By: Hjuka Harugari
In Gothic, we find şiuş: the good, and from that, şiuşeins: goodness, generosity, good... such gives way to cognates in other tongues:
(OI) şığr: friendly and şışa: friendship
(OE) şéow (from which M/MoE thew comes)custom, usage, habit.
and its derivatives:
geşieşe (OE)/ githiudo (OLG/OS), etc: 'becoming'(as an adjective, that is), good, proper, virutous...
(OHG) Thau (also OLG)..custom, usage, 'habit'..
the etymology, that is, tracing it into proto-Germanic and earlier into Indo-European and proto-Indo-European becomes problematic, if not truly impossible: the term itself is the same at one point, or always similar in examples to that as describes the tribal community: for example, gothic şiuş and şiuş-a (which, properly rendered, the ş becomes a 'd' between vowels, so: şiuda)..so on and etc. this, of course, to Heathen is no suprise considering the true definition of such things as 'good' and 'friend/ship'...and its integral relationship to the tribal unit- good, for example having nothing to do with right or wrong, per se, at least not in a christain sense, but rather what is good or beneficial to the collective folk unit...same thing applies with being 'friendly'- being helpful, or 'there' for your folk in need, which of course was integral to the survival of the folk unit....so, we'd expect to see these kind of words derived from or at the least intimately related to one-another, as we do here...so, when we consider the renderings of words such as şiuş as 'good' or 'goodness'...these perceptions and understandings have to likewise be taken into account, such as is reflected in how the word is used in preserved texts: you don't see it being referenced to a 'good little boy', for example, but in referring to the good of the folk. a 'thew' is just that: a custom, usage, or collective or social habit, the norms of a given society that further that society, that ensure its cohesiveness and functioning on solid grounds and in good measure....
Thau predates the codification of such norms or 'standards'- the codification itself being of Roman import...codifying Thau threatens to stagnate it within a realm of rigidity that goes beyond anything organic or natural, and certainly a hindrance to furtherance and evolution in any true way or fashion- adding more codified standards simply burdens the system, rather than addressing or conforming to the 'new' needs of the folk-group at hand...Thau will retain a root in itself, but will always evolve on some level with the repsecitve growth of the folk...
Hope that's something of what you were looking for:)