A sample of my fandom research

[luzula]

So I started out wondering whether it would be historically accurate to have Ewen singing 'Both Sides the Tweed' to Keith in a fic (no, not in my current one). I do have a head canon that Ewen has a very nice singing voice, and that Keith never tries to sing if he can help it. And it would be very nicely symbolic, right? Let friendship and honour unite, and flourish on both sides the Tweed.

Sadly I have not quite got all the way in my research--I know that the original lyrics must be a fair bit older than 1819, but I can't find any more info than that. Here they are, along with the original melody, which I have been learning, and which is the one I would have to use in the fic (it's apparently an old Scottish air called 'Tweedside'). I don't like that melody as much as the one that Dick Gaughan wrote at the same time as (very reasonably) removing all mention of a king from the song, but I don't dislike it, either.

Anyway, the notes in the 1819 publication say that the author isn't known, and doesn't give a date, either. But! That publication is a treasure trove of Jacobite songs, the majority of which are not among those that you find on Youtube. Also there's a lot of Hanoverian/Whig songs, which I have not been able to find anywhere else! Very interesting, though few of the songs have melodies.

Comments

[regshoe]

Aww, I like that headcanon! And this is certainly an appropriate song for Ewen to sing to Keith :)

And it is a very good publication—I remember I was looking through there a while ago trying to find the song that Broster quotes as the epigraph to part 2, but I couldn't find it—perhaps I'll have another look...

As for the song's history—Dick Gaughan seems to think it was written by James Hogg himself, in which case it would be too late for FotH. But since the authorship apparently isn't known for certain, and it's only talking about historical events from earlier on in the 18th century, I think you could get away with deciding that it did exist in the 1740s!

[luzula]

Glad you like my headcanon. : )

I remember I was looking through there a while ago trying to find the song that Broster quotes as the epigraph to part 2, but I couldn't find it—perhaps I'll have another look...

Oh, I can find that one for you! Here it is, also click backwards to find the melody. There appear to be several variations of the lyrics. Also that same melody is used for a Robert Burns song about a woman not being daunted by men. : )

Re: James Hogg, in the 1819 publication it explicitly says that he doesn't know the author of the song? Which seems strange if he wrote it--wouldn't he just say so? Or maybe he was invested in it being perceived as old and traditional? Ah well. Probably I'm the one invested in it being old, since I want to include it in fic. : P

[regshoe]

There it is—thank you!

Yeah, I thought '19th century folk song collector says a Jacobite song is traditional when he actually wrote it' seemed like a fairly plausible possibility, especially since he doesn't seem to give any sources for where he found it. But it's perfectly likely he is telling the truth!

[garonne]

Making something up and saying it's traditional is itself a traditional thing to do in 18th century Scotland :D (I'm thinking of this)

[luzula]

Heee. Yes, you have a point. : D

[jesse_the_k]

Looking forward to you singing it, with whatever melody, in the eventual podfic.

[luzula]

Ack, I clicked the wrong button and accidentally removed your DW access; it is returned now.

Anyway, yes, this is of course the reason I am researching the melody and not just the words. : )

[jesse_the_k]

(no worries. I can't imagine why someone would want to be notified when ppl change access. Maybe it was state of the art 1999 version of a "like" button?)

[solo]

I didn't realize the song was this old. Great information!

[luzula]

Happy to share! Actually on the Wikipedia page for the song, they give what they claim are the original lyrics, but in fact there seems to be an error there--the crucial difference is that instead of Let the love of our land's sacred rights/To the love of our country succeed, the original lyrics (as seen in the 1819 publication I linked) are Let the love of our king's sacred rights/To the love of our country succeed. Which is quite a difference!

Actually I'm not quite sure I completely grasp the meaning of either of those phrases. The best I can do is: "If you love our country, then let that love also be succeeded (in your heart) by love of our land's sacred rights/king". Can't see that it makes sense if I interpret "succeed" in the sense of "success".