# What, exactly, does the phrase "to have and to hold" in traditional wedding vows mean? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 4, 2011, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182 "2011-02-04T18:41:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![BubbaDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bubbadog/32/333_2.png) [@BubbaDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BubbaDog)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2016, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182/21 "2016-08-17T14:13:47Z")
> [@david1959](#): > > The question was asked and the answer was given. That was his point. He thought your answer was invalid. > [@](#): > > Strange how there will always be one person who will resort to insults - usually it means that they have no reasonable reply, so they resort to personal attacks instead. It may have been rudely stated but it does point to your explanation as having no evidence cited to support it. We have an opinion section on this board which you can use or you can pose your response as a suggestion but without any cites you appear to be expressing an opinion instead of providing a factual answer. > [@](#): > > Incidentally, an ass is a type of donkey. helpful information for you. [Ass](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ass) has multiple definitions including vulgar ones such as buttocks or rectum. Hey, but besides all of the verbal sparring - Welcome to the Dope. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2016, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182/22 "2016-08-17T15:46:48Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#): > > The purpose was to avoid any misunderstanding, since both languages were spoken in England. > > Other examples are: > > last will and testament Originally, testament means testimony, not last will. The person giving the document is attesting that the decisions listed are, indeed, what he wants as his last will. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2016, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182/23 "2016-08-17T15:59:58Z")
> [@GreenWyvern](#): > > Yes, I believe this is correct. > > In early English legal formulas, very often two words of very similar or identical meaning were used, one of Norman origin and one of Saxon origin. > > … > > To have and to hold is the same kind of construction from the same time period, however else people may try to rationalize it today. From [etymonline](http://etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=have) > [@](#): > > have (v.) > Old English habban “to own, possess; be subject to, experience,” from Proto-Germanic \*haben- (source also of Old Norse hafa, Old Saxon hebbjan, Old Frisian habba, German haben, Gothic haban “to have”), from PIE \*kap- “to grasp” (see capable). Not related to Latin habere, despite similarity in form and sense; the Latin cognate is capere "seize. > > ``` > Sense of "possess, have at one's disposal" (I have a book) is a shift from older languages, where the thing possessed was made the subject and the possessor took the dative case (as in Latin est mihi liber "I have a book," literally "there is to me a book"). Used as an auxiliary in Old English, too (especially to form present perfect tense); the word has taken on more functions over time; Modern English he had better would have been Old English him (dative) wære betere. > > ``` > [@](#): > > hold (v.) > O.E. haldan (Anglian), healdan (W.Saxon), class VII strong verb (past tense heold, pp. healden), from P.Gmc. \*khaldanan (cf. O.N. halda, Du. houden, Ger. halten “to hold,” Goth. haldan “to tend”), originally “to keep, tend, watch over” (as cattle), later “to have.” Ancestral sense is preserved in behold. The original pp. holden was replaced by held beginning 16c., but survives in some legal jargon and in beholden. > [@](#): > > behold > O.E. bihaldan (W.Saxon behealdan) “give regard to, hold in view,” also “to keep hold of, to belong to,” from bi- “by” + haldan, healdan (see hold). There is no indication of a Norman/Latin ancestor for either. There may be an implication of redundancy in that both say that ownership or possession is involved, and the redundant pairings common in law (given earlier by matt\_mcl) may have influenced the wording. The CoE vows also has the line to love and to cherish, which do converge from Latin and German ancestries. Remember that the lines come from the Book of Common Prayers, which was written in 1549 (not 1559). Modern people can interpret them in whatever way they want, obviously, but if you’re asking what the words meant when they were inserted into the vows you have to look at 16th century usage. ---
**Author:** ![Drunky\_Smurf](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drunky_smurf/32/449_2.png) [@Drunky\_Smurf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Drunky_Smurf)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2016, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182/24 "2016-08-17T16:25:55Z")
> [@david1959](#): > > The question was asked and the answer was given. Yes it was. 5 years before you showed up. ---
**Author:** ![APB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@APB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/APB)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2016, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182/25 "2016-08-17T17:33:12Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > Remember that the lines come from the Book of Common Prayers, which was written in 1549 (not 1559). [nitpick] They’re actually much older than that, as Cranmer was merely adapting the familiar vows from the various liturgies used in England before the Reformation. See, for example, the version of the vows in the [Use of York](https://archive.org/details/manualeetp00cath) (p. 27). [/nitpick] And, yes, \*\*Long Time Lurker \*\*and **Giles** had this one nailed five years ago. The phrase is an instantly familiar one to anyone who has had cause to read older English legal deeds. Even illiterate brides and grooms would probably have recognised and understood it as a suitably solemn piece of legalese. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2016, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182/26 "2016-08-17T18:06:02Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > … > There is no indication of a Norman/Latin ancestor for either. There may be an implication of redundancy in that both say that ownership or possession is involved, and the redundant pairings common in law (given earlier by matt\_mcl) may have influenced the wording. The CoE vows also has the line to love and to cherish, which do converge from Latin and German ancestries. > > Remember that the lines come from the Book of Common Prayers, which was written in 1549 (not 1559). Modern people can interpret them in whatever way they want, obviously, but if you’re asking what the words meant when they were inserted into the vows you have to look at 16th century usage. But… Latin _ **habeo** _ > [@](#): > > From Proto-Italic \*habēō or \*haβēō, the latter possibly from Proto-Indo-European \*gʰh₁bʰ- ‎(“to grab, to take”). Compare Old Irish gaibim ‎(“I hold”), Polish gabać ‎(“to grab, snatch”). > > Oscan and Umbrian have cognate forms with -b-[1], which must reflect an original -b- as Proto-Italic -β- (and therefore PIE -bʰ-) becomes -f- in those languages. On the other hand, b is a rare phoneme in PIE, whose status is still disputed. Thus, the exact origin of this word is not clear. > > Among the oldest attestations are the works of Plautus (circa 254 to 184 BC) and the Senatus consultum de Bacchanalibus (186 BC). Umbrian cognate hab- attested in the Iguvine Tablets (oldest tablets 3rd century BC). Oscan cognate haf-[2] attested in the Tabula Bantina (89 BC). When the election is done, the guy running the show comes out the Sistine chapel and announces “habemus papam…” As is commonly found in European languages, the switch between “B” an “V” is not that distant. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2016, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182/27 "2016-08-17T19:29:52Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > But… Latin _ **habeo** _ But… You could have read my cite: > [@](#): > > Not related to Latin habere, despite similarity in form and sense; the Latin cognate is capere "seize. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [August 17, 2016, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182/28 "2016-08-17T19:53:06Z")
> [@Exapno\_Mapcase](#): > > …From [etymonline](http://etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=have) > > > [@](#): > > > > Quote: > > have (v.) > > Old English habban “to own, possess; be subject to, experience,” from Proto-Germanic \*haben- (source also of Old Norse hafa, Old Saxon hebbjan, Old Frisian habba, German haben, Gothic haban “to have”), from PIE \*kap- “to grasp” (see capable). Not related to Latin habere, despite similarity in form and sense; the Latin cognate is capere "seize. > > > > Sense of “possess, have at one’s disposal” (I have a book) is a shift from older languages, where the thing possessed was made the subject and the possessor took the dative case (as in Latin est mihi liber “I have a book,” literally “there is to me a book”). _Used as an auxiliary in Old English, too (especially to form present perfect tense); the word has taken on more functions over time; Modern English he had better would have been Old English him (dative) wære betere._ > > … [ital added by Leo] To follow this up, is the the consequent clause here “modern English” or what? I always thought it was subjunctive and that was that. “If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well/It were done quickly:” _Macbeth_ I:7.1-2 Note: yes this is a drift leading to hijack, but it’s language and it’s Shakespeare, who always gets a pass. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-does-the-phrase-to-have-and-to-hold-in-traditional-wedding-vows-mean/570182.md?page=1)