Talk:Bodach

Mythology Low‑importance

	Mythology portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Etymology

The bodach vs. botach forms create a confusing situation. Both are Old Irish. It appears to be undisputed that the etymology is from bot "penis"(?) But in the context of Irish feudalism, the botach (never(?) bodach) class is unambiguously derived from both "cottage" (presumably coined as the equivalent of cottier). Was this some kind of rude pun? Or a coincidence?

So, the "penis" etymology suggests "man" > "some random guy" > "random idiot, churl, boorish lout" > "rustic, peasant" etc., while the "cottage" etymology suggests "tenant farmer" > "random peasant" > "rustic, peasant", "churl, lout" etc. Both etymologies are entirely compatible with the sense (both, words for penis becoming derogatory or affectionate terms for lower-class males, and terms for peasant farmers becoming generic terms for boorish clowns etc., are well attested with many parallels). But the etymologies are completely incompatible. Perhaps the key is that the "penis" word became bodach and the "tenant" word remained botach in Middle Irish? Creating a divisinon between senses even though there would clearly have been mutual influence?

For the purposes of the mythological/folkloristic bodach, there is the further problem of boadach, which appears to have been completely distinct in Old Irish, but may have become poorly understood in Middle or Early Modern Irish. So that suddenly, the eternal king of fairyland instead of being "the victorious one" was reported as "a rustic clown". It would then have been natural to resolve the cognitive dissonance by means of a trickster-in-disguise episode. --dab (𒁳) 09:40, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bodach. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151029235714/http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/The_Old_English_Manor_v12_1000376886/83 to http://www.forgottenbooks.com/readbook_text/The_Old_English_Manor_v12_1000376886/83

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:06, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]