On Names – Part I

Slavs

The interesting thing about ancient Slavic names is that it is difficult to claim with certainty that any of them are “really” Slavic.  For what does it really mean “really Slavic”?  To a modern Slav any name with the following suffixes (or prefixes) would “sound” Slavic:

  • -mir
    • Branimir
    • Dragomir
  • -gost
    • Milogost, Miłogost
    • Riedogost
  • -slav or –sław (i.e., -suav)
    • Boleslav, Bolesław
    • Branislav, Bronisław
    • Yaroslav, Jarosław

The first means “peace” or “world”.  The second “guest”.  The third fame.  All or most of these can be made female by just adding an -a at the end, e.g., Dragomira.

Germans

But it is quickly made clear that various Germanic/Scandinavian peoples used similar names.  And so we have the corresponding suffixes (and prefixes):

  • -mar, -mer but also -mir, e.g.:
    • Visimar
    • Merobaudes
    • Vithimiris
    • Geilamir
  • -gast
    • Arvagastes
    • Cunigastus
    • Merogaisus
    • Neviogastus

Slavs Again

To add confusion, the very first Slavic chieftain names are written also with a -mer not necessarily -mir and with a -gast not always -gost.  Thus, for example we have the Slavic (or Antes) chieftains (see here for more details):

  • -mer
    • Mezamer (Antes)
  • – gast
    • Ardagastus
    • Kelagast (Antes)
    • Peiragastus

So were the Slavs led by a Germanic leader class?  Or did the Slavs not have names of their own before they met the Germans?  (OTOH, the Germanic -bod suffix occasionally showed up in Slavic names too as –bud meaning “to be” or “being”).

Thankfully, we can grow some comfort from the fact that the prefix and suffix -slav are 100% pure Slavic.  It may be that the Western Slavs will pronounce that -suav but the Germanic Schwaben never had such names.

Germans Again

Well, not exactly true, they did have names like Suabhard, Swabberaht, Suab, Swab, Suabo, Swap, Suabalah, Suabberi, Suabilo, Suabin, Swabulf, Swabinc, Swabizho, Swapold, Swabperaht, Swabger, Suabgast, Suaphart, Swabahilt, Suaprod, Suabolach (!), Suavarich, Suabrito.  (Most of these are out of Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte, volume 16).

But here is another source showing much of the same :

swab1 sawab2

Slavs Return

But at least we still have our suffixes!  And that is how you can tell a true Slav.  Or for that matter a Slava – if we are talking female.  So we have, e.g., the above names

  • Boleslav, Bolesław – great fame
  • Branislav, Bronisław – defender of the fame
  • Yaroslav, Jarosław – strong fame

and the female versions

  • Boleslava, Bolesława
  • Branislava, Bronisława
  • Yaroslava, Jarosława

Thus, we see that the only way to be absolutely sure that we have us a “Slav” is to have a suffix with –slav or -slava in it.

There are just two problems.  Hopefully, they are minor.

First, the meaning of the above words is odd.  Fame is Chwala or Slava but not Slav.  Boguchwal or Boguslav works because the chwal or slav could be a verb in the injunctive.

But Boleslav, Branislav, Yaroslav or for that matter Wladyslaw does not work if slav is meant to be the noun Slava.  That is because the prefix is not a noun that can be modified by a subsequent verb (as in Boguslav/Boguchwal) but rather is an adjective (Bole-) or a verb (Brani- or Yaro-) that modifies the subsequent noun, i.e., -slav.  But if -slav is a noun it cannot mean fame since fame is Slava not Slav.

But maybe it works for the female names?  Well, it’s a bit better but not really convincing.  That is because in Slavic languages the adjective gender has to match up with the noun gender.  So you would have to have had Yaraslava not Yaroslava.  This suggests that the female version is merely a derivative of the male onto which the -a was slapped on.  But the male version does not work as we note above.  Is there a solution?

Well, you could make it work if you thought that Slav was not a reference to any “fame” or “glory” but rather to a person, i.e., to a Slav or, as the Western Slavs would pronounce it, to a Suav.  Then you would have a:

  • Boleslav – Great Slav
  • Bronislav – Defender Slav
  • Yaroslav – Strong Slav (this one does not work perfectly, maybe Yareslav?)
  • Wladyslaw – Ruling Slav

(all pronounced Suav for the Western Slavs if they so insist and yes Wlady, Vald and Veleda are likely Indo-Europeano related)

In other words, now the prefix is an adjective that describes the ethnic Slav.

So we fix the first problem.  And we continue to own our own Slav name.  In fact, we own Slav and the female Slava!  That is how you can tell a Slav or a Slava!

Hmmm

Hippo Regius was a Vandalic-controlled town in Africa.  Many ruins remain to today.  Here is an inscription on one female tomb (dated to 474):

ermengon

The woman’s husband who gave the dough to pay for this was named Ingomar.  No problem there – sounds very Swedish/Germanic.

So does the woman’s name is – the best scientists inform us – Ermengond, a lovely Germanic name for no doubt a beautiful person.  The name is actually written RMENGON as you can see.  So it seems the husband could not fit the initial “E” or the final “D”.  He did manage to fit in the woman’s ethnic designation, however – SVABA.  Strange, you do not fit the actual name but focus on ethnic details?  Was it that important that the world know that Ermengond was a woman of the Suevi (or, as it so happens here, Suavi)?  Did it matter that she was not of local stock or of the ruling Vandals or Alans (whatever was left of the latter by that time)?  Or was that, perhaps, part of her name?

[E]RMENGON[D]SVABA

RMENGONSVABA

Nothing seems sacred to these people!  Now there is that separator dot between the “N” and the “S” so maybe these are two words.  But then we hear (again from the same volume of Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte) of Altswab, Adalswab and Erchanswab.

Other Thoughts

There are other interesting names.  E.g., the ultra-Slavic Bogdan meaning “God’s gift”.  If you want to have fun just change Bog to the Greek θεός/Theo/Theos and you get Theo[s]dan.

Or Bozydar (same meaning) – and you get Theo[s]dar.  And there was that stuff about -ik being a Slavic suffix (bartnik, miecznik, etc).  Or, for that matter the words dar or podarek (meaning a gift or present).  We will return to podarek when discussing Veneti again.

Funny stuff.

Copyright ©2015 jassa.org All Rights Reserved

May 30, 2015

One thought on “On Names – Part I

  1. Pingback: On Names Part II – Confirmation Biases and the Like | In Nomine Jassa

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *