Jewish Given Names in Eastern Europe

Revue des études juives, 1998, 157 (1), pp. 169-198. Jewish Given Names in Eastern Europe by Alexander Beider There is an abundant literature treating the origins of East European Jewry. Unfortunately, due to the extreme paucity of documented sources, that literature is largely polemical. With a lack of direct historical proof, the authors often construct general theories derived from the analysis of particular aspects of Jewish life. A very important part of the works written on the subject use Jewish personal names as the arguments. Eastern European names are discussed, for example, in REA 1:05 (introduction by A.Garkavi), Beršadskij 1883:395, Centnerszwerowa 1907, and Golb-Pritsak 1982:24, 35-40. Remarks concerning given names were also made in Dubnov 1909:26, Weinryb 1962:294-5, Weinryb 1973:28, and Wexler 1986:7-9. Many pages of Max Weinreich's Gešixte fun der jidišer šprax (1973) and Paul Wexler's Explorations in Judeo-Slavic Linguistics (1987) deal with Jewish given names as well. The attention paid by various authors to Jewish proper names is understandable. Consideration of the general tendencies and peculiarities of names can indeed serve as a good tool for corroborating or falsifying the conjectures concerning the origins of Jews in different areas. It appears, however, that no detailed study in this domain was ever made. The viewpoints of Garkavi, Beršadskij and Centnerszwerowa were based on a superficial and erroneous analysis. Apparently, Weinryb's opinions, though the correct ones, were also drawn from a very superficial consideration.((1)) On the other hand, the study by Golb and Pritsak, though very detailed, was based on a very small sample - a dozen of names served the authors for drawing their general conclusions. Two sections of I.Schipper's Kultur-gešixte fun di jidn in pojln bejsn mitlalter (1926) represent the only scholarly text in which the origins of different given names used by Jews in Eastern Europe were studied systematically. Unfortunately, many of his interpretations concerning both the etymologies of names and the relationship between certain names from Poland and some names from sources in Western or Central Europe, are rather naive and based on casual phonetic similarities between unrelated words. Another systematic scholarly study of given names used by Jews in Eastern Europe provides the paper by E. Stankiewicz (1969). In that study, the author focused his attention on such questions as the phonetic forms of Jewish given names, their derivational relations, and the functions of the variants. The paper's contribution to Jewish onomastics was outstanding by both his pioneering linguistical approach and his profound analysis of many important aspects of Jewish given names. These aspects are beyond the scope of this paper. On the other hand, Stankiewicz has deliberately ignored the historical aspects of names but for few remarks (pp.279-281). The aim of this paper is to provide a detailed analysis of given names used by Jews in the territory of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the 15th-16th centuries. (The data from the following centuries will be considered only in order to clarify some features for which the available sources from the 15th-16th centuries are unsufficient.) Our discussion will be focused on the inventory of these names and their historical aspects. The conclusions about the origins of Lithuanian Jewry that can be made on the basis of the analysis of this inventory will be treated in detail. Sources for the Analysis of Jewish Given Names The study of texts in which Jewish personal names are mentioned shows that in different documents the same individual can be named differently. The language in which the text is written is of paramount importance for understanding the form of the given name present in a document. Yiddish texts generally give the names in the forms which were used between Jews in the vernacular life. Names appearing in Hebrew sources (including the tombstone inscriptions) often do not provide the names used in the everyday life, but the so-called shemot ha-kodesh,((2)) that correspond to the vernacular names. For example, a man who was generally called Mendel by his relatives or acquiantances, will be generally referred to as Menachem in a Hebrew source. Christian sources, written either in Latin or in Cyrillic characters, give the names by which Jews were known to the local Christians. Such names can be similar to those used by Jews among themselves. They can also differ from the latter ones by the presence of specific diminutive suffixes of non-Jewish origin; for example, Mordecai (Mortxe in Yiddish) could be called Mordko in the Russian or Polish sources. They can also correspond to the Christian equivalents of the Jewish names. Such substitutions are common in the case of biblical names. Examples are such forms as German Moses, Polish Moj_esz, and Russian Moisej all corresponding to Yiddish Mojše. They can also represent the translations of the direct meaning of genuine Jewish given name into the local language, and, for example, someone known to other Jews as Volf (Wolf) can be mentioned as Vlk in Czech documents, while Lejb (lion) or Lejbe can appear as Levko/Lewko in Russian/Polish documents.((3)) Finally, these names can be those used by local Christians which have some phonetic similarities with the genuine Jewish names. Example are the name Heinrich that substitutes in German Christian sources such Hebrew names as Hanoch and Hayyim, and the names Marcus and Markwart/Markvart that often hide in German or Czech sources the name Mordecai. Another example is the Russian Gentile name Glebko used in a Russian document instead of the genuine Jewish name Lejbko (RN 1:313, 314).((4)) Thus, if one wishes to know the names used by Jews among themselves, those names appearing in non-Jewish sources are to be taken with a great caution. Nevertheless, one can distinguish three categories of given names present in these Christian sources which clearly correspond to names used by Jews among themselves. First are the names which are both not used by local Christians and are not mentioned in the Bible. Examples are the post-Biblical names of Hebrew origin mentioned in the German Christian sources, or those of German or Yiddish origin mentioned in Slavic sources. Second are the non-Christian forms of the biblical given names. Thus, if one encounters in a Russian source such names as Naftuli, Xackel' or Šabšaj, one can be sure that these names were indeed used in such form by their bearers since the Russian equivalents of these names are Naftali, Ezekiil' and Sabbataj, respectively. The third category of genuine Jewish names include a special group of non-biblical names used by local Christians which appear as Jewish names in several independant Christian sources. The scribes who compiled these documents could independently of each other replace the genuine Jewish names with the same Christian name (different from the Jewish one) only if this Christian name and the genuine Jewish name were very close phonetically. The examples are the German names Arndt and Borchard/Burchard which sound very similar to Aron and Boruch, respectively. Both substitutions Aron -> Arndt and Boruch -> Borchard could be done by various scribes independently. On the other hand, there is no purely Jewish name which sounds similarly to Gumprecht and Bogdan, both of which appear as Jewish names in a large number of different sources. Hence, even though based only on Christian sources we can, nevertheless, be sure that the name Gumprecht was indeed used by German Jews during the 13th century, while Bogdan was used by Jews in Eastern Europe during the 16th century. Unfortunately, no Jewish source from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is available for the 15th century, while those written during the 16th century include a very small number of names. Thus for the analysis of the inventory of Jewish names from that period, one need to be based on Russian Christian sources. The comprehensive compilations of such sources can be found in three volumes of REA and the first volume of RN which will be the source of most data presented below. The detailed consideration of these sources shows that they include many errors: in certain cases the names of the same individuals are referred differently in REA and RN. For example, in the censuses of the townlet of Novyj Dvor we find these discrepancies (in each pair the first form is from REA 2:82-3, while the second one is from RN 1:224-5): Šmojlo Monkovi_ / Xmojla Markovi_, Xoim / Xaim, Ioško / Ja_ko, Baška (man) / Raška (woman), Naxim / Xaim. For Grodno, errors are certainly present: such as the spelling of the following names (REA 2:73-4, Polish spelling / RN 1:229-32, Russian spelling): Ichudzicz / Sxudi_, Zorach / _drax, Iliya Moszko / Xija Koško (sic!), Breynia / Brejma, Moszkowicz / Mo_kovi_, Chackowicz / Xankovi_, Aron / Azon, Hachim / Naxim, Miescin Kochmanowicz / Mesin Koxvanovi_, Szmoy_o / Izmojlo, Marko / Mosko, Nochman / Naxmaš, Seymin / Iejmin. In Kobrin, one finds Faim (REA 2:121-2) and its correct form Faiš (RN 1:235). Errors could have arisen at a number of different stages. The above examples show that they are rather graphical than phonetic. Some of them could appear when a printer misread handwritten notes. It is more likely, however, that they are mostly errors of the scribes. We know that all books of records from the 15th century and the majority of books from the 16th century were re-written in 1596-8 (REA 1:III). Actually, many documents are even later copies, as, for example, the text of two documents of 1503 was clearly re-written in 1654 (REA 1:63-64). Thus when dealing with Russian sources of the 15th-16th centuries, one should always keep in mind the possibility that some very unusual names represent no more than scribe errors.((5)) To suggest the existence of a name, it is therefore preferrable to cite it from at least two independant records. Jewish Given Names in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania The first valid references to Jewish communities in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania date from the end of the 14th century when the sovereign of the country, Vitautas, gave special privileges to Jews. At that time, the Duchy covered the contemporary territories of Lithuania, Belarus, large part of Ukraine (Volhynia and the Kiev area), the Polish Podlasie, as well as a small part of western Russia (the Smolensk area). The majority of the population of Lithuania were Orthodox Slavs, while the official language was Russian. Until the middle of the 15th century, no one name used by local Jews appears in the available Russian documents (RN, REA). From the second part of that century and up till the expulsion of all Jews from Lithuania in 1495, only the names of about 50 of the richest Jewish men are recorded in the Russian sources, mainly these are the names of Jewish Royal taxfarmers (otkupš_iki). These persons lived in Brest, Grodno, Kiev, Luck, and Troki. Some of them could be Karaites, since, firstly, Russian sources of that time do not distinguish that sect of Judaism from other Jews, and, secondly, Karaites certainly lived in such towns as Troki and Luck. Actually, the number of known given names from that period is almost double the number of mentioned persons as the majority of these men had their patronymics also given in the sources. A very large part of mentioned names are Slavic forms of biblical names: Avram (Abraham), Danilo (Daniel), Esip (Joseph), Iguda (Juda), Ilja (Eliah), Lazar' (Elieser or Elasar), Mixail (Michael), Moisej/Mošej (Moses), Onatan (Jonathan), Ruvim (Reuben), Sadko (Zadok), Sak (Isaac), etc. Only few biblical names are recorded in Jewish forms: Icxak (Isaac) and Šloma/Šlema (Solomon). The letter o in the second syllable of the name Alkon/Olkona (REA 1:43, 53) reveals the Ashkenazic pronunciation of the biblical name Elkana, and, therefore, its bearer was undoubtedly of western (and not southeastern) origin. The spelling of three other biblical names, Naxim (Nahum), Ogron/Agron (Aaron) and Xackel' (Ezekiel), is also of interest. The name Naxim is first mentioned in Grodno in 1495 (REA 1:54) and was actively used during the 16th century. The Belorussian Christian form of that name, Naum/Navum (Biryla 1966:125), was different from the Jewish one. Thus, if the first vowel a in the name Naxim could be influenced by the Belorussian spelling of this name, the second vowel i is undoubtedly due to the Jewish pronunciation of it. This pronunciation is not directly based on the Hebrew form of this name, since the Hebrew form ends in -um, not in -im. All representative lists of given names used by oriental Jews, which are known to me, always show -um in the discussed name. On the other hand, we have evidences that the form ending in -im/-ym was used in western Europe during the 14th-15th centuries: Nachym in Erfurt (Süssmann 1915:106) and Nachim in Vienna (Goldmann 1908:319). Thus, the name Naxim is likely to be related to the Ashkenazic migrations from the West. Aaron is generally spelled Ogron or Agron in Russian sources of that times (REA 1:47, 52). The name seems not to have been used by local Slavic Christians. It is clear that this name was used in real life. First, the forms Ogron and Agron are recorded in various towns, and, therefore, these spellings could not be due to a single scribe. Second, at the beginning of the 19th century Agron and its hypocoristic form Agroska were sources for such Jewish surnames as Agronovi_, Agronovskij, Agronskij, Agroskin, etc. (Beider 1993:99). It is unlikely that the initial O corresponds to the Jewish pronunciation as it was stated in Joffe 1954:120 (cf. the standard Yiddish form Orn). More likely, it represents the phenomenon of replacing the initial unstressed A with O, peculiar to Belorussian Christian names (cf. Biryla 1966:13). The presence of g in Ogron is more intriguing. As the letter g is pronounced /h/ in Belorussian, hence it is clear that Ogron is related to Aharon, the original Hebrew spelling of the name. However, neither the Latin form Aaron (the source for Polish Roman Catholic form of this biblical name) nor the Greek form of it (the source for Belorussian or Russian forms) include h. Thus the letter g (sound /h/) either corresponds to the non-Ashkenazic pronunciation of the name by local Jews, or it reflects the form used by Slavs for Jews that resulted from earlier learned Christian transliteration of the Hebrew spelling.((6)) Two names are derived from the biblical name Ezekiel: Xackel' (REA 1:183) and its hypocoristic form Xacko (REA 1:54). These forms have two important phonetic differences with both the Hebrew form of Ezekiel and its Yiddish colloquial form Xeskl: the first vowel a (instead of e) and the affricate c (pronounced as /ts/) (instead of z or s). I was unable to find in German or Austrian sources from the 11th-16th centuries any occurence of a variant of Ezekiel in which a would be present. On the other hand, such forms are mentioned in the Slavic lands of Central Europe: Chazkel in Silesia in 1204 (Aronius 1892:161) and Chaska in 1500 in Prague (Bondy-Dvorsky 1906:1:180).((7)) The change s -> c before a plosive consonant is likely to be a Slavic phenomenon (cf. Polish Christian names Kasper and Kacper). Among the post-biblical Hebrew given names are Mevorax (spelled Merovax in the source REA 1:51), Nisan, Pesax, Šalom and Simxa. The name Elen' (stag) (REA 1:55) is, most likely, a direct translation of the Yiddish name Herc/Hirš/Herš. Only one name was certainly borrowed from local Slavic Christians: Bogdan (REA 1:54). As this name means God-given, it could be used in Jewish families as a vernacular equivalent of the biblical Nathaniel or Jonathan that have the same meaning in Hebrew.((8)) The name of a Kiev tax-farmer of 1486-8 spelled Samodyka (REA 1:38) or Samodelka (RN 1:81), is likely to be of Slavic origin as well. Another tax-farmer with a Slavic name, Zubec (the root coincides with the Russian word for tooth) is mentioned during 1486-1507 in Troki. He is likely to be a Karaite (REA 3:86). Levon, the Belorussian form of Leon, was either borrowed from local Belorussian Christians, or represents a Belorussianized form of some other name (Levi ?, Leon ?, Levin ?). Another name that could be of Slavic origin is Rabej, as that name coincides with the Belorussian word for rabbi. Kulišer (1911:65) and Schipper (1926:289) suggest that this name is related to Hebrew name Rabba that was used, for example, by Nürnberg's Jews at the end of the 13th century. That idea makes sense since the addition of the suffix -ej was appropriate for Belorussian onomastics (Biryla 1966:15). We also find the same suffix in Ošejka/Gošej, a form of Yehoshua/Joshua, borne by Troki's Jewish (Karaite ?) tax-farmer during the 1480s (REA 1:38, 46). The unusual names of three merchants who arrived from Volhynia to Gda_sk circa 1445 are interesting: Magdon, Detko, and Hollofene (Schipper 1911:186). The origin of the first one is unclear, and it is very likely that some letters in this strange name were distorted by the scribe. The second name coincides with the Russian diminutive form for child. However, we find in the sources from Red Russia written in the 15th century two names which are very similar: Dzatko and Dyed. These names are very likely to be based on Polish dziad and Russian ded, both meaning grandfather. Consequently, the name Detko could be the phonetic spelling of Dedko, a diminutive of grandfather. Such name is likely to be assigned to a tenderly guarded or seriously sick child. The third name, Hollofene, is likely to be a Ukrainized variant of Xlavna/Xlavno, that in turn is mentioned in that form for the first time in Kobrin's census of 1563. That name seems to be derived from Czech word hlavn_, meaning firebrand (though no information about its use in Bohemia was found). The Ukrainian equivalent of that word is holovnja. Most likely, it appeared as a calque of biblical Lapidoth, meaning torches in Hebrew since the name Xlavno was used in the 17th century as a vernacular form for Lapidoth (BS 97a). It also could be a calque of talmudic name Meir that in turn is derived from Hebrew root meaning to shine (Schipper 1926:286).((9)) A dozen of names end in Slavic diminutive suffixes. These are mainly the hypocoristic forms of biblical names ending in -ko/-ka: Danko (Daniel), En'ka (Jonah?), Es'ko (mainly, Joseph, cf. Kulišer 1911:38 and Petrovskij 1984:287, but also Ayzik/Isaac, cf. Beršadskij 1888:35), Icko (Isaac), Jacko, used by Jews as a vernacular form for Jacob (cf. BS 97a), Judka (Juda), Moško (Moses), and Ošejka (Joshua). The name Perko (REA 1:40) is most likely derived from the Yiddish name Ber, though it could be also based on the biblical Peretz. The name Ri_ko/Ry_ko (REA 1:38, 67) seems to be drawn from the Slavic root meaning red-haired. (The names Ry_ko and Ryško were both used by Russian Christians too, cf. Tupikov 1903:344.) Other hypocoristic suffixes are found in such names as Konjuk (REA 1:54, 224; most likely, derived from Olkona/Elkana, cf. Kulišer 1911:24; suffix uk), Ota_ik/Ata_ik (REA 1:47, 59; of unknown origin; suffix -ik or -_ik), Rab_ik (REA 1:38; from Rabej; suffix -_ik), and Šaxno (REA 1:38; from Shalom or Shabbetai; suffix -xno). Given names mentioned before the end of the 15th century are not too numerous and include too many biblical names for drawing any conclusion about the origins of the Lithuanian Jews. After 1503 Jews were allowed to live in the Duchy again. Documents dating from the beginning of the 16th century clearly indicate several earlier expelled persons who later returned to Lithuania. Thus it is reasonable to think that many Jews who came to the Duchy immediately after 1503 were either those who were obliged to leave the country in 1495 or their direct descendants. Hundreds of names used by Jews during the 16th century are mentioned in the Russian sources of that time. A large majority had biblical names, and, therefore, their geographical origins are hidden. Other names provide more information. An important part of given names reveal the presence in Lithuania of Ashkenazic Jews, that is, Jews who came to the area from western Yiddish-speaking communities or their descendants. These individuals either used names with Romance or Germanic roots, or had names ending in Yiddish diminutive suffix -l. Some of them bore non-Slavic (Yiddish or German) forms of biblical names inferring their western origin. The geographical distribution of such names was not uniform. In the northern part of the country (corresponding to modern Belarus and Lithuania), Ashkenazic names were quite common only in Brest. Examples are: Ajzik, Bendet, Berman, Fajviš, Fišel', Gerš, Kgec, Kolman, Mendel', Merkel', Mixel', Šmerlja, Vol'f, Zelikman, Zelman, and Zyskin. In other towns such names are rather unusual. We do find, however, such instances as Brejna, Lipman and Zoval', all in Grodno, Mendel' and Jankel' in Novogrudok, Faiš, Fajviš, Šabsaj and Zel'ko, all in Kobrin, Bendet, Girša, Golda and Šiskin, all in Pinsk, Šmerlja, Juta, and Zel'man, all in Tykocin. In Volhynia, most numerous examples of Ashkenazic names are from the 1563 census of Kremenec (RN 1:237-8): Bejlja, Ekalec, Enta, Gitlja, Kalmen, Liber, Midlja, Pejsax, Sorka, Surka, Tolba, Xackim, Zindel', Zisel' and Zundel'. Among the rare examples from other towns are: Gercko, Katzim and Peslja (REA 2:26; Luck's census of 1552), Libko, Ezel' and Zel'man, all from Vladimir Volynskij, Man and Zel'man from Ratno (RN 1:241).((10)) A very small proportion of given names used by Lithuanian Jews during the 16th century had Slavic roots. Several names from that category seem to be the Slavic calques of the original Hebrew or Yiddish names: _idka from Judith (REA 1:93; both names have the root meaning Jewess), _iv'nica from Haya (RN 1:242; both names are based on life), Vol_ko from Wolf (RN 1:212). When dealing with such loan translation forms, one can not be sure that all these names were indeed used by Jews. They could represent a translation of the genuine given names made either by its own bearer or by an educated Christian scribe. The example of Polock's tax-farmer, who is called Š_asnyj in REA 2:71 and Feliks in REA 2:44 clearly shows such possibility (both names mean happy, in Belorussian and Latin, respectively). Several other Jews called Š_asnyj or Š_ensnyj (from Polish Szcz_sny) are mentioned during the 16th century as well (Kremenec 1563, Parczew 1565; in RN 1:238 and REA 2:148, respectively). That name used at that time by Christians too (RN 1:155), could represent in Jewish families the equivalent of biblical Asher, of the Yiddish name Zelik or the Latin name Felix. Names borrowed from local Slavs include Kasper (REA 2:51; the name of non-Slavic origin used by both Polish and Belorussian Christians), Bogdan, known as Jewish name already in the 15th century (see above) and its feminine counterpart Bogdana (REA 1:288, RN 1:257). Other Slavic names are the feminine names Drobna (small), Lixanka (perhaps, from the root meaning bold; since that name is present only in one document, some letters could be erroneous, and the name could be, for example, a form of Lea with added Slavic suffix), _ernja (from Czech black), and Dobrusa (good), as well as such masculine names as P_olka/B_olka (coincides with the diminutive form of bee) and Krivon/Krivonja (substantive form based on crooked; lame; one-eyed) (RN 1:143, REA 2:171, RN 1:262, RN 1:230, RN 1:257, and REA 1:267, respectively).((11)) The pleasant etymology of such feminine names as Dobrusa, Drobna and Lixanka seems to be determinant for their use. On the other hand, the reason of the occurence of both masculine names cited above is not evident. No source indicates that these names were also used by Christians, and, therefore, they could be exclusively Jewish. If the name P_olka is indeed derived from the word bee, then it is strange enough that a masculine name was drawn from a feminine noun (the Ukrainian, Belorussian and Russian words for bee are feminine). The fact that the name appears always with the diminutive suffix -ka, while no instance of the name P_ola/P_ela was found, is suspicious as well. Hence, the idea that the discussed name has not originated from the word bee, seems to make sense. For example, this name could be derived from Bcalka, a hypocoristic form of biblical Betzalel, which was changed to P_olka/B_olka, that sounds similar and coincides with the existing common Slavic noun.((12)) Krivon, having a distinct pejorative connotation, could be a name assigned to a tenderly guarded or seriously sick child in order to cheat the evil spirits. Such pejorative names were also common in Russian Christian families. Two other unusual masculine names could be of Slavic origin as well. These are Pexturc/Pexturca (Pexturec?; perhaps, a distorted form of biblical Pedatzur) mentioned in Grodno in 1541 (REA 1:292) and Pesnyj (nickname or given name ?) appearing in Kremenec' census of 1563 (RN 1:238). The name Golaš/Gološ used by several Jews of Brest and Grodno during the first part of the 16th century (REA 1:121, 127, 271) is of unclear origin. (The names Golaš and Galaš were used by Russian Christians at the end of the 15th century, cf. Tupikov 1903:102. Both Holasch and Golas were used by Polish Christians during the 15th century too, cf. SSNO 2:155, 307.) The name Domanja is mentioned in Xmel'nik and Rossoš during the 1560s (RN 1:241; REA 2:171). Unfortunately, in both documents the gender of its bearer is unclear. Kulišer 1911:101 considers this name to be feminine. It could be a hypocoristic form of Domna, a name of Latin origin used by local Slavic Christians. Slavic phenomena influenced the phonetics of the forms of certain biblical names used by Jews in Lithuania. We find, for example, several names in which the (peculiar to Belorussian) introduction of the consonant v between two vowels took place: Govaš (most likely, from biblical Yehoash, cf. Kulišer 1911:35 and Wexler 1987:79), Novax (Noah) and Iovel' (Joel) (REA 1:52, RN 1:296, RN 2:13).((13)) The presence of the letter v in the name Evna (Jonah), mentioned in 1564 in Vladimir (Volhynia) (REA 2:131), is very likely to be due to Ukrainian or Belorussian influence. Another Belorussian phenomenon is the use of initial M instead of original N: Misan (REA 1:105, 264; RN 1:238). This feature was not found in Jewish sources (cf. Wexler 1987:221), and, therefore, it is very likely that it was simply due to Christian scribes, while in the everyday life the form Misan was never used by Jews. The origins of Jews in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania It is generally assumed that the first communities in the eastern Slavic territories were nonAshkenazic. It is said that they were migrants from the southern or eastern areas: Crimea, Caucasus, the Khazar Kingdom, Byzantium, Persia, or Babylonia. For Kiev, data from the Russian chronicles make likely the existence of a Jewish community in the 12th century.((14)) The Jewish sources of the 12th-13th centuries mention only few Jewish individuals (of unknown origin) who lived at that time in Kiev and _ernigov. Were these earlier Jewish settlers important for the genesis of the communities which were in existence toward the end of the 14th century ? The analysis of given names used in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the 15th and 16th centuries suggests that such conjecture is rather implausible and that the existence of Jewish settlements in that area could be discontinous (see Weinryb 1962:501). All names appearing in the documents of that period are of Hebrew, Romance, German/Yiddish or Slavic origin. No one name is of Turkic, Persian, Arabic or Greek origin.((15)) Evidently, the lists of names extracted from the available sources for the 15th-16th centuries are far from being exhaustive. The Christian and Jewish documents from the following centuries are much more informative. However, they include no one name of Turkic or Persian origin as well. The only name of Arabic origin used by Jews in Poland, Lithuania, or later, during the 19th century, in the Russian Empire, was Majmon. That name is unlikely to be due to Sephardic migrations to the area. More likely, it was used in honor of the father's name of the famous Jewish Sephardic medieval scholar Moses ben Maimon (Maimonides). Thus that name was not inherited from previous generations, but borrowed from Jewish writings. The only names of definitive Greek origin were Alexander, Kalonymos, and Todros, whch are names that were already used by Jews in western Germany during the Middle Ages. All other names mentioned during the 15th-19th centuries are of Hebrew, Aramaic, Romance, German/Yiddish or Slavic origin. The fact that during the 15th-16th centuries Jews used Slavic names was put forth by several authors. R.Centnerszwerowa expressed in 1907 the view that prior to the 17th century, Polish was the vernacular language of most Polish Jews, while Russian was the language of the everyday use for Lithuanian Jews. Jewish proper names were her main arguments. The two pioneers of the studies of the history of East European Jewry, Abraham Garkavi and Sergej Beršadskij were the main contributors to the theory. Both claimed that during the 16th, Russian was the colloquial language of numerous Jews in the Duchy (cf.Beršadskij 1883:395). Garkavi (1869) suggested that it was the case during the earlier centuries as well as during the first part of the 17th century too. Both used proper names as one of the most important supports for their argument. The detailed study of other arguments advanced by Beršadskij clearly shows that the richest and the most educated Jews of that time were indeed fluent enough in Russian: they never used translators, they prefered Russian to Polish or Latin, of which their knowledge was apparently rather poor. Nothing indicates, however, that Russian was the native language of these people, or that they used Russian in internal Jewish affairs.((16)) Apart from onomastics materials, Garkavi's arguments were mainly based on his analysis of Slavic glosses present in medieval western Hebrew texts. However, as was shown by Jakobson and Halle (1964:160), these glosses are rather from the Czech language than from eastern Slavic tongues. In contrast to Garkavi and Beršadskij, Simon Dubnov (1909) claimed that during the 16th century the majority of Lithuanian Jews were native Yiddish speakers. He cited several Yiddish testimonies incorporated in the transactions of Hebrew rabbinic judgments. All Dubnov's examples dated from the second part of the 16th century or the first part of the 17th century. He stated that actually such instances are quite numerous, while the Russian-speaking Jews are mentioned in the same type of sources only twice: in the Podolian town of Med_ibo_ (1605) and in the city of Vilna (1635). All other Dubnov's arguments on the use of Yiddish as the vernacular language came from his study of Jewish communal records and Jewish popular literature of that time from two Polish cities: Kraków and Pozna_, but did not deal with Lithuania. These arguments were directed against Centnerszwerowa's idea about Polish as the vernacular Jewish language in Poland. As it was already discussed, analysis of given names used during the 16th century provides numerous examples of Jews of western origin who were bearers of Germanic names. One name, _ernja, is of Czech origin, and, therefore, was also due to the migrations from the West. These instances corroborate the presence of Ashkenazic Jews in all important communities of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.((17)) It is unlikely that those with names with distinctive Germanic roots were native speakers of Russian. Moreover, it is highly inlikely that those who used names with evident Yiddish suffixes or representing the dialectal Yiddish forms were the native speakers of Russian. These examples are quite insufficient, however, for drawing the conclusion about the prevalence of Yiddish-speakers in number. In contrast to these Jews, the origins and the native language of numerous holders of biblical names can not be determinated. The predominance of Russian or Polish forms of biblical names, often ending in Slavic diminutive suffixes (mainly in -ko and -ka) does not infer that their bearers were Slavic speakers. These forms could be either due to the Slavonization of names made in the documents by Christian scribes, or represent the names under which Jews were known to their Gentile Slavic-speaking neighbors. By analogy, in no case do Slavic nicknames designating Jews in Christian sources of those times infer that these Jews were native Slavic speakers (see the details in Beider 1992:190-1). On the other hand, the existence of certain other Slavic given names can indeed be a good indication of the presence of monolingual Slavic-speaking Jews. Consider several examples. The given name Bogdan was not unusual at that period. Among its bearers were two Grodno's landowners of the end of the 15th century (REA 1:54), one of whom was the father of Iguda/Juda, the Grodno's richest Jew in the first part of the 16th century. Tobiaš, the son of another Bogdan, was one of the elders of the Brest community during the 1560s (RN 1:255). This name, meaning God-given was borrowed from Christian Slavs and was actively used by them at that period too. The frequency of its use in Jewish families could be understood if, for example, we suggest that during the initial period of its propagation the vernacular language of Jews was Slavic (or Judeo-Slavic) and, therefore, the meaning of the word Bogdan in that language was the feature that contributed to the common use of this name. Even more important for our argument are the names Drobna and Krivon(ja), discussed above, which seem not to be borrowed from Christians, but constructed by Jews themselves. It is reasonable to think that construction of new names is possible only in a vernacular language, or in a language used in religious matters. For Jews this implies that their new invented names should always be based either in a language they use in their everyday life, or in Hebrew/Aramaic. Thus new Slavic names could originate only within the Slavic-speaking Jewish communities. The group of names ending in -xno (masculine) or -xna (feminine) is very interesting for our analysis too. This suffix was often present in the hypocoristic forms of given names used by Ukrainian and Belorussian Christians during the 16th century. In Russian documents of the same century, the Jewish names using this suffix are not unusual: Avixna (mentioned only once, it could be a corrupted form of Vixna, see below), Ruxna, Saxna, Stexna, Vixna, Jaxno, Juxno, Saxno, Šaxno, and Smoxno (REA 1:248, REA 2:26, RN 1:250, REA 1:245, RN 1:211, REA 2:141, RN 1:220, RN 1:241, REA 1:38, RN 1:230, respectively). In the 17th century, one finds also mentions of Jews called Mixne and Jakuxno (RN 1:380, 427). Many names from the above list were also used by Christians though in some cases the Jewish and the Gentile names could be derived from different base forms. A Russian peasant called Šaxno is mentioned in the 16th century (Tupikov 903:438). Mixna appears as a name of several non-Jews (cf., for example, RN 1:143, 190). Polish Christian bearers of such names as Jachna, Jachno, Juchno, Ruchna, Sachna and Wichna are all cited in SSNO. On the other hand, I was unable to find any mention of Christian users of such names as Stexna (from Esther) and Smoxno (from Samuel) in the available literature. We do not know whether these forms were initially constructed by Jews or by their Christian neighbors. Certain ones such as Šaxno and Vixna, were undoubtedly used by Jews among themselves and survived in these forms until the 20th century. The names Miruxna (from Miriam) and Moxno (from Moses) were also recorded in Jewish sources of the 17th century (BS 100b, 98a; the same book also mentions the names Šaxno, Saxna and Vixna). Hence, it is quite possible that -xno/xna was one of the suffixes used by Slavic-speaking Jews for contructing the hypocorostic forms of their given names. Another Slavic suffix that seems to have been used by Jews during the 15th-16th century is -acko/ucko/acka. We find it in such names as Jacko (REA 1:41; from Jacob), Lacko (REA 1:183; from Lazar which in turn is a Slavic hypocoristic form of both Elieser and Elasar), Ducko (REA 1:128; from David, as the same person is called David in another document REA 1:146), and Xacka (REA 2:219; from Xana or Xava). This suffix was not used by local Christians in the 16th century (see Biryla 1966), and, the names Ducko, Lacko and Xacka seem to be exclusively Jewish. On the other hand, both Belorussians and Poles used the name Jacko as a hypocoristic form of Polish names Hiacynt and Jacenty (Biryla 1966:172). In both cases the suffix is -ko, not -acko. This Christian name could be borrowed by Jews as a vernacular form for Jacob. The above analysis shows that it is indeed very plausible that there was a period of existence of monolingual Russian-speaking Jewish communities, suggested by Garkavi and Beršadskij, though, of course, nothing indicates that during the 16th century native speakers of Russian were more numerous than Yiddish-speakers. Moreover, it is clear that these Russian-speaking Jews were a very minority. The first, indirect, argument is provided by onomastics. As it was pointed out above, the number of Slavic names used by Jews is minimal and far smaller than the number of Germanic names. The second argument is provided by the demographic data. The paucity of mentions of Jews during the 14th and 15th centuries infers that their number was very small. For the middle of the 16th century the data of censuses is available for all important communities except for Troki and Ostrog. The biggest numbers of households were in the following towns: Brest - 85 (1566), Grodno - 60 (1560), Kremenec 48 (1552), Luck - 31 (1552) (that number does not include the Karaite households) and Vladimir Volynskij - 30 (1552). The detailed study of all available Russian documents shows that many dwellers in the same town were related. For example, among the 60 Grodno's householders, one can distinguish five sons of Iguda Bogdanovi_ (Juda, son of Bogdan): Abram (Abraham), Izrael' (Israel), Ogron (Aron), Moško (Moses), and Pesax (Pesach), as well as at least two of his grandsons: Tobiaš Abramovi_ (Tobias, son of Abraham) and Morduxaj Bogdanovi_ (Mordecai, son of Bogdan). At least two members of another family, Xorošen'kij, were independent householders as well: Xacko Lazarovi_ (Ezekiel, son of Elieser or Elasar) and his son Misan (Nissan). In Brest, we find two persons surnamed Lip_i_ (Lipschitz) and two brothers David and Lipman, sons of Šmerlja (Shemariah). In Pinsk, the brothers Izrael' (Israel) and Naxim (Nahum), sons of Pesax (Pesach) are present. During the middle of the 16th century Jewish houses were rather small and the name of one householder appearing in the census could not hide numerous individuals living in the same house (Beršadskij 1883:335). Thus it is clear that the total number of unrelated families in every Jewish community was not big. Only some of these few families could be native speakers of Russian. Both the exact time and exact geographical area corresponding to the existence of Russian-speaking Jewish communities are obscure. The distribution of Jewish given names in Eastern Europe provides interesting data. During the 15th century Christian sources cite Jews called Šaxno (Szachno in Polish spelling) and Bogdan (Bohdan) in Lwów and Dzatko in Drohobycz, in the Lwów area (Schipper 1911:183, 242). As it was pointed above these are some of the few examples of Slavic names used by Jews in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the 15th-16th centuries. There are two ways of explaining these facts. Firstly, the sharing of names in two neighboring countries((18)) could be due to Jewish migrations between them. Secondly, one might conjecture that the monolingual Russian-speaking Jewish communities were formed when Red Russia and Volhynia were parts of a single state, that is during the 13th century.((19)) A very intriguing fact is the sharing of such Slavic names as Bogdan, Vol_ko and Jaxno by the Karaites as well (cf. the data from 1552' census of Luck in REA 2:25). I see two ways of explaining this fact. Firstly, these names could be due to monolingual Russian-speaking Jews (of uncertain origins) who had no scholars during the 14th century and, therefore, knew little of Jewish law. During the 15th century new Ashkenazic settlers came to the area either from the West or from the Rabbinite communities of Brest and Grodno, while new Karaite settlers came to Luck either from Troki or directly from Crimea. This Russian-speaking community could then be divided in two groups. One group joined the Ashkenazic Jews to form the Rabbinite community of Luck, while others took part in the creation of a local Karaite community. Secondly, the names cited above could be shared by both communities as these communities were not really separated from each other idealogically and geographically. It is very likely that the clearcut distinction between the Rabbinite and the Karaite Jews did not exist during the 15th-16th centuries. We do not find any trace of a conflict between these two religious groups in the Russian sources of that period. Moreover, as it was already pointed above, generally these sources do not distingish these groups (except for the census of Luck in 1552, REA 2:25 and one other document from the same town dating 1506, REA 1:68). To local Christians, they both were just Jewish. In the 15th century the only known Karaite communities in Slavic and Lithuanian lands were in Troki, Luck and Lwów. For two latter towns one can be sure that the Rabbinite communities existed in them too, while for Troki the existence of the Rabbinite community is plausible as well. Thus Karaites were not separated geographically from other Jews. This fact is unlikely to be accidental. Both groups were probably in permanent contact with each other. This contact (intermarriages?) can explain the sharing of such Hebrew non-biblical names as Nisan and Simxa, as well as the use of certain Slavic names by both the Karaites and the Rabbinite Jews. The second hypothesis seems to be more plausible as it is better corroborated by the historical facts. Not very numerous in numbers, Russian-speaking Jews merged with the newly arriving Yiddish- speaking migrants from the West during the 16th and the first part of the 17th centuries. The largely quoted testimony of Meir Katz, an Ashkenazic Jew, who served at the beginning of the 17th century as rabbi in the Belorussian town of Mogilev, is the first and the last mention of the Slavic-speaking Jews as a group. That rabbi wrote that Jews around him are mostly speaking Russian and call the town Brest by its Russian name. He also expressed the desire for a time to come when all Jews will speak Yiddish and will call the town by its Yiddish name, Brisk. Dubnov (1909:23) commented on Katz' writings arguing that the only positive information it presented is that Jews of Mogilev spoke Russian, while nothing indicates that they were not speakers of Yiddish too. Max Weinreich (1980:88) claimed that the word mostly used by Meir Katz is due to the author's temperament and to his negative reaction to the use of the non-Yiddish language. The onomastics data dealing with Mogilev during the first part of the 17th century support the Dubnov's and Weinreich's sceptisism. In 1645, an anti-Jewish pogrom occured in that town, the first known event of such kind in the whole history of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. We know the names of members of ten families who were either injured or whose houses were damaged during the events (RN 1:387). Only two of these families have no names of Ashkenazic origin: all their given names are just Slavic forms of biblical names with one exeption: Pantelej, a Russian Christian name of Greek origin which is likely to be present in the document instead of the genuine Jewish biblical name Paltiel that sounds similar. In all other families at least one given name is explicitly Yiddish. These names are: Flejda (Frejda?), Gendlja, Golda, Pesja, Zel'da, and Zusman, all of German or Yiddish origin, Noxim and Pejsax, the Yiddish pronunciation variants of names of Hebrew origin, and Fajbiš, derived from the Latin name Vives that was changed to Feibisch in German lands. No one mention of any native Jewish speaker of Russian is found in the sources dating from the second part of the 17th century.((20)) In the 19th century, among several hundred basic given names used by Jews of the Russian Empire only a few were the survivors from the rare names with Slavic roots used in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania during the 15th-16th centuries: Badana/Badane (Yiddishized form of Bogdana) and Drobna. The obsolete name Detko/Dzatko/Dyed seems to give rise to Zejde.((21)) Volhynian sources from the 19th century also cite the masculine name Sobol' (derived from Slavic sable) and its feminine counterpart Sojbl (based on Yiddish sable). Apparently, such names as Bogdan, Domanja, Krivon, Lixanka, P_olka, Pexturc, Pesnyj, Ri_ko/Ry_ko, Samodyka/Samodelka, _idka and _iv'nica were not used anymore.((22)) Among other names of Slavic origin that were still in use at the beginning of the 20th century are Baba, _erna, Dobriš, Drazna, Slava, Zlata, and Xvoles. All these feminine names are of Czech origin and they all were used by Czech Jewish women too (Bondy-Dvorsky 1906:1:86, Hock 1892:55, 26, 36, 32, Levy 1929:25, Hock 1892:210, respectively). Thus it is clear that their use in Eastern Europe was due to the migrations of Czech Ashkenazic Jews. The name Duška (coincides with Slavic diminutive form for soul) could be a hypocoristic form of Dušna, a name used in Bohemia (Hock 1892:14). The feminine name Velika seems to be of Eastern Slavic origin. However, there is another Jewish name, Vejlka, that sounds very similar. The latter name is likely to be a phonetic variant of Bejlka, that in turn is a hypocoristic form related to the Yiddish name Bejle (of Romance origin). It is quite plausible that Vejlka gave rise to Velika due to the existence of the Eastern Slavic word velika, meaning great. Finally, such Slavic Christian hypocoristic feminine names as Dunja, Grunja and Ljuba were also used by Jews during the 19th century. All of them seem to be borrowed due to their phonetic similarity with Jewish names the biblical name Dinah, and Yiddish names Grine and Libe, respectively. Jewish Names With Slavic Suffixes A very large number of names used by Jews of the Russian Empire during the 19th century were hypocoristic forms ending in Slavic diminutive suffixes. The most productive suffix was -ko/ka. For Jews, the first records of this suffix in Europe are from Silesia: Debruska/Dobruska, Friczko, Slomko, Smolka, Stanka, Wilczke, all belonging to the period 1330-1360 (Brann 1896:XIX, XXVII, XXVIII, XXX). The names Babka, Deska, Libovka, Mu_ka, Mušatko, and Slavi_ka are all cited by Bohemian Christian sources in the 1370s (Bondy-Dvorsky 1906:1:75, 76, 86). We can not be sure, however, that these names were indeed used by Jews themselves as they all could be just the names used by Slavic Christians for designating Jews. The first known names with -ko/ke which were undoubtedly used by Jews themselves are Hanko/Hancko and Heske appearing in Vienna's Christian sources of 1398 and 1402, respectively (Schwarz 1909:104, 223). As the local Christians were not Slavic-speaking, the presence of the Slavic suffix in that name could be only due to the use of the name in such form by its own bearer. (At that time, though the Slavic Christian population still lived not far from Vienna, the sources mention no Christian with a name ending in this Slavic suffix.) In the 15th century, Jewish sources from Bohemia, Moravia and Hungary include already the examples of the given names ending in -ko/ka. Thus when Jews from these countries came to Poland or Lithuania in the 15th-16th centuries, they already used that suffix in Yiddish, their vernacular language. Since local Polish, Belorussian and Ukrainian Christians in these territories also had this suffix in common use, it also became widespread among Jews. The first record of a name ending in -ko/ka in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania date from the first part of the 15th century. It appears in the patronymic of Jakób S_omkowicz (Polish spelling), a Jew from Luck. Toward the end of that century one finds few other examples: Icko (Isaac) from Brest (1472) and Es'ka (Joseph or Isaac) from Troki (1484). During the 16th and later centuries the forms ending in -ka/ko or certain other diminutive suffixes of Slavic origin became quite common. We have evidence that sometimes (often?) these forms corresponded to the given names used by Jews among themselves. Max Weinreich has found the following examples in the writing of Solomon Luria (Maharshal) who was born in Lithuania in 1510 and served as rabbi in Ostrog and Lublin: Abruš (suffix -uš), Šlomca (suffix -ca), Abraška and Šlomka (suffix -ka) (Weinreich 1973:4:268). Another example is the nickname Sirkes (that is, son of Sirke/Sirka) used by a rabbi who was born in Lublin in 1561. In the following centuries the examples of such kind are already quite numerous. Several Slavic diminutive suffixes became the integral part of Yiddish and were actively used in Jewish given names.((23)) Max Weinreich suggested that these suffixes could be borrowed by Jews from Gentile wet nurses, maids, governesses since they carry an unmistakable stamp of children's language (Weinreich 1973:2:196). This idea seems to be incorrect, since the forms ending in these Slavic suffixes did not produce pet forms with undeniably expressive features. At that time, they lead to the creation of familiar or colloquial hypocoristic forms with very slight, if any, expressive nuance and could not be related to children's language. Before the beginning of the 18th century names with these suffixes were actively used by adult Christians including the nobility, in both vernacular life and in documents (cf., for example, REA 1:197, 199). Even in the 18th century records cite such names as the Ukrainian Cossack's leaders Ignatko and Vasko (RN 3:26, 36). In the Russian Empire, the use of the hypocoristic or pet forms in the official documents was prohibited by czar Peter I in 1701 (Bondaletov 1983:110-3). At the end of the 18th century, when the Russian Empire annexed Polish and Lithuanian territories, this rule became also applied to all new Christian subjects. In the vernacular life, the hypocoristic forms with diminutive suffixes like -ko/ka continued to exist in children's language independently of social groups (and here is the basis for Weinreich's anachronistic idea). For adult Christians, however, their use was strongly influenced by their social status. The poorest people, say, workers and peasants, were often adressed by such names. Moreover, they used these forms for designating themselves. On the other hand, during the 19th century the nobility was no longer using such familiar names in their vernacular life. The same was the case for the Russian Christian urban intelligentsia. These cultural groups considered these hypocoristic names to have a deteriorative association. An example can be found in the letter of the middle of the 19th century written by V.G.Belinskij. He states with indignation that instead of calling themselves by given names, people use the derogatory nicknames: Van'ka, Vas'ka, Steška, Palaška. In Jewish families, during the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, the forms with the diminutive suffixes were not viewed as derogatory. Analogously with the poorest Christians, Jews actively used such names as familiar or colloquial forms in their everyday life. Nevertheless, a substantial difference between these two religious groups existed in official documents. As it was already said above, for Christians the use of such forms was prohibited. On the other hand, Jews were often recorded by state clerks in official documents with their hypocoristic forms. This practice lasted until 1917, the year of the Bolshevik Revolution. In many cases, Christian officials certainly considered such names ridiculous. Among Jews, there was an analogous attitude to these names by the Russian acculturated Jews. One of these people, Osip Rabinovi_, wrote a pamphlet in 1858 entitled On Moškas and Ioskas. The article is full of contempt for the familiar forms of names used by Jews. Rabinovi_ considered them as insulting, as names which should be used for animals, not for human beings. The large part of the article is full of indignation against his coreligionists. Some paragraphs deal with Rabinovi_' concepts of the history of Jewish names. These parts of the article are absolutely naive and fanciful. Rabinovi_ claimed that the use of the diminutive forms had its roots in the stupidity of Jews. He stated that such forms had been used by Christian nobles for designating Jews in order to ridicule them, while Jews themselves considered these names to be expressions of endearment by Christians. Another example of such kind of polemical literature, are several paragraphs from the introduction written in 1911 by I.I.Kulišer for his compilation of all given names used by Jews in the Russian Empire. The main reason for the creation of the book according to its author, was purely practical: the numerous difficulties encountered by the Czarist administration in dealing with Jewish given names. The second reason viewed by Kulišer as quite important was the author's desire of elaborating the correct viewpoint on the topic of Jewish names among the Christians, as well as among the Jews themselves. According to Kulišer, the complete ignorance of this domain by Christians, was mainly due to Jewish ignorance and criminal indifference to the question, fueled by Jewish prejudices. Analogously to Rabinovi_, Kulišer pointed to the inconsistent use of different forms of Jewish names in various documents. The views of both authors cited above were rather uncommon for Jews of their times. The main differences between Rabinovi_ and Kulišer, on one side, and Jewish mass (including numerous religous scholars, rabbis and other Jewish intellectuals) on the other side, lay in their approaches to the problem of the place of Jews in the Christian state. It is clear, that for two enlightened authors, the question of the social status of Jews in the Russian Empire was of paramount importance. Most of their concerns were related to the use of names in official Russian documents. Thus we will not be surprised to learn that O.Rabinovi_ was the founder of the first Russian-language Jewish periodical Rassvet, while I.I.Kulišer's position was the Learned Jew working for the Governor of Volhynia, and, therefore, he was a state clerk. In contrast, those who were so severely criticized by both authors, considered names used in official Christian documents of no importance. In religious matters, they were named according to the shemot ha-kodesh. The use of these sacred names, which never include the diminutive suffixes, was always consistent. All other names (including those recorded in the official Christian documents) were vernacular, and therefore, strictness in their use was not required by the Jewish community. Classification of Names by Their Origin In conclusion, I would like to suggest a classification of given names which seems to be fruitful for both the general analysis of historical aspects of names and the search of the etymologies of names. For each particular area and for a specific time period, all names used by local Jews can be divided into the following categories: 1. Names created outside the region and brought there by Jewish migrants 2. Borrowed Names 2.1 Names borrowed from coterritorial non-Jewish population 2.1.1 Christian forms of biblical names 2.1.2 Names borrowed due to their phonetic closeness to Jewish names 2.1.3 Names borrowed due to their semantic closeness to Jewish names 2.1.4 Names borrowed without the connection to any Jewish name 2.2 Names borrowed by local Jews from Jewish sources 2.2.1 Names borrowed from the Bible or the Talmud 2.2.2 Use of names of famous Jewish scholars 3. Names created by Jews inside the area 3.1 New roots 3.2 Names appearing after loan translations (calques) 3.3 Creation of hypocoristic or pet forms of existing names 3.4 Creation of feminine names from masculine names This classification was already implicitly used in the above consideration of names borne during the 15th-16th century by Lithuanian Jews. Below we will consider how it can be applied to the search of etymologies of particular given names. For any name one should establish the region where and the time period when it came into existence. The reasons for its arising should be understood (creation or borrowing; language; suffixes; semantics). If the name was used later in another area separated from the land of its genesis, documented proofs should be found about the use of the name in the intermediary countries. Consider these implications taking as examples three names used by Jews of the Russian Empire during the 19th century: Drejzl, Šaxno and Vita. Several authors believe that the Yiddish feminine name Drejzl is derived from Roman name Drusilla (Harkavy 1928:527, Pribluda 1987:40) since the latter was indeed used by Jews in ancient times (cf. Zunz 1876:14). It is unclear, however, how the vowel /u/ was transformed into the diphthong /ey/. The geographical distribution of the name makes the Roman origin even more problematic. I do not know a single medieval German Christian or Jewish source that mentions any feminine name sounding like Drusilla or Drejzl. On the other hand, the sources from Bohemia and Silesia (14th-16th centuries) cite the names Draschna and Drazna (Brann 1896:IX; Bondy-Dvorsky 1906:1:360). The inventory of old Prague's Jewish cemetery includes Drazna and Drezl/Drezel (Hock 1892:36, 41, 391), the latter being, most likely, a hypocoristic form of the former made by the addition of the Yiddish diminutive suffix -l with a concomitant truncation of the stem and root vowel alteration. Apparently, the change of Drezl into Drejzl took place in Eastern Europe. The modification of the voiced /e/ into the diphthong /ey/ is usual for Yiddish. The second name of non-evident origin is Šaxno (Schachno) generally believed to be an Aramaic variant of biblical Shehaniah. However, we have no evidence that Shehaniah was ever used in Europe. The earliest mention of the name Šaxno known to me dates from 1440 when a bearer of this name lived in Lwów (Schipper 1911:183). At the end of the 15th century and the beginning of the 16th century the name is also mentioned in Luck and Brest (REA 1:38, 1:127; RN 1:103). Šalom Šaxno (Shalom Schachna), often called the father of the Polish rabbinism, lived during the first part of the 16th century in Lublin. His fame could contribute to the common use of the name by Polish Jews. It is only in the 17th century that sources from Central Europe begin to cite the name in question as borne by local Jews. These were, most likely, the migrants from eastern Europe. Thus the chronology of different referrals of the name Šaxno strongly suggests its origin in Eastern Slavic lands. In that area, as it was pointed out above, numerous other names ending in Slavic diminutive suffix -xno/xna are cited by the sources. Hence Šaxno is very likely to represent a Slavic hypocoristic form of a name beginning with Ša- (Shalom or Shabbetai).((24)) Vita is said to be a Romance calque of the Hebrew feminine name Haya as the latter name is derived from Hebrew life, while the word vita means life in Latin (Weinreich 1973:2:303-4). Such etymology is indeed very attractive as we know many other examples of names created as calques from other older forms including such masculine names as Vidal, Vital, Vivant, Vives, all of which are Romance calques of the Hebrew masculine name Hayyim (life). Nevertheless, the direct Romance origin of the name Vita is doubtful. The name Vita was not found in French medieval sources (cf. Seror 1989). I was unable to find any mention of it in numerous available Christian or Jewish sources dealing with Jews from Germany or Austria and dating from the 11th-15th centuries. As these sources are not exhaustive, they alone do not force us to reject the hypothesis about the Romance origin of Vita. However, there is another factor that contradicts that hypothesis: not a single tombstone from the old cemetery of Prague (Hock 1892) cites this name. Not one Czech source in the compilation made by Bondy and Dvorsky in 1906 mentions Vita as well. Thus the name appears to be used exclusively in Eastern Europe. For that region, in the 14th century we find that Jewish women used the name Witos_awa, borrowed from Polish Christians (Schipper 1926:253). Its hypocoristic form Vitoska is mentioned as a Polish Jewish given name in the 15th century (Schipper 1926:287). To my mind, that name of Slavic origin seems to be a more plausible etymon for the Jewish name Vita than the Latin word for life.((25)) Notes 1. Consider the direct quotation from Weinryb 1973:28: "both the names in the inscriptions (with one exception) and the texts seem to resemble the ones used by German Jewry" (italics are mine). 2. The shemot ha-kodesh, or sacred names, are given to Jewish boys on the day of their ritual circumcision. They are the names by which Jews are called later in life to read the Torah in the synagogue. This group includes the biblical names, the post-biblical names of Hebrew or Aramaic origin as well as three names of Greek origin (Alexander, Kalonymos and Todros) used by Jews from ancient times (Zunz 1876:25). 3. One of the leaders of Brest's community during the 1660s is called either Levko or Lejba in different Russian sources (RN 1:456, 465). 4. A Jew called Iakob Andreevi_ (Jacob, the son of Andrew) is mentioned in both known censuses of the townlet of Novyj Dvor (REA 2:83 and RN 1:224). It is very likely, that the name Andrej (Andrew) substitutes in both sources the genuine Jewish name (Anšl?). 5. Both Garkavi (REA 1:05) and Beršadskij (1883:395) cited the name Krav_ik (diminutive form of tailor) mentioned in 1486 (REA 1:38) as one of the examples of Slavic names used by Jews. It is strange, however, that a rich tax-farmer could be called tailor (or son of a tailor). It is even more strange that at the beginning of the document only one person is mentioned, Simxa Krav_ik, while the same text refers later to two persons: Simxa and Rabej (REA 1:39). Since (1) Rabej is also called Rab_ik in other documents, (2) Russian b and v are close graphically and (3) the Russian word for and contains only one letter, it is reasonable to think that the word Krav_ik arose as a scribe error, while the genuine initial text was and Rab_ik. The Greek Orthodox name Nikon was also cited by Garkavi (REA 1:05) as an example of a name borrowed from local Christians. The comparison of the document in which a Jew called Nikon Sym_i_ is mentioned (REA 1:55) with other Russian sources, clearly shows that that individual was actually called Nisan Simši_ (Nisan, the son of Simxa) (cf., for example, REA 1:46, 51; RN 1:104). 6. Note that several persons called Agron are mentioned in both Jewish communities, the Karaite and the Rabbinite, of Luck in 1552 (REA 2:25-6). 7. Fischer (1938:157) suggested that the Yiddish name Xeskl was falsely re-interpreted as a diminutive form [with the root vowel alteration a -> e] and, thus it gave rise to the hyper-correct form Xaskl. This idea can be correct only if the hypocoristic forms using the suffix -l have been common already about 1200 (when the form Chazkel is mentioned; I hope that both the date for that source and the fact that the record spelling is indeed Chazkel are reliable). However, it is unlikely to be the case. In German Jewish and Christian sources, forms with diminutive suffixes become common only toward the end of the 13th century (cf. Salfeld 1898, Aronius 1892). Almost all these forms end in the suffix -lin, while very few records mention the suffix -l, as, possibly, in the names Dobrizel and Gerzuozel from Regensburg in 1242 (Wiener 1862:108). 8. Wexler (1987:48) suggests a very unusual hypothesis about the genesis of Jewish name Bogdan. He states that Bogdan could be a Jewish translation of the (Judeo-)Greek name Todros (Theodoros), independent of the Slavic Christian name and composed at a time when the meaning of the Greek name was still understood by Jews. He has two arguments against the much more simple (and, therefore, logically more plausible) idea of borrowing of the name from Slavs. Firstly, according to Wexler, a direct East Slavic derivation for the Jewish anthroponyms is unattractive, since there are relatively few Slavic personal names in use among Jews in the Slavic sources. Secondly, the name Bogdan is recorded in use among Belorussian Christians only in the 16th-17th century. However, Wexler's information about the names used by Belorussians was taken from Biryla 1966. That source is far from being exhaustive. In neither way can it be used for the period prior to the 16th century, since no comprehensive study about the names used by Belorussians in the 14th-15th century exists. Moreover, during the 16th century the name Bogdan was certainly also used by both Karaites and Moslem Tatars in Lithuania (REA 2:25, 1:270, 296, 305). It was frequently used by Slavic Christians in Poland from the 13th century onward (SSNO 1:187) and even by Armenians in Lwów at the end of the 14th century (Czo_owski 1892:125). Taken together, all these facts strongly suggest that Bogdan was borrowed, and not created by the Jews. 9. The name Glownia is mentioned in Kraków in the middle of the 15th century. That name could be the Polonized form of Xlavno, derived from Polish g_ownia, meaning firebrand. Max Weinreich suggested that the name Xlavno is derived from Czech word hlavny, meaning principal, chief (Weinreich 1973:2:204). However, no corroboration for that conjecture is found. 10. The Ashkenazic origin of these names deserves a more detailed explanation. Some names from that list end in German/Yiddish element -man: Berman, Kolman/Kalmen, Lipman, Zelikman, and Zelman (hypocoristic form: Zel'ko). Of Romance (and, therefore, western) origin are Bejlja (Bella), Bendet, Enta. The name Fajš is either derived from the name Fajviš (or Romance origin, related to Latin Vivus), or it is related to the German word Fisch. At any case, its variation Fajše was used by Bohemian Jews at the beginning of the 16th century (Bondy-Dvorsky 1906:1:206). The Yiddish diminutive suffix -l is present in such names as Ekalec (from Jacob; the second suffix, -ec, is of Slavic origin), Ezel' (from Joseph), Fišel', Gitlja, Jankel' (from Jacob), Mendel' (from Man), Merkel' (from Marcus or Mordecai), Midlja (from Mindlja, which in turn is from Mina), Peslja, Šmerlya (from Shemariah), Zindel', Zisel', and Zundel'. Of Germanic origin are Brejna (cf. Braun), Gercko (Hertz), Gerš and Girša (Hirsch), Golda, Juta, Kgec (Götz), Liber (hypocoristic form: Libko), Man, Tolba (from Tauba?), Vol'f (Wolf), and Zyskin/Šiskin (Süsskind). Ajzik, Šabsaj, Pejsax, and Sorka/Surka represent the purely Ashkenazic forms of Hebrew names Isaac, Sabbethai, Pesach and Sara, respectively, while Zoval' is based on the German Christian spelling of Saul. Xackim and Katzim seem to be related to such names from Central Europe as Hatschim (in Vienna, 1370; Schwarz 1909:77), Hatschym (in Pressburg, 1362; Wiener 1862:22), Kadczim (in Silesia, 1345; Brann 1896:XXIII) and Atschim (in Salzburg from Regensburg, 1297; Altmann 1990:135). 11. Not all persons listed in the censuses of Jewish households of the middle of the 16th century were Jewish. Some of them were certainly Christian, as, for example, Stanislav Andreevskij, Stanislav Kraevskij, Jurko Balber, Dimitr Sopega, and Stepan Dre_in_in, all in Brest (REA 2:153). Š_asnyj Špak, mentioned in the same document, was also Christian (cf. REA 2:257), though Beršadskij (1883:395) cited his name as an example of a Slavic name used by a Jew. Most likely, the above Gentiles were the owners of houses inhabited by Jews. 12. Samuel ben Uri Shraga Phoebus (BS 96a) also suggested the derivation of P_olka from Betzalel. In several documents it is unclear whether the name P_olka/B_olka is masculine or feminine. However, we find Icxanko P_ol_i_ (REA 2:152), Danko B_ol_i_ (REA 2:224), and Davyd P_ol_i_ (RN 1:299). As matronymics were extremely unusual in the Russian sources of that period (the only found examples are from Luck: Ruxni_ and Pesli_, REA 2:26), the name is more likely to be masculine. The definitive proof is provided by the name P_olka Xackovi_ (REA 2:153), which is undoubtedly masculine. Thus this name can not be a calque of the biblical feminine name Debora as it was suggested in Wexler 1987:59. 13. Wexler (1987:80) states that the addition of v in the names Novax and Govaš could be of Asian Arabic influence. He claims that the Belorussian influence is unlikely since the epenthetic v appears before rather than after a stressed vowel in Belorussian. His argumentation is unconvincing, however. The epenthetic v is undoubtedly found among Belorussians, and, therefore, the logical probability of the influence of local Christians on Belorussian Jews is much higher than the hypothetical Asian Arabic influence. 14. One document citing the names of twelve Jews who lived in Kiev in the 10th century is known to historians. The most detailed discussion of that document can be found in Golb-Pritsak 1982. Golb (p.24) claims that the Kiev's Jewish community of the tenth century was apart from other known Jewish communities, and suggests the Khazar origin of the mentioned individuals. His main argument results from his statistical analysis of eleven mentioned given names of Hebrew origin. It is clear that such small number of instances are absolutely insufficient for any statistical analysis. Pritsak (pp.35-40), on the other hand, focuses his attention on six non-Hebrew names cited in the document. He suggests the Khazar origin for all these names. Though that idea indeed makes sense, his erudite linguistic analysis of these names is rather unconvincing. 15. The names of possible Khazar origin mentioned in the Hebrew document from Kiev (see the note 14) were not found among Lithuanian Jews. Wexler (1986:9; 1987:76) considers that the name Pesax could be borrowed from Khazars in the Ukraine. His arguments are absolutely unconvincing, however. We have numerous mentions of that name in different parts of Central and Western Europe (they are all cited by Wexler). On the other hand, we know about its use by Khazars only from a letter (of doubtful authenticity) written by the Khazar King Joseph to Hisdai Ibn Shaprut. Russian scholar Pavel Kokovcov even considered that the name Pesach was put in the text later (cited by Golb-Pritsak 1982:126). 16. Russian sources of the 16th century do not mention a single document written by Jews in the Russian language. On the other hand, few letters or promissory notes written in a Jewish language (Hebrew or Yiddish?) and/or having Jewish signatures are cited. Among them are three documents concerning the affairs in which both sides are Jewish (RN 1:147, REA 2:11, and REA 2:42, all from Grodno). A Jewish signature under a promissory note from a Brest Jew to a Christian noble is mentioned in REA 2:234. An interesting document is given in REA 2:3. There we read that according to Bogdan Igudi_, his father, Iguda Bogdanovi_, was not able to write in Russian and could sign only in Hebrew letters. Iguda Bogdanovi_ was a very rich merchant. During the first part of the 16th century, he was the single Jewish member of the Grodno's court of justice and even took part in judgements between Christians (RN 1:194). The above facts show that the Lithuanian Jews were illiterate in Russian, while they were able to write in Hebrew or Yiddish. However, these facts alone do not force us to conclude that all the mentioned persons were not Russian-speakers. It is quite possible that at that time even many Russian Christian merchants were also illiterate in Russian. 17. For the 16th century, Brest, the richest and the most populous Jewish community of the country of that period, seems to be the place that received the largest number of new western migrants. The arguments for supporting that idea can be found in the inventory of names used by local Jews. We find that the rabbi in the 1520s was called Mendel' Frank (REA 1:113). REA 1:259 mentions Lazar' Nemec (his nickname means German in Russian) in 1540. During the 1560s Solomon _ex (Czech in Russian) and two members of the family Lipschitz (spelled as Lip_i_ in Russian) are mentioned as well (REA 2:142, 152-4). Data from the censuses made during the 1560s shows that the proportion of given names of undoubtful Ashkenazic origin in Brest (28 percent) is significantly higher than in other important communities in the same area (such as Grodno (four percent), Pinsk (14 percent), or Kobrin (16 percent)). Among these Brest names one finds Berman, Kgec (Götz), Mandel', Zelikman, which were very unusual for Lithuania for that period (no other bearer of them was mentioned during the 16th century in other towns). The distinctive Germanic sounding of these names suggests that their bearers were, most likely, recent migrants either from German areas, or from important Yiddish-speaking communities of Bohemia, Moravia or Poland. Census' data also shows another factor that distinguishes Brest from other Lithuanian communities. Among one hundred masculine names mentioned in the list of Brest householders, there are 77 different names. Thus the frequency of the names is extremely small, the feature that is easily understandable if we suggest that an important part of Brest householders were either migrants from various different areas or the sons of these migrants. It is interesting to note the presence in the census of various forms of the same names, such as Solomon/Šloma/Šlomka, Moisej/Mošej/Moško (Moses), Jakov/Jakub (Jacob) and, the most impressive of all, a series of seven forms for Isaac: Icko/Icka/Isko/Icxanko/Icxgkak/Izaak/Izak. The simultaneous presence of so many different forms in one community strongly suggests its heterogenous origins. 18. The Lwów princedom along with other areas of Red Russia was included in Poland in 1340, while Volhynia was incorporated in Lithuania in 1377. 19. Russian chronicles indicate the existence of Jewish population in Vladimir (Volhynia) in 1288 (RN 1:64). Benjamin from Vladimir (same town?) is mentioned in Cologne in 1171 (Aronius 1892:130). On the other hand, the first mention of Jews in Lwów dates from 1356. It is reasonable to think, however, that Jews were already living in Lwów before its Polish annexion (cf. Schipper 1911:66). It is absolutely unclear whether the communities of Brest and Grodno (former Black Russia) were founded by migrants from the south (Volhynia, Red Russia), or they are due to migrants from the west (from Mazovia?). Kiev and Crimea are unlikely to be the direct sources for Black Russia as the distance between these areas is too great. 20. EE 10:248 states, apparently without any documentary evidence, that the fusion of two groups the Russian-speaking Jews of eastern and southern origins and the Yiddish-speaking Jews from the West - was not completed even by the 18th century. At that time, it is said, differences still existed in proper names, pronunciation of Yiddish words, as well as in physical appearance of individuals pertaining to these two groups. 21. The latter name is derived from the Yiddish word grandfather which in turn is of Slavic origin; cf. Belorussian dzed, grandfather. 22. Since the names Pexturc, Pesnyj, _idka and _iv'nica are cited only once in the documents, we can not be sure about their spelling. Certain letters could be due to scribes' errors. The complete disappearance of the popular name Bogdan is likely to be due to the terrible fate of PolishLithuanian Jews during the Cossack uprising headed by Bogdan Khmelnitski (Chmielnicki). 23. Stankiewicz (1969:272, 281) listed the following suffixes used in Eastern Europe at the first part of the 20th century in order to form the hypocoristic and pet Yiddish forms: -l, -ele, -e, -ke, -ik, -_e, še, -ši, -iš, -enju, -inke, -e_ke. In this group only the first two originated in western Europe, while all others are of Slavic origin. One could add several other suffixes, of Slavic origin as well, that, though possibly not used anymore in 19th or 20th century, contributed to Jewish given names: -ek (Berek, Mošek), -xne (Saxne, Šaxne, Vixne, and, possibly, Jaxne), -xe or -uxe (feminine names Buxe and Gruxe, both used in Volhynia in the 19th century; derived, most likely, from Bune and Grune, respectively), -uš (Abuš, Lejbuš). 24. Wexler (1987:99) has already suggested the presence of the Slavic suffix -xno in the name Šaxno. However, his idea that the name is derived from the Jewish form of Isaiah is not convincing. We have no evidence that the Yiddish form Šaje or any other form of Isaiah beginning with Š was used in Eastern Europe in that period. Moreover, in contrast to the derivation Šaxno < Šaje, all known examples of Christian and Jewish names ending in -xno/xna are always shorter than their base forms. Generally, when adding the suffix -xno/xna several syllables (and at least two consonants) are truncated. 25. The given name Vita (derived from Latin life) was also used by Russian Christians (Petrovskij 1984:77). That name could be the source for the Jewish name Vita as well. This fact does not change our general idea. At any case, the Jewish name Vita seems to be borrowed from Slavic Christians than to have been created directly from the Latin. *** My thanks go to Saul Levinson who read this paper and made many suggestions for improving the text. Works Cited BS: Samuel ben Uri Shraga Phoebus. Beit samuel. Fürth, 1694. EE: Evrejskaja enciklopedija. 16 vols. St.Petersburg, 1906–13. REA: Russko-evrejskij arxiv. Dokumenty i regesty k istorii litovskix evreev. 3 vols, St.Petersburg, 1882 (first and second vols, both compiled by S.A.Beršadskij), 1903 (third vol.). RN: Regesty i nadpisi. Svod materialov dlja istorii evreev Rossii (80-1800). 3 vols. St.Petersburg: Obščestvo dlja rasprostranenija prosveščenija me_du evrejami v Rossii. Vol. 1 (1899), vol.2 (1910), vol.3 (1913). SSNO: Słownik staropolskich nazw osobowych. Edited by E. Taszycki. 6 vols. Wroc_aw, 1965–81. Altmann, A. Geschichte der Juden in Stadt und Land Salzburg. Salzburg: Otto Müller, 1990. Aronius, J. Regesten zur Geschichte der Juden im Fränkischen und Deutschen Reiche bis zum Jahre 1273. Berlin: L.Simion, 1892. Beider [Bejder], A. “Imenovanija evreev Vostočnoj Evropy v 16-18 v.v. v russkix istočnikax.” Onomastica, Cracow, 37 (1992): 183-98. Beider, A. A Dictionary of Jewish Surnames from the Russian Empire. Teaneck, NJ: Avotaynu, 1993. Belinskij, V.G. “Pis'mo k Gogolju.” Sobranie sočinenij v 3 tomax. Moscow, 1948, 2:708. Beršadskij, S.A. Litovskie evrei. St.Petersburg, 1883. Beršadskij, S.A. Avram Ezofovič Rebičkovič, podskarbij zemskij, člen Rady velikago Knjažestva Litovskago. Kiev, 1888. Biryla, M.V. Belaruskaja antrapanimija. Minsk: Navuka i Texnika, 1966. Bondaletov, V.D. Russkaja onomastika. Moscow, 1983. Bondy, B. and F. Dvorsky. K historii židu v Čechach, na Moravě a v Šlensku (906 až 1620). 2 vols. Prague, 1906. Brann, M. Geschichte der Juden in Schlesien. Breslau: W.Jacobsohn, 1896. Centnerszwerowa, R. O języku Żydów w Polsce, na Litwie i Rusi. Warsaw: Księgarnia Powszechna, 1907. Czołowski, A. Najstarsza księga miejska 1382-1389. Pomniki Dziejowe Lwowa, vol.1. Lwów, 1892. Dubnov, S.M. “Razgovornyj jazyk pol'sko-litovskix evreev v 16 i 17 v.v.” Evrejskaja Starina 1 (1909): 7–40. Fischer, J. “Zur Erklärung einiger jüdischer Namen.” Festschrift für Leo Baeck. Berlin: Schocken, 1938, 152-160. Garkavi, A.J. “O jazyke evreev, živšix v drevnee vremja na Rusi.” Trudy Vostočnogo otdelenija Russkogo Arxeologičeskogo obščestva 14 (1869): 43–56. Golb, N. and O. Pritsak. Khazarian Hebrew Documents of the Tenth Century. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1982. Goldmann, A. Das Judenbuch der Scheffstrasse zu Wien (1389-1420). Vienna-Leipzig: W. Braumüller, 1908. Hock, S. Die Familien Prags. Pressburg: A.Alkalay, 1892. Jakobson, R. and M. Halle. “The term Canaan in medieval Hebrew.” For Max Weinreich on his seventieth birthday. The Hague: Mouton and Co, 1964, 147-72. Joffe, J.A. “Dating the origin of Yiddish dialects.” The Field of Yiddish. New York, 1954, 102–21. Kulišer, I.I. Sbornik dlja soglasovanija raznovidnostej imen. Žitomir, 1911. Levy, L. “Die ältesten Grabsteine in Mähren.” Die Juden und Judengemeinden Mährens in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart. Brünn: Jüdischer Buch- und Kunstverlag, 1929. Petrovskij, N.A. Slovar' russkix ličnyx imen. Moscow: Russkij Jazyk, 1984. Pribluda, A. Cu der gešixte fun jidiše familien-nemen. Bibliotek fun Sovetiš Hejmland 6 (78). Moscow: Sovetskij pisatel', 1987. Rabinovi_, O. “O Moškax i Ios'kax.” Sočinenija. St.Petersburg, 1888, 3:64-99. Salfeld, S. Das Martyrologium des Nürnberger Memorbuches. Quellen zur Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland, 3. Berlin: L.Simion, 1898. Schipper, I. Studya nad stosunkami gospodaczymi żydów w Polsce podczas średniowiecza. Lwów: B.Połaniecki, 1911. Schipper [Šiper], I. Kultur-gešixte fun di jidn in pojln bejsn mitlalter. Warsaw, 1926. Schwarz, I. Das Wiener Ghetto. Vienna-Leipzig: W. Braumüller, 1909. Seror, S. Les noms des Juifs de France au M.A. Paris, 1989. Stankiewicz, E. “Derivational Pattern of Yiddish Personal [Given] Names.” The Field of Yiddish, Third Collection. The Hague: Mouton and Co., 1969, 267–83. Süssmann, A. Das Erfurter Judenbuch (1357-1407). Leipzig: Fock, 1915. Tupikov N.M. Slovar' drevne-russkix ličnyx sobstvennyx imen. St.Petersburg, 1903. Weinreich [Vajnrajx], M. Gešixte fun der jidišer šprax. 4 vols, New-York: YIVO, 1973. (Partial English translation: History of Yiddish Language. Chicago and London: Chicago Press, 1980.) Weinryb, B. “The Beginning of East-European Jewry in Legend and Historiography.” Studies and Essays in honor of Abraham A.Neuman. Philadelphia: Dropsie College, 1962, 445-502. Weinryb, B. The Jews of Poland. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication of America, 1973. Wexler, P. “The Reconstruction of pre-Ashkenazic Jewish Settlements in the Slavic Lands in the Light of Linguistic Sources.” Polin. A Journal of Polish-Jewish Studies. Oxford: Basile Blackwell, 1 (1986): 3-18. Wexler, P. Explorations in Judeo-Slavic Linguistics. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1987. Wiener, M. Regesten zur Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland wärend des Mittelalters. Hannover: Hahn'sche Hofbuchhandlung, 1862. Zunz, L. “Namen der Juden.” Gesammelte Schriften. Berlin: L.Gerschel, 1876, 2:1–82.