"She owns him not."

[Radaghast]

I always kind of wondered about the line in the book that says, "“his cat he calls her, but she owns him not.” I assumed this was some archaic turn of phrase, though I've never encountered similar use. Also, someone on Quora asked if it was an error. One answer says, no, Tolkien phrased it that way because cats own their person, not the other way around.

I'm highly skeptical of that answer and wanted to know if anyone can clarify.

 

[Server Room Gremlin]

It makes me think of the word 'disown', which means to refuse to acknowledge that something/someone belongs to or is connected to you.

So I'd read it as 'Sauron thinks of her as a pet, but Shelob does not acknowledge such ownership or connection'.

 

[Erurávennë]

I always kind of wondered about the line in the book that says, "“his cat he calls her, but she owns him not.” I assumed this was some archaic turn of phrase, though I've never encountered similar use. Also, someone on Quora asked if it was an error. One answer says, no, Tolkien phrased it that way because cats own their person, not the other way around.

I'm highly skeptical of that answer and wanted to know if anyone can clarify.

Very interesting. Something to look into. However, I can testify to the fact that cats own their person...

 

[Elthir]

Yep.

 

[Ent]

The concept that the cat owns the person is a very, very old one.
That said, the question from the phrase does not revolve around the 'old phrase' - but around "what does it mean."

In this case, does "she owns him not" mean the cat does not acknowledge her ownership of him?
Or does it mean that he does not acknowledge the cat's claim on him?

Therein lies the mystery.

 

[Eljorahir]

I think this is a similar use of "own" as a synonym for "acknowledge".

Children of Hurin, Turin Among the Outlaws:
“There before the Nirnaeth many men had dwelt in scattered homesteads; they were of Haleth’s folk for the most part, but owned no lord…”

 

[Ent]

No doubt. But the direction of its "point" remains unclear, given the sentence's ambiguous syntax.

 

[Eljorahir]

No doubt. But the direction of its "point" remains unclear, given the sentence's ambiguous syntax.

I used to understand the meaning only if I assumed it was an error; I'd switch the pronouns to: "...he owns her not...". Meaning: Sauron does not own Shelob.

Now, I think all the ambiguity disappears if we substitute a valid (but atypical) synonym for "own": 'she acknowledges him not.'

'If now and again Shelob caught them [orcs] to stay her appetite, she was welcome: he could spare them. And sometimes as a man may cast a dainty to his cat (his cat he calls her, but she owns him not) Sauron would send her prisoners that he had not better uses for: he would have them driven to her hole, and report brought back to him of the play she made.'

 

[wondering]

Yes, I think the meaning is 'acknowledge' not 'possess'. Shelob does not care for Sauron or acknowledge any relationship with him.