A root mentioned in notes from the late 1950s having to do with “persons” serving as the basis for the suffix Q. -wë common in ancient Quenya names (PE17/189-90). In The Etymologies of the 1930s this suffix had two variants: masculine ᴹQ. -we derived from root ᴹ√WEG “(manly) vigour”, but also abstract ᴹQ. -we derived from unrelated ᴹ✶-wē (Ety/WEG). The suffix was masculine in some later notes as well, where Tolkien said “√WEG, WEƷ, √NES, NETH- referred to masculinity and femininity apart from sex and so could refer to the Valar and Maiar” (PE17/190), but this etymology was rejected and in its place Tolkien wrote: “√WE ? WEƷ ‘person’, individual (only used of Elves and Men), thus origin of -we in Quenya names as Manwe, Voronwe” (PE17/189). In Quenya Notes (QN) from 1957 Tolkien wrote:
> -we in Quenya names (Manwe, etc.). This is in origin a separate word √WĒ (WE’E ?), from its form an ancient element of Eldarin vocabulary. Probably related to Q ve “as, like”; vëa “seeming, apparent”; vávea, ovéa “(con)similar, alike”. In Sindarin adoption of Quenya names (as Voronwe > Bronweg) -we was sometimes used to represent -we, which historically had become w or u (as in Elu = Elwe). But this S -we is of distinct origin, √WEG- “live, be active”. Hence ✱wego(n) “living creature”: Q weo, vëo, S gwê (PE17/189).
In these Quenya Notes, √WĒ as a name element was distinct from √WEG “active”, and neither were distinctly masculine. The initial version of this note glossed √WE as “a person or being” (PE17/190), but in revision Tolkien connected it to Q. ve “as, like” (PE17/189). The interpretation of the suffix -we as gender-neutral was mentioned again in The Shibboleth of Fëanor from 1968 where Tolkien said it was derived from √EWE “person” (PM/340). However, the only feminine name where this element appeared was Q. Elenwë the wife of Turgon (S/90, PM/345), and most of the names with this element were both masculine and ancient.
See the entry on √WEG for more on the evolution of earlier, largely masculine, forms.
This root was connected to vigour and masculinity for much of Tolkien’s life. The earliest iteration of this root seems to be primitive ᴱ√gu̯eg- from the Gnomish Lexicon of the 1910s that served as the basis for various words such as G. gweg “man”, G. gwectha- “impregnate; generate”, and G. gwionert “deed of valour” (GL/44). Tolkien mentioned a few Qenya cognates like ᴱQ. wie and ᴱQ. wenga, but they were unglossed (GL/44). In the Gnomish Lexicon Slips Tolkien gave {ᴱ√we >>} ᴱ√waik as the primitive form beside {ᴱ✶u̯ē+kĕ >> ᴱ✶u̯ĕ+kĕ >>} ᴱ✶u̯ǝkḗ (PE13/117).
In the Early Noldorin Dictionary of the 1920s Tolkien gave ᴱ✶wikā > ᴱN. gweg “man” vs. ᴱQ. vika “valiant”; the Qenya form indicates this 1920s primitive was not specifically masculine, and it also had a primitive feminine variant ᴱ✶wiktā (PE13/162). It was nonetheless related to other words likes ᴱ✶wiqē > ᴱN. gwib “teors”, which is Old English = “penis” (PE13/162). Some similar forms like ᴱQ. via “male” and ᴱQ. vie “teors” appeared in Early Qenya Word-list of the 1920s as well (PE16/135). These 1920s forms seem to be based on primitive ✱ᴱ√WI instead of ᴱ√(g)weg.
In the Declension of Nouns from the early 1930s Tolkien gave primitive weʒ- as the basis for N. gwe, ᴹQ. †wé “man, warrior” and the masculine suffix ᴹQ. -we common in names (PE21/1). In The Etymologies of the 1930s this masculine suffix was derived from ᴹ√WEG “(manly) vigour” along with other derivatives like ᴹQ. vea “adult, manly, vigorous”, ᴹQ. vie “manhood, vigour” and N. gweith “manhood; man-power, troop of able bodied men, host, regiment” (Ety/WEG; EtyAC/WEG).
In some notes from the late 1950s Tolkien again gave the suffix Q. -wë as masculine and derived it from √WEG or √WEƷ, but then changed his mind and decided it was derived from √WĒ or √WEƷ “person” (PE17/189-190), an idea he seems to have stuck with thereafter; see the entry on √WĒ/EWE for further discussion. In Quenya Notes (QN) from 1957 Tolkien gave {√WEK >>} √WEG as distinct from √WĒ, giving it the gloss “live, be active” where it served as the basis for words like Q. vëo/S. gwê “living creature” and Q. vehtë “life”, though he clarified that this last word was “not Life in general or as a principle, but (a period of) individual activity, as in vehtequentalë ‘biography’ (PE17/189)”.
Neo-Eldarin: For purposes of Neo-Eldarin, I think it is best to assume this root had to do with vigour and activeness, characteristics that were generally (but not absolutely) attributed as masculine. This allows us to retain the largest array of derivatives of this root from various periods. I also think it is best to assume it remains distinct from √WĒ/EWE “person”, though the two roots may originally have been related.