Cumbria but in the Danelaw and Norman England, who ARE named Arthur/Arthor/Arnthor. These individuals have ostensibly Norse/Anglo-Norse names, not Roman or British names that might have been used 5-600 years earlier.
Now when you said "disappeared" I assumed you meant "ceased being used" not "were not recorded", however, while both are true of most names that were presumably used (although we have a lot of names, these represent a tiny fraction of the population and are biased toward wealthier men - we know from later recorded place names and family names, there must have been far more), neither is true of Arthor — the Norse name was recorded in Scandinavia, and its variants (Arnor, Arndor, Arnthor) are still being used to this day. Ar-/Arn- are regular variants comparable to Bear/Beorn, both variants are recorded as terms for "eagle" in Norse, and both are used as name elements, in Saxon Britain and the Continent.
Now when you said "disappeared" I assumed you meant "ceased being used" not "were not recorded", however, while both are true of most names that were presumably used (although we have a lot of names, these represent a tiny fraction of the population and are biased toward wealthier men - we know from later recorded place names and family names, there must have been far more), neither is true of Arthor — the Norse name was recorded in Scandinavia, and its variants (Arnor, Arndor, Arnthor) are still being used to this day. Ar-/Arn- are regular variants comparable to Bear/Beorn, both variants are recorded as terms for "eagle" in Norse, and both are used as name elements, in Saxon Britain and the Continent.
1