Names: Historically accurate vs. readable?

greendragon

Registered
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
4,217
Reaction score
475
Location
Beacon Falls, CT
Website
www.greendragonartist.com
I write in medieval and ancient Ireland.

My constant conundrum is between having non-anglicized names (as most of my writing is pre-Norman conquest in Ireland) and having the reader be able to read them.

Example:

Anglicized name: Ewan
Gaelic spelling of name: Eógan

(They are pronounced the same).

A more extreme example:

Anglicized: Turlough O'Connor
Gaelic: Toirdhealbhach Ua Conchobair

They are not quite pronounced the same, but close. More subtlety in the Gaelic version.

I know that the Gaelic is certainly more accurate, and adds an exotic/historic flavor to the tale. I DO include a pronunciation guide in all my books for any Gaelic names or words I include (I use them sparingly). However, I also know that often readers will just skip over a difficult name and ignore it. On the other hand, the English just seems so - Anglicized. For the Irish, who have recently begun spelling some of their names with the old Gaelic spelling now that they're finally out from under the English, I feel like it's a betrayal to their culture to Anglicize names set in that pre-Norman period.

My main characters I try to keep relatively simple - Conn, Orlagh, Maelan, Finn, etc.

However, when I insert historical chiefs and heroes, I want to use their proper names, their proud Gaelic names. Muirchertach Ua Briain, Bé Chuille, Cathasach Ua Conaill, Cu-Uladh, Rognavaldr (OK, that's an Ostman, not a Gael, but the principle applies).

Thoughts? What are your preferences, both as readers and as history lovers?
 

ecerberus

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 11, 2017
Messages
150
Reaction score
17
hello there, reciprocating your help in my other thread.

I love history and historical fiction. When confronted in cases like yours, as a reader, I prefer that the main/recurring character names be simple and identifiable, but it's OK for 'one off' 'royalty/chief' name be whatever it is. It does give a more authentic flavor, but if the names are excessively complex for repeating characters then it becomes a distraction.

Alternatively, you could introduce the character with their original name, but quickly give us a nickname or shortened alternative. And then use the full name only very sparingly.

(case in point, Egyptian Pharaohs didn't have simple names like Thutmoses, but much longer native equivalents, but as a reader I'd be Ok with the introduction of Thutmoses with his original name, so long as the transition to the shorter name was made quickly, smoothly.)
 

Curlz

cutsie-pie
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 5, 2016
Messages
2,213
Reaction score
382
Location
here
However, when I insert historical chiefs and heroes, I want to use their proper names, their proud Gaelic names. Muirchertach Ua Briain, Bé Chuille, Cathasach Ua Conaill, Cu-Uladh, Rognavaldr (OK, that's an Ostman, not a Gael, but the principle applies).
I don't have problem with difficult names and it doesn't bother me when I'm not sure if "Richard" the German Character reads his name as "Ree-chard" or "Ree-hard". But Gaelic is an extreme case where the names are often impossible to pronounce and thus impossible to memorize. Toirdhealbhach? That could just as well be written in Chinese characters or Egyptian hieroglyphs. I won't even bother to read it, I'd only try to memorize the first and the last letters. To me it's just some sort of a doodle. And then your book would need to be exceptional in order to keep my attention because such unpronounceable names would slow me down and distract my attention immensely. Everybody would be just "that character" instead of somebody with a name. Of course that means I'm not going to appreciate how the author made an effort to use authentic names.
 

Sunflowerrei

Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
1,438
Reaction score
86
Location
Queens, New York
Website
www.michelleathy.com
I mean, if it's a one-off character or a minor character, I don't mind an authentic but difficult looking name. As a person of Irish descent, I think I understand where you're coming from with the Anglicization issue.

But for a main character, that needs to be shortened or explained in-text somehow. A few years ago, Susan Fraser King wrote a novel about the historical Lady Macbeth, whose name was really Gruoch, but she nicknamed her "Rue" after a point in the story because to our modern eyes, "Gruoch" is grouch. You have to tread a line as in anything in historical fiction with being authentic but not appealing to your modern day readers.
 

Lillith1991

The Hobbit-Vulcan hybrid
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 12, 2014
Messages
5,313
Reaction score
569
Location
MA
Website
eclecticlittledork.wordpress.com
I'm actually not bothered by difficult names. Combined with the fact I actually like the various obscure proper names for a lot of Tolkien's characters, I wouldn't bat an eye at a Gailic name being hard to pronounce. You may wish to Angelicize longer and more difficult names, that way they're not quite as itimidating to look at for readers who aren't me. But I would be careful to only do it to names that are especially difficult.
 

Susannah Shepherd

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 7, 2016
Messages
175
Reaction score
27
Location
The coolest little capital
Hmm, I can definitely see your problem, especially around anglicising the names of a subsequently occupied/colonised culture. As a reader, period-inappropriate names are a huge put-off, but I'm less bothered generally by spelling (especially when in the interests of readability). How wedded are you to a consistent approach across the book? Eógan doesn't feel like too much of a challenge, but Toirdhealbhach does! I could probably cope with a pronunciation guide, though. It wouldn't stop me buying unless the first few pages were a welter of difficult names.

I'm also currently writing something set in 9th century Ireland, and I've settled on period-accurate but anglicised names - Dervla not Dearbhla, Tiernan not Tighearnán, and not an Aisling or Clodagh in sight. But my work is romance first and historical second, so I might be more inclined to use the Gaelic versions (with a pronunciation guide, as you do) in a straight historical. I think expected audience is critical to the choice.
 

greendragon

Registered
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
4,217
Reaction score
475
Location
Beacon Falls, CT
Website
www.greendragonartist.com
Mine are more closely historical fantasy, as there are heavy faerie magic elements. Oddly, I've got Aisling, Clodagh and Dearbhla in various books :) No Tiernan - yet!

I do introduce the difficult words slowly, and try not to bombard the reader with a slew of them. For instance, in the first chapter of my current WIP, I introduce Diarmait, Chief of the Ua Briain clan - and the main character, Maelan. I mention the brother, but not his name yet (Muirchertach Ua Briain). That comes later.
 

autumnleaf

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
1,133
Reaction score
215
Location
small rainy island
I'm Irish, and I'd find Toirdhealbhach hard on the eyes! My first guess would be "tor-yal-vach" but I'm guessing that's wrong since the anglicized version is Turlough ("tur-loch").

Old and Middle Irish had some quirky letters, like putting a dot over consonants to get the "v" sound. Modern Irish sticks a "h" in there instead, which accounts for some of the less intuitive spellings like Siobhán ("shiv-aun")* So "Toirdhealbhach" would be spelled more like "Toirdealbach" with a dot over the d and the b, except that would get even further away from the sound for English speakers.

Honestly, Irish sounds don't map to the Latin alphabet all that well, and generations of anglicization and attempts at simplification haven't helped much! One of my favourite names is pronounced "May-ive" and I've seen it spelled Medb, Medbh, Meabh, Maev, or Maeve! I also suspect that, back in past eras, the spelling was less consistent than today (it certainly is for English). No matter what you do, it'll be an anglicization of some sort.

Hope this helps and doesn't just confuse more!

* Long "a" sound because of the accent. See, there is some logic!
 

AW Admin

Administrator
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 19, 2008
Messages
18,772
Reaction score
6,285
Given that names and spelling both are wildly inconsistent in Medieval Irish, I'd use the modern Anglicization for names, with a list in the back.

You can direct people to a page on your Website where you have audio recordings saying the names and such, if you want.
 

Tanydwr

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Nov 2, 2009
Messages
347
Reaction score
25
Location
Torn between two worlds
Sarah Woodbury runs into this in some of her novels, set in Medieval Wales, which is admittedly a bit easier on the eyes than Irish, even if it also has some pronunciations that are not expected by English speakers (Rhun is pronounce 'rin', for example, and let's not get into the multiple uses of Y and W as vowels and DD=hard TH, etc.). She does a pronunciation guide in the front of the book!

I agree that with longer names I would probably struggle to create a pronunciation in my head, but I'm also the sort of person who would appreciate the work going in and would flip to check how it's pronounced - but note that that would be more difficult for e-book readers (I love e-books - my shelves are already fit to burst!). I agree with the use full name/title once and then use a nickname as a good method going forward as well, but then I base a lot of the names in my fantasy novels on Germanic languages, so I have people named Sunniva, Reinburn, and Henmira in different novels, and that's not getting into the northern half of the continent where they have Celtic-based languages (Finnlaogh becomes Finn, for example).

However, I'm a name-collector and etymology-lover, so I respect every effort to get stuff accurate, even if I acknowledge that tricks are sometimes needed to help make things a little easier on the casual reader.