Fred, I looked at Gloria's posting, felt she had put in a lot of work, and realised I had not a clue what was going on... And then along came your reply, and I knew it made sense but still I would take some time to follow what was happening! I do hope Gloria can make a breakthrough, maybe even with John's tip. This went a little way to explaining why some Cyrillic ('Polish') documents I offered to look at made so little sense to me. The three names after some kind of Russian convention left me very confused and I've not had a chance to get back and look at them. Thanks so much for your replies (and sometimes I can even spell exquisitely), Bron. On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Fred Hoffman <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi, > > Gloria Antypowich posted a very interesting note. The text is too long to > repeat all of it here, but obviously anyone can look it up in the list's > archives. > > Gloria, from the info given in that note, it's hard to determine for sure > the ethnicity of your husband's grandfather. He could have been of Russian > descent, or Polish, or Belarusian; or his ancestors might have been among > the many Poles who resettled in Belarus. These peoples have mixed and > mingled over the ages, as have their languages and names, and it can be > pretty tough to untangle it all. It doesn't help that at one time, Poland > (or more properly, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth) ruled much of what > is > now Belarus and western Ukraine, so that people living there were often > classified as "Polish," even if that wasn't entirely accurate. Then in the > late 18th century, the Russian Empire swallowed up those lands, ruling what > is now central and eastern Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, and northwestern > Ukraine. So from then until after World War I, people from those areas were > officially classified as citizens of Russia, and were often called > "Russians" for short. > > In other words, there is often a great deal of ambiguity in the > terminology. > About the only hope of straightening it all out is to trace the family > history -- which is, of course, what you're trying to do. It's a kind of > Catch-22 situation. You can't find the family history till you straighten > all this stuff out, and you can't straighten this stuff out till you trace > the family history. Still, a lot of people manage to break through, just by > plugging away at it. > > I will say this. I think the name of your husband's grandfather appeared in > Russian form because he was a citizen of the Russian Empire, and Russian > was > the official language for all documents. In other words, he wasn't > necessarily Russian; but he could have been. Russians probably called him > Iosif Antipovich Khvat (I'm rendering the Cyrillic spelling of the name > phonetically), which means "Joseph Khvat, the son of Antip." It is standard > in Russian to name a person with first name, patronymic, and surname. So > even if Antypowicz later became the surname, it was probably due to > confusion because people were unfamiliar with Russian naming habits. I'm > guessing KHVAT was the surname, and Antipovich the patronymic. In case > you're wondering, KHVAT is pronounced with a guttural sound like the "ch" > in > German "Bach," followed by "vott," all in one syllable. It's hard for > English speakers, but not tough at all for Slavs. > > Poles would render the name as Jozef Antypowicz Chwat. But for Poles, a > name > ending in -owicz is a surname; they don't use patronymics as a middle name. > That could be a contributing factor in the establishment of Antypowicz as > the family's surname later on; Poles might have focused on Antypowicz and > the Chwat part kind of got lost in the shuffle. Or they might have called > him Jozef Chwat and left out the Antypowicz part completely. This confusion > may explain why sometimes you see Chwat as the surname, and sometimes > Antypowicz. > > That patronymic, Antypowicz or Antipovich, however you spell it, suggests > Belarusian or Russian ancestry, because Poles don't often use the first > name > Antyp or Antip. It's of Biblical origin, associated with Herod Antipas, but > there was also a Saint Antipas of Pergamum or Pergamon mentioned in the > Book > of Revelations. I doubt many Christians would name children after Herod > Antipas, but that saint is a different matter. The name never really caught > on in western Europe, or among Poles, who are mostly Catholic. But it did > catch on among followers of the Orthodox faith, which included Russians, > Ukrainians, and Belarusians. That's why I say the use of that name in the > patronymic suggests family origin in the lands east of Poland's modern > borders. Those are the areas where you'd be more likely to run into a > fellow > who was "son of Antip." > > CHWAT, as Poles spell it, or KHVAT, as we might spell the Cyrillic version > in Russian (which looks to us like XBAT), comes from a word used in both > Polish and Russian to mean "a plucky, daring fellow." It probably started > as > a nickname for an ancestor who impressed people with his energy and > courage. > Unfortunately, the word is used in both Polish and Russian, so its use as a > surname doesn't tell us much about the ethnicity of a family that went by > it. > > I don't know how much good this does you, but I hope it clarifies things a > little. > > Fred Hoffman > Author, _Polish Surnames: Origins & Meanings_ > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >