Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung

JÜRGEN UDOLPH Center for Name Research – Göttingen Lower Saxony Academy of Sciences in Göttingen ORCID id: orcid.org/0000-0002-8475-7857 Research fields: Historical linguistics, hydronymy, toponymy, family names. DOI: doi.org/10.35321/all90-03 THE NAME LEIPZIG AND THE GERMANIC SOUND SHIFT The name of Leipzig and the Germanic consonant shift ANNOTATION This contribution deals with the etymology of the place name Leipzig. For a long time, it was assumed that the Slavic word lipa ‘linden tree’ formed its basis. Closer attention to historical spellings such as Libzi and others, especially in Thietmar of Merseburg, who mastered Slavic, led to a correction of the etymology. It has not yet been considered, however, whether Germanic tribes encountered this name before or after the operation of the First or Germanic Sound Shift. This is decisive for the question of which Indo-European word group can be regarded as the basis for the place name. KEYWORDS: Leipzig, place names, Germanic sound shift, etymology. ANNOTATION The article deals with the etymology of the place name Leipzig. Initially, it was widely believed that the Slavic word lipa ‘linden tree’ formed its basis. However, a closer examination of historical spellings, especially those cited by Thietmar von Merseburg, who was fluent in Slavic, such as Libzi and others, prompted a reassessment. Nevertheless, no attention has been paid so far to whether Germanic tribes adopted this name before or after the onset of the Germanic sound Shift. This aspect is crucial in determining which Indo-European word group can be viewed as the basis for the place name. KEYWORDS: Leipzig, place names, Germanic Sound Shift, etymology, Indo-European. 70 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung INTRODUCTION¹ For decades, the assumption was maintained that the place name Leipzig arose from Slavic *Lip-skentstanden and could be connected with the word lipa ‘linden tree’, which is abundantly attested in the Slavic languages. This thesis pervaded name research and historiography from the beginning of scholarly work on geographical names and was still maintained until the end of the twentieth century. One need only think, by way of example, of the works of Ernst Eichler, Hans Walther (1986: 165), and Dieter Berger (1999: 180). The latter summarizes the interpretation as follows: “The name 1459 Leipczigk, 1350 Lipzcik, 1213 Lipzc, Lipz is Germanized from Slav. *Lipč or *Lip´sk[o], the name of the Sorbian settlement (1012/18 in urbe Libzi vocata = in the city called Libzi. This name belongs to Upper Sorbian lipa ‘linden tree’ and means ‘place where lindens grow’.” A turning point for this view came when closer attention was paid to the oldest attestations of the place name, particularly those recorded by Thietmar of Merseburg (975/76–1018), who apparently possessed knowledge of the Slavic language(s). 1. THIETMAR’S ATTESTATIONS AND THE CORRECTION OF THE PREVIOUS VIEW The view outlined here remained undisputed until approximately 25 years ago. A turning point came when the oldest transmission of the name was examined more closely; this includes the attestation from 1012/18 Libzi mentioned by D. Berger, which comes from Thietmar of Merseburg, who is credited with good knowledge of the Slavic language. The historical attestations with -b- led to a revision of the Slavic lipa/linden etymology. This now widespread revision of the old Lipa explanation, which assumes a basis Lib rather than Lip(a), is based on a careful ¹ My reflections on the place name Leipzig, where I was permitted to work in name research for almost ten years, also took me back to that period. They were the most scientifically rewarding years for me, which, thanks also to the fruitful collaboration with the Leipzig name researchers who are still living—Dietlind Kremer (to whom I have been especially indebted), Karlheinz Hengst, and Walter Wenzel—could be shaped so successfully. Straipsniai / Articles 71 JÜRGEN UDOLPH attention to the historical attestations of the place name compiled by Berndt Koenitz (2016: 443–446). I present the oldest of them: 1015 (1015/18) in urbe Libzi vocatur (Thietmar VII 25) 1017 (1017/18) ecclesia in Libzi (Thietmar VII 66) 1017 (10/17/18) in urbe Libizi vocatur (Thietmar/Corvey manuscript VII 25) 1021 (copy from around 1300, later complete forgery) oppidum Libziki (UB Merseburg 60) 1050 (copy 1427–30) in burcuardo Libizken (UB Merseburg 71) 1080 (copy from around 1150) usque Libiz (Annales Pegavienses 241) 1088/89 (copy from around 1150) Libiz oppidum (Annales Pegavienses 266) 1165/70 (copy from around 1215) Lipz (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae I 2,372; II 8,2) 1185 Albertus de Libz et frater suus burzlaus (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae I 2,510) 1190 (Actum et datum) in Lipz (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae I 2,560) 1195 in Lipzk (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae I 2,561) 1200 in civitate nostra Lipz (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae I 3,48) 1210 (copy from around 1229) civitatem Lipczk (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae I 3,148) 1212 apud Libuiz fundavit (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,1) 1213 in Lipz, Lipzc (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,2; II 9,3) 1215 in Lipz (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae I 3,207) 1216 Lipzenses, –ium, –ibus (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 8,3) 1216 Johannes miles de Lipzc (UB Merseburg 162) 1217 in civitate Lipzc (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,4) 1219 quod ipse apud Lybzek fundavit (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,6) 1220 Lipz (2x) (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,7) before 1221 Lipzensi, in Lipzc (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,8) 1221 advocatus de Lipz (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae I 3,289) 1221 in Lipzc (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,8) 1222 in Lipcz (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,8) 1222 de Lipzk (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 1,92) 1224 Eckehardus prepositus de Lipz (UB Merseburg 185) around 1225 Libzke, Lipzke (Eike von Repgau, Sachsenspiegel) 1229 civitas Lipczk (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae I 3,148) 1231 in Lipz (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 10,3) 1232 Lipzic (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,10) 1236 Lipzk, Lipzc (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,11) 1240 Lipzik (3x) (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 9,13) 1248 Lipzc (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 10,10) 72 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung 1252 in Lipzk (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 1,162) 1255 in Liptzk (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 8,4) 1259 civitas Lipz (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 10,12) 1268 Lypzrk (Codex diplomaticus Saxoniae II 8,6 ff.) This is where we can stop. The subsequent transmission shows only occasional -b- spelling. This list essentially corresponds to the likewise comprehensive collections of historical attestations in Walther (2009: 12–14) and Eichler, Walther (2010: 129 f.). The new view was initially advocated above all by E. Eichler and K. Hengst. Below I offer an outline of the course of the corrections, which were undertaken chiefly by Leipzig name researchers. In a lecture in Leipzig in 2000, K. Hengst drew attention to the significance of the -b- spellings (reference by Eichler 2001: 28, n. 26; also discussed in greater detail in Hengst 2010: 134), and later elaborated on this in writing (Hengst 2003: 165 f.): “The current state of research is different: After thorough examination, the early documentary attestations of Leipzig instead point to an original pre-Slavic form for a hydronym based on an Indo-European Old European basis *leibh- [...] and thus [...] For a detailed treatment of this root, see Udolph 1990, 136–139.” In this connection, K. Hengst points to the contribution by E. Eichler (2001: 28 f.), in which, on the basis of the early -b- forms, he likewise concludes that there was a pre-Slavic basis *Libьcь > Lib’c, pronounced Lip’c. This “can be connected with an Indo-European Old European root *leib/*līb and ultimately points to PIE *lei-/lēi- ‘pour, flow, drip’.” For the appellative inventory of this root, E. Eichler refers, like K. Hengst, to Jürgen Udolph 1990: 136 ff. These views then also entered the Historical Place-Name Dictionary of Saxony (HONBS I 577 ff.) in 2001: “The oldest spellings with *Lib may point to an Old European (PIE) root *lei(b)- ‘pour, flow’ and thus be based on a hydronym *Lei-b, which was Slavicized to *Lib and expanded with Slavic suffixes such as -ьc- (-ьc or -ica). The place name would then have been reshaped with the Slavic suffix -bsk and adapted to Slavic *lipa ‘linden tree’: Upper Sorbian *Lip’sk(o) from *lipa ‘linden tree’ + suffix -skъ- ‘linden place’. The oldest attestations, however, also permit a further basic form with the same meaning, namely Upper Sorbian *Lip’c, older *Lipьcь. Through diphthongization of the i in the stem syllable and insertion of an i between the sibilants and the -k suffix, the present official name arose.” This view then became widely established; it is justified in detail in Walther (2009: 14), where it is assumed that “the name change from *Lib(i)z > *Lip’sk only occurred in the last third of the twelfth century,” Straipsniai / Articles 73 JÜRGEN UDOLPH i.e. after the town’s foundation around 1165, [occurred].” This view is also found in the corresponding entry in the German Place-Name Dictionary (2012: 359) and in Eichler (2007: 82), who emphasize: “Since Thietmar of Merseburg renders the Slavic pronunciations very carefully and the oldest spellings display –b–, one must reckon with an old hydronym *Lib, which is also widespread elsewhere in Europe for hydronyms and may be present here as well, just as hydronyms in this area such as Luppe, Parthe, Pleiße etc. are evidently of Indo-European origin.” Walther 2009 provides an outline of the discussion in Leipzig, in which E. Eichler, K. Hengst, and H. Walther in particular participated. They corrected the previous explanation, which was based chiefly on the name attestations containing –p–, and developed, on the basis of the early source attestations containing –b–, the etymology mentioned above, which led to a root *leibh (this basis must, however, be modified in the final position of the root; see below). Finally, Walther 2009 and Eichler, Walther (2010: 129–133) offer a detailed presentation of the problem of the name, including the new interpretation and several further new aspects. The latter suspect behind the basis Libl̥[z not so much a hydronym as a ‘river-water-rich, slippery, clayey area’ and emphatically point to the abundance of water in the region around Leipzig. A few pages later, Hengst (2010: 135) likewise referred to “the Leipzig landscape rich in watercourses.” 2. A COUNTERMOVEMENT: CANNOT A SLAVIC ETYMOLOGY AFTER ALL BE MADE PLAUSIBLE BY TAKING THE –B– SPELLINGS INTO ACCOUNT? Naturally, one can try—and this has in fact been done—to explain the name Leipzig from Slavic by incorporating the old attestations with –b–, such as Libzi, Libizi, etc. K. Hengst discussed this possibility at an early stage and remarked (Hengst 2010: 135): “The question therefore arises again whether Slavic offers any possibility at all of explaining the b-forms in the early transmission of the place name Leipzig.” He discusses several Slavic roots that might potentially be relevant, but finally concludes (2010: 137): “The place name Leipzig, representing the presumed original form Upper Sorbian *Lib-c, stands absolutely isolated in the Upper Sorbian linguistic area.” 74 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung Walter Wenzel (2017: 171) expressed the same opinion: “Since no root *lib that could be considered for the name could be demonstrated in Slavic, [...] Karlheinz Hengst reconstructed a Germanic name *Libja ‘place in a river-water-rich area.’” According to W. Wenzel, Slavs adopted the name, “integrating it into the Slavic naming system and providing it with the suffix Proto-Slavic *-bsъ. Thus *Libъskъ arose; after the loss of the reduced vowels, *Libsk, and then through assimilation of b to s, *Lipsk” (ibid.). B. Koenitz (2016) vehemently objected to this and similar opinions in Namenkundliche Informationen, as is already clear from the title of his contribution: “Leipzig – the origin of the name is purely Slavic!” Following more recent research, Koenitz starts from the attestations containing -b- and sees in them an Old Sorbian basic form *Libci/*Libce, formed as the plural of an inhabitant name on the basis of *libc ‘a lean, weak, puny person’. He attempts to substantiate this explanation, on the one hand, through a series of Czech place names of similar structure and comparable semantics and, on the other, through historical attestations of the root *lib in several Slavic languages. Furthermore, Koenitz doubts that later forms of the name containing -zik-, -zk, -zig, etc. originally reflected the suffix -sk. Rather, they may have been an early alternative diminutive form *Libcky, extending the toponym’s character as a nickname, while the forms Lipsk, Lipsko of modern Polish, Sorbian, and Czech are presumably the result of interpreting (written and spoken) Germanized forms from the fourteenth century. In detail, five points would speak against the interpretation with a basis containing -b-: 1. Thietmar’s notation, occurring twice, <Libzi> does not allow us to infer the name form *Libc. 2. The attestations Libziki, Libizken in Thietmar look strongly like Slavic plural forms. 3. The possibility of a Slavic etymology was examined only very cursorily and prematurely rejected in favor of a pre-Slavic, merely reconstructed (Germanic) water word. 4. Evidently, the search in the Slavic lexicon was also restricted from the outset to the aspect of potentially name-giving terrain—above all, terrain “rich in river water.” 5. A derivation from a designation for a person or from a personal name was not considered. Straipsniai / Articles 75 JÜRGEN UDOLPH As already noted, Koenitz’s own proposal consists in connecting the place name with a (Slavic) designation for a person. Libzi is to be explained as Libči and connected with an original nominative plural *Libci and Old Sorbian *libc < *libcь ‘lean, weak [or similar] person’ or the like. According to Koenitz, a comparative name is the Czech place name Slabce < *Slabbcь/ *Slabbce, from Czech slabec ‘weakling’. K. Hengst addressed this view somewhat later, first emphasizing that “in Slavic toponymy from Rügen to the Black Sea and between the Urals and northeastern Bavaria [...] no comparable geographical name with a basis *lib can be found,” and that it was therefore probable that Slavs had adopted the name rather than created it (Hengst 2016: 462). In the remainder of his contribution, he discusses whether a Slavic geographical or settlement name with a historical tradition could be found that would provide evidence for Slavic *lib in the toponymic sphere. The Proto-Slavic root *libb, with the varied meaning ‘weak, unattractive, lean, low in fat’ and with different reflexes in the individual Slavic languages, has been well known for about a century as an inheritance from the Proto-Slavic period. “What is still missing, however, is a toponym corresponding exactly to this *libb. If research can identify one, the probability that the original Slavic name form of our present-day name Leipzig can also be connected with it—and that the naming was originally Slavic—will increase dramatically” (ibid.: 463). Despite this qualification, however, K. Hengst essentially accepts B. Koenitz’s proposal and sees in it “a reliable Slavic original form for the place name Leipzig” (ibid.: 475). W. Wenzel (2016) essentially follows this view in a brief contribution. Along with B. Koenitz, he considers the assumption of a Germanic and/or Slavic compound *Libьcь or *Libьsk(o) ‘place in an area with abundant river water’ questionable and accepts its Old Sorbian basis *Lib́cě ‘settlement of the weaklings, puny people’ to a Proto-Slavic basis *libь ‘weak, lean, sickly’ or also ‘settlement of a family’ Libьc´ with *Libьcь as a personal name. This interpretation is further supported by the Russian surnames Liba, Libov, and, with reference to the Czech place names Studce, Trubce, Chylec etc., a basis *Libčě ‘settlement of the weaklings’ as a nickname is to be assumed rather than ‘settlement of the Libьc´ family’. But the question arises: is a Slavic etymology with a basis *Lib- convincing? This is highly probably questionable because comparative names are lacking. Koenitz (2016: 441) rightly pointed out that the formerly 76 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung generally accepted connection of the name Leipzig with Slavic lipa ‘linden tree’ “was supported by sufficiently many other place names in the Slavic surroundings (Czech, Polish, Upper and Lower Sorbian, Polabian; cf. Hey 1893: 250).” One must then also ask whether this is the case for Leipzig (from a basis containing -b-). Consequently, others have repeatedly pointed to the lack of convincing Slavic comparative names; see Hengst 2010: 137 and Wenzel 2017: 171. B. Koenitz attempted to address this problem by adducing possible name parallels. To arrive at a conclusive answer, it is useful to consult a collection of geographical names that has been freely accessible on the Internet for approximately two years. I have repeatedly referred to this collection of approximately 450,000 names, most of which are of Slavic origin (see, e.g., Udolph 2021, 2022, 2022a, 2023). It can be accessed on the Internet at the page https://adw-verwaltung.uni-goettingen.de/ortsnamen/images_lightbox.php. It is advisable to search there for Slavic geographical names that could point to a basis Lib and thus could contain indications of a possible Slavic etymology. The yield is considerable. Here is a list of most of the names mentioned there: Lib, Liba/Libauа, Libče/Libči, Libec, Libeč, Liběč, Liběchov/Libín, Libeň, Libchava/Libchavy, Libice/Libici, Libkov, Libno, Libouň, Liban, Libanovo, Libanja, Libarna/Livorno/Liburni/Liburnia, Libawa, Libbehne/Libenow, Libbich, Libčice, Libčany, Libě, Liběčhovka, Libeč, Libědice, Libehna, Libeličě, Libějice, Libelose, Libelj, Libenica, Libenka, Libenize, Libeniczа, Libera, Liber, Liberec, Liberk, Liběšice, Libeš, Libešovice, Libetova, Libětice, Libhošť’, Libigž/Libiažka/Libigž/Libienz, Libice, Libič, Libice, Libič, Libichowa, Libingen, Libina, Libiszka, Libišany, Libiš, Libiv, Libitz, Libnitz, Libniza, Liboň, Liboměřice, Libosváry, Libova, Libouchec, Libovište, Libovia, Libow See/Libowe See, Libová, *Libovl, Libow See, Libovje, Liboviža, Libovište, Libra, Libražd, Librantowa, Librówka, Libřice, Libri, Libuchova/Libuchovka, Libusza/Libuszka, Libuše, Libušin. So far the list of names recorded in the Internet file mentioned. Its abundance makes clear that the assumption that the place name Leipzig could be traced back to a Slavic basis containing -b- has by no means yet been tested against the available place-name material. The Internet file mentioned repeatedly here must be consulted. An examination of the numerous names now shows, however, that the number of those that could be connected with the assumed Slavic basis for Leipzig shrinks considerably. It is not possible to present a complete analysis of all the names here, but various groups can be identified, which for entirely different reasons Straipsniai / Articles 77 JÜRGEN UDOLPH cannot be connected in any way with the basis *Liběče ‘settlement of the weaklings, puny people’ or ‘settlement of a family’ Libčć with *Libъcь as a personal name. In listing the names, I provide no more precise source references; they can all be consulted and checked in the Internet file. The following groups can be identified: 1. The following names are formed with other suffixes, so a connection is unlikely: L ibanovo, a place name in Macedonia (Vasmer 1970: 206); Liebelose, Libelose, a hydronym in Horst (Eastern Pomerania), 1180, 1208 Niflose, 1618 LeweloseFluss (Bosse 1939). 2. The following names are of different origin or derived from personal names: Libbich, German name (Gansleweit 1982: 190 f.); Liberec/Reichenberg, Liberk, Libochová Dolní und Horní, villam Lubchow, Lybochau, Libochovice, Libuchová, Libuchovka, Libusza, Libuše, Libušin, Liebiezka, Libiszka, Libíšany, Libšany, Libív, Liběvi, Libievi, Lubiana, Libbehne, Llaben, Libene, Libražd, Librantowa, Parambam Elbrandi, de Poramba, Poręba Elbranda, Hildebranda, Librówka, Liber, Libań, *Lebán ja, Libějice, Lubějovici, Libějovici, *Libějovice, Libouchec, Lupuche (Profous 1949: 600 f.). 3. In countries settled by Slavs today and in the past, place and hydronyms are frequent whose more recent forms with Lib go back to developments from L(ъ)ub (also already mentioned by Hengst 2009: 26). The following may be named: Liběchov, Libín, Liběchovka, Libín, Liba to be derived, for 78 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung which older forms indicate a basis *Lub. The same applies to some Czech, Moravian, and Slovak place names such as Libeň (for details, see Profous 1949: 581), as well as Libchava, Libchavy, Libčány, Libědice, Liběšice, Libice, several places in Bohemia and Moravia (ibid.: 581 ff.; Hosák, Šrámek 1970: 525 f.), Libavá, Libavá Stará, Libhošť, Libina Moravska und Německá, Libinky. Libeř, Libeš, Liběšice, Libešovice, Libiš, Libohošť, Libice, Libče/Libči, Libec, Liběč, Libiva, Liboměřice, Liboš, Libosváry, Libřice and the rest of the bibliographic information. Corresponding formations are also found in Poland, for example Libiąż, a place name southeast of Katowice, 1405 Lubansz, etc., from which the hydronym Libiążka is derived (HE IX 59 f.); Libichowa, a place name southeast of Kraków, 1262 (17th-century copy) Lubichowa, Lubechowa, Lubichowa (SHGZ III 601 f.). The development is also recognizable in Slavic names in Germany: Groß und Klein Liebitz, Lubicze, Libow See, Libowe See, Liebon, Liboń, Leubobel, Lobebyl, Lieben, Liebono, Liebau, castrum Lübaw e, Lubow, Libehna, Lubene, Libene, Liebschütz, Lubezic, Libbenichen, Lubanovitz and the remaining information. This development is likewise frequently observed in South Slavic names; thus France Bezlaj (1969: 12) cites Libanja, an der Lybon; Libušnje, Glibusna; Libeliče/Leifling, Liwuelich; Libeliče, Liflach, Libelj, am Lubel, Libenica, Libija, Libonja, Libeliče, Libić, Libovište, a place name near Ohrid (Rospond 1937: 16). With some names—especially hydronyms—one must Straipsniai / Articles 79 JÜRGEN UDOLPH nevertheless have doubts about this explanation. This will be addressed below. Corresponding Slavic names are also found in Greece: Libova, Greek Λίμποβες, Γλίμποβα (according to Malingoudis 1981: 63, an –ov derivative of a personal name Libo, a short form of the full name Libo-mir), as well as Liboviž’a, Greek Λιμποβίζια, a possessive formation with the suffix -ja from a PN Libovidь < Ljubovidь (ibid.). Phaedon Malingoudis also places here—contrary to Max Vasmer—the place name Λιμποβίσı in Arcadia, from Slavic Libovižь (Libovidь + jь). The same reflex Libo instead of Ljubo is also attested in Albania: Libounik – Libonik (Slišichev 1931: 271), Libouša (ibid.: 302). 4. Further Slavic place names are demonstrably derived from Slavic lipa ‘linden’. I know of: Libingen, a field name near Glossen (Löbau), < lipina (Hoffmann 1959: 39); Libitz on Rügen, 1386 Lypitze (Trautmann 1949: 43). Bezlaj 1961: 344 f. also sees this development in the river name Libniza (mentioned in this form in a copy (twelfth century) of a charter from 1002), a tributary of the Sora in Slovenia. With this I can conclude the list of the numerous Slavic names that could be based on Lib. If one wished to explain the name Leipzig, 1015 ff. in urbe Libzi, in Libzi, Libizi, etc., from Slavic, parallels would have been expected. But apparently this is not the case. 3. WHAT DOES THIS COLLECTION INDICATE FOR A SLAVIC APPROACH LIB’CI OR THE LIKE FOR LEIPZIG? 1) Apparently, there are no parallels. 2) Nothing supports an interpretation with the help of Slavic word or name material. 3) The suffix *-ьсв, which B. Koenitz supposes in the place name, occurs in the variants *ьсв, *-ьса, *-ьсе, *-ьci in numerous Slavic water, place, and field names; they are found, for example, in Jilec, Gnilec, Blatec, Izvorec and in the comparable plural formations Izvor-ci, Ozer-cy, Blat-ci, Brloš-ci, Bron’-cy (cf. Udolph 1979: 587 f.). 80 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung 4) It follows that this suffix could also have been added, in the course of a Slavicization, to non-Slavic or pre-Slavic bases. This idea will be pursued below. For this, however—as has repeatedly been suggested recently—we must leave Slavic behind, since parallels for a place name *Libъ or the like are found precisely in geographical names outside the Slavic settlement area. 5) As has already been explained elsewhere—at that time still without reference to the place name Leipzig (the prevailing opinion then was that the name belonged to Slavic lipa ‘linden’)—there are more than a dozen water names even outside the Slavic settlement area that probably go back to a base *leib (Udolph 1990: 136–141). Studies published since then have indeed referred to the Indo-European root *leib- that I then presumed (occasionally incorrectly also: *leibh-) and have also connected it with the place name Leipzig (e.g. Hengst 2003: 165 f.), but no compilation of the water names to be associated with it was made, nor was there a list of the extremely important Ancient Greek lexical material, which is ideally suited as a basis for ancient water names. It is absolutely necessary, however, to present the relevant material here once again, supplemented and corrected. 4. *LEIB–, *LOIB–, *LĪB–, *LĪB– IN EUROPEAN WATER NAMES A base *leib, etc. (and not *leibh-), emerges from the appellative inventory of Greek; see below. The search for and compilation of presumably related water names also shows that there seem to be derivatives from different ablaut grades. It is not always possible, however, to distinguish with certainty whether vowel length or a diphthong underlies them. The following names can apparently be connected with a root *leib-, *loib-, *lib-, *līb: a) *–ei–: I cannot provide a certain attestation of this ablaut grade. The water name Ľubica listed under *–ī– may possibly belong here. Straipsniai / Articles 81 JŪRGEN UDOLPH b) *−oi−: An −n−derivative of this ablaut grade may be presumed in the place name Λοιβάνα, attested in Ptolemy, in the territory of the Celtiberians (Holder 1904: 280). In my estimation, the most important representative supporting the assumption of an ablaut grade *−oi− is the presumed basic form *Loibā for the river name Łeba/Leba, an approximately 150-km-long Baltic tributary near Łeba/Leba, northwest of Gdynia/Gdingen. This name, together with the lake name Łebsko, German Leba-See, and the place name Łeba/Leba, was treated extensively elsewhere in relation to the Baltic (Udolph 1990: 136–141). The historical attestations (list: Udolph 1990: 136 f.; Babik 2001: 439) show no major variations: 1140 (copy from the beginning of the 13th century) ad Lebam, 1182 Leba, 1188 (copy from 1370) ad Lebam, 1217 intil Floden Leba, ad Lebam, around 1229 super lebam, 1240 Leba, 1251 super lebam, 1252 (K. 15. Jh.) super Lebarn, 1260 super Lebam, 1282 Leba, 1283 Leba, cum clausura Lebe, 1287 super Lebam, 1288 Leba, 1295 Leba, 1310 Leba, 1313 Leba (several times), 1320 Leba, citra fluvium Lebam, etc. The same applies to the place name derived from it, Łeba/Leba, and the lake name Łebsko/Leba-See. The interpretation from *Loibā was criticized and rejected by Zbigniew Babik (2001: 439–441). On the one hand, he refers to a review of the attempt by Leszek Bednarczuk (1993: 253), who objects that no diphthong can be demonstrated in the name of the Łeba and that a connection with the name of the Elbe/Łaba can be established. Both assumptions are mistaken: regarding the alleged absence of a diphthong, one must heed Friedrich Lorentz’s decisive observations on sound development in Slovinzian (discussed in detail in Udolph 1990: 138); regarding the connection with the name of the Elbe/Łaba, one may refer to Richard Ekblom’s rejecting position (Udolph 1990: 137, n. 9). Z. Babik himself rejects this etymology and considers convincing a connection with an unattested Slavic dialect word *lebъ ‘thin, delicate’, which is related to Lithuanian láibas. The Lithuanian word has a range of meanings from ‘slender, thin, gaunt, thin’ to ‘weak’ and is—which Z. Babik does not mention—cognate with Church Slavonic libъv ‘thin, slender, narrow’, etc. I am utterly unable to see how this could serve as the basis for a water name. I emphasize once again F. Lorentz’s decisive passages, which permit us to suppose that behind the vowel *−e− developed from the Kashubian and Slovinzian dialects there is also a *−ě−, which can fit very well with a base *Loibā > *Lěba. For this reason, a base *Loibā is preferable for Łeba/Leba. 82 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung This also removes the river name from the isolation that Z. Babik emphasized, since with a base *Loib it belongs to the zero-grade formations listed below. There are quite a few names. c) *-ī-: This zero grade of the ablaut series *leib-/*loib-/*lib-/*līb is well attested in Slavic water names—but not only there!—: 1. Město Libavá, German Liebau, near Olomouc/Olmütz, lies on the river Libavský potok, German Liebauer Bach, a left tributary of the Oder; the place name: 1301 in Lubavia, 1323 in Luboia, 1633 z Lybawi, etc.; also the place name Libavá Stará, 1397 Stara Lybowa, 1480 Stara Libawa, German Altliebe (Hosák, Šrámek 1970: 527). Regarding the interpretation, Hosák and Šrámek state: The root l’ub- ‘dear, beloved’ appears in Slavic hydronyms; a possessive formation with the suffix -ova is probably to be assumed. This may be doubted, since -ava is primarily and almost exclusively a hydronymic suffix in Slavic names (with references to further literature, Udolph 1979: 555–558), which also served to Slavicize pre-Slavic water names, e.g. nearby Opa > Opava. It cannot be ruled out—and the series of attestations for Libavá Stará also supports this—that an original water name is to be assumed. It would then continue a zero-grade formation. 2. Place name Libava, German Liebau, an abandoned settlement near Falknov/Falkenau on the Eger, around 1370 Lyba, Oden lyba, 1523 Lyba, 1525 in Lieba, 1542 Lieba; the river (Malá) Libava, a left tributary of the Ohře/Eger, flowed there; 1428 dan der Lybau, 1509 Velká Libava, 1603 Velká Libau, cf. Udolph 1990: 139 f. 3. Equally problematic is the connection of the water name Libawa, an approximately 20-km-long right tributary of the Małapanew/Malapane (today flowing into the Turawa Reservoir), 1566 ein forenbach die Lubaw genannt, which today den Namen Libawa führt (Domański 1970: 136), with a personal name. Here too one may ask whether the hydronymic suffix -awa is supposed to have been added to a personal name. For details, see Udolph 1990: 139; for a list of the appellatives, see below. Babik (2001: 426) rejected this explanation and preferred a connection with Slavic libъ ‘thin, weak, slow, sluggish’. This is the same root that B. Koenitz used to explain the name Leipzig, although with a range of meanings around ‘meager, weak, puny’ (see above). The meanings ‘slow, sluggish’ cited by Z. Babik cannot be demonstrated. Here the semantic range has been impermissibly expanded. Moreover, Libawa (the tributary of the Małapanew/Malapane) does not stand alone, but has the two Czech river names alongside it. Straipsniai / Articles 83 JÜRGEN UDOLPH 4. Lübnitz, a place name in the district of Bayreuth (Upper Franconia), (1332–1340) to Libnitz, (ca. 1398–1420 von der Liebnicz [...] zu der Liebnitz, etc.), is treated extensively by E. Eichler, Albrecht Greule, Wolfgang Janka, Robert Schuh (2006: 154–156). It is based on the water name Lübnitz(bach) and is traced by the authors to a basic form *Lьbnica. A Slavic etymology is not apparent, so one may tentatively think of a connection with the family mentioned here around Indo-European *lei-b- ‘pour, flow’ (see also Hengst 2009: 27). 5. A water name Libovje (?) or Libovja is also disputed; according to Bezlaj (1956: 342), it is a river in the area of the Mur (Slovenia) whose location cannot be determined; perhaps the following refers to it: 1232 inter aquam Liboam et Muram. Descriptions of Slovenia today name several streams Libovja, for example a small river in the Savinja/Sann area. Identification is hardly possible, however. There may perhaps be a connection with Libovia, a water name in Zala County according to Hungarian sources (Pesty 1888: 188), or also with a river name Libouza mentioned in 1193 near Nagykanizsa, in whose vicinity a place Liboca is also named, 1321 Libolcha, Libocha, 1357 Libolcha, 1493 Lybolcha. Ján Stanislav (1948: 2, 314) and Bezlaj (1956: 342) consider a connection with Slavic personal names based on Ljub-; Hengst (2009: 27) probably rightly doubts this, since the early tradition shows –i–, not –u–. 6. Lubě is today the name of an approximately 25-km-long tributary of the Svratka in Moravia. The place Lubě lies on it: 1368 in villa Lyby, 1398 villam Lybye, 1406 mezi Jenčěm a mezi Libí, 1448 Libie, 1557 z Lubie, etc. Hosák and Šrámek 1970: 558 see in it a -ja derivative of a personal name L’ub, with a change from -’u- > -i having occurred. This may be doubted, since the name of a river more than 20 km long will rarely be derived from a personal name. Probably not least for this reason, Jan Skutil (1974: 121) writes: “Libě, today Lubě, 1st tributary of the Svratka.” 7. Libenica, a tributary of the Ledava/Lendva in the border area between Styria and Slovenia; there is also the place name Libenicză there according to Hungarian sources, 1885 Libenizca, 1910 Libenicap atak (Kaszás 1977: 130). F. Bezlaj (1956: 341) assigns it to a personal name L’ubenv and thus to ljub, etc. This is doubtful, as is the case with the next name. 8. Libojna, a left tributary of the Drau/Drava, 1322 an der Lybon, an der Lyben, among other forms. Bezlaj (1956: 341) vacillates in explaining the name but ultimately decides on a connection with Ljub and corresponding personal names. With this name, one may again ask whether an explanation from *Ljub and a connection with a personal name is convincing, especially since these are water names. 84 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung 9. L’ba, a right tributary of the Obscha (→ Meža → Western Dūna/Dvina), Polish Lba, Łba (WdG III 155). I have not found an interpretation. 10. Lībe, Lībe, river names in Lithuania and Latvia, probably go back, according to Alexandras Vanagas (1981: 188), to *Libia. He suspects a connection with Lithuanian lība ‘stutterer, mumble’ and Latvian libis ‘lazybones, liar, chatterbox’. The strange proposal may have been related to particular sounds made by the water. I consider it more appropriate to associate the name with the word family listed here and mentioned below around Greek λείβω ‘drip, pour, pour out a libation’. Further zero-grade formations, which are frequent in -r-derivatives—but are by no means always found in water names, as Aller, Oder, Eder and many others show—occur especially in western Europe: 11. Libra, a river name near Reims, (around 950) ex villa, que vocatur Canoella (editors’ note: perhaps Caurel), secus Libram rivolum sita […] largiter effluens, pro eo quod tantumdem fuerit emptus, Libra vocacitur (MGH SS(f) XXXVI 119, 449). 12. Libre, a river name in the area of the Aude (southeast of Toulouse) (Dauzat, Deslandes, Rostaing 1978: 60). 13. Liver, a river in Scotland, Modern Gaelic Libhir < Goidelic *Liberā, a river name in Scotland (Förster 1941: 410, with the observation that -e can also have arisen secondarily as an epenthetic vowel). 14. According to Jacques Astor (1984: 23), an -r-formation expanded with a “suffixe […] prélatin” occurs in the water name Libron, 972 Lebrontis in southern France. Regarding the derivational base, Albert Dauzat, Gaston Deslandes, and Charles Rostaing (1978: 60) state: “Racine obscure”. 15. In this context, J. Astor (1984: 23) also refers to Lioure, two river names in the area of the Drôme and the name of a grotto near Claviers. 16. The place name *Libri, ad Libros transmitted in the Tabula Peutingeriana (on the Salona–Argentaria road) may also perhaps refer to a river name (access: https://omnesviae.org/#!/iter_TPPlace2110_TPPlace1707 [accessed 16.1.2024]); it belongs here. 17. Llyfni, a river in North Wales, apparently mentioned by Ptolemy as Αἰβίνου ποταμοῦ ἐκβολαί (Holder 1904: 205; Förster 1941: 397), an -n-derivative like the place name Λοιβάνα, likewise attested by Ptolemy. Eilert Ekwall (1968: 251) discusses the name extensively, also identifying it with the river name mentioned by Ptolemy and including English river-name variants such as Lyne, Leven, among others. Regarding the etymology, he states: “The British name may belong tot he root (s)leib- ‘to drip &c.’ found in Lat. lībo ‘to pour out’, Gk. λίβω the same, or more likely to the formerly Straipsniai / Articles 85 JÜRGEN UDOLPH identical root (s)leib- ‘to glide, to be slippery & c.’, found in OIr sliab ‘hill’, Lat lībo ‘to touch lightly, to taste’ [and elsewhere]. “I shall return to this hitherto overlooked etymology after completing the compilation of the water names belonging to *leib-, *loib-, *lib-, *līb. 18. The place name Leiva in the La Rioja region, old Libia⁴³, probably also contains a short vowel, on the lower course of the Rio Tirón (perhaps therefore an old sectional name of the river). 19. Of particular importance for the presumed etymology of Leipzig is the water name Leppe, a river in the Sieg drainage basin in the Oberberg district, 1555 die Leppe; there is also the place name Leppe, 13th c. de Leppe, 1373 van der Leppe, 1413 Leepp, which Greule (2014: 311) has treated and in which—citing Udolph (1990: 139–141)—he sees a -j-derivative of Germanic *lip from Indo-European *leib- ‘pour, flow, wet’. It is important here that one must posit the trace of the First or Germanic Sound Shift (*-b- > –p-). If one now wishes—as is emerging—to connect Leipzig here as well, this is possible only on the assumption that, in the case of Leipzig, the presumed sound shift did not take place. d) *-ī-: Possibly *-ī may be assumed in: Ľubica is the name of an approximately 20-km-long right tributary of the Poprad in Zips/Spiš, 1269 fl. Lubicha, Germanized as Leibitz, Leibitzbach, 1294 Lubicha, Wenige Lewbicz, also Libitza, Lybicha (Šmilauer 1932: 280, assuming a basic form *L’ubica and a change from Lu > Li). Again, one must ask why there should have been a change from Lu > Li, when the reverse direction is far more convincing (from a base Lib- > Ľub- unknown in Slovak). Once again, in the case of a water name, one must ask whether the connection with a word family ideally suited to hydronyms is not the more convincing hypothesis. This concludes the compilation of water names (which can also, as has often been demonstrated, survive in place names). The list of these and further names (Udolph 1990: 140) was supplemented by the following remark: “I mention only in passing -rn-formations such as Liburni, an ethnic designation and the name of a region on the Adriatic; the Lurngau in Carinthia, old Teurnia, ex oppido Tiburniae, Liburnia, in Liburnia, etc.; Livorno, old Libarna, Libarnum, a PN in Tuscany; Libarna, now Serravalle, a PN in Liguria.” Some of these names may belong to the family treated here, but this will not be discussed further at this point. Something else is more important. 86 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung The question is which appellative base underlies these fairly numerous water names. Ekwall (1968: 252) probably already took the right path—also previously overlooked by me—in his treatment of the British water name Lyne. E. Ekwall writes: “The British name may belong tot he root (s)leib- ‘to drip’ &c., found in Lat. lībo ‘to pour out’, Gk. λείβω the same, or more likely to the formally identical root (s)eib- ‘to glide, to bei slippery’ &c., found in OIr sliab ‘hill’, Lat. lībo ‘to touch lightly, to taste’, OHG slīfan &c. […]“ Since this concerns water names, it is much more convincing to draw on the Greek word family around *leib, which has occasionally been referred to (E. Eichler, K. Hengst, and others; partly also incorrectly: *leibh-) without presenting the material. It is advisable to name it here once again; cf. Udolph 1990: 139: Greek λείβω, aorist λειψαι (predominantly poetic since the Iliad) ‘drip, pour, pour out a libation’; derivatives λειβήνος · ὁ Διόνυσος, λείβηθρον (λίβ-) ‘eaves; place where water drips’, λείβδην ‘drop by drop’; with ablaut: λοιβή ‘libation, offering’, λοιβεῖον ‘vessel for making offerings’; with zero grade: *λῑψ, transmitted only in gen. λιβός, acc. λίβα ‘libation, drop’, λιβηρός ‘moist’, λίψ, λιβός ‘the pourer’ (name of the rain-bringing ‘southwest/west wind’); from λίψ: λιβάς, -άδος ‘outpouring, spring stream, etc.’, also λιβάδιοί ‘moist meadow’, λιβάζω, -ζομαι ‘(cause oneself to) pour out’, λίβος ‘outpouring, spring stream, etc.’²¹; Greek λιβρός probably also belongs here, an attribute of λός (‘turbid liquid’), to ἰγί, etc. (Frisk 1970: 96–97). H. Frisk considers—with good reason, certainly—a connection with Latin lībō ‘I pour out, offer, sacrifice, consecrate’ < *loibāiō (probably denominal), zero-grade dēlibūtus ‘moistened or smeared with a (fat) moisture’, also figuratively ‘drenched, dripping’. For further connections and the relevant literature, cf. Udolph (1990: 139). It is particularly significant that the Greek family exhibits the three ablaut grades *leib-, *loib-, *līb, exactly corresponding to the list of water names presented above. That this is an ancient Indo-European word group is also clear from the fact that the root is posited in the LIV as *leiH- (H = hypothetical laryngeal) with the meaning ‘pour’, with Greek λείβω also being cited. There can hardly be any doubt that the water names compiled above—there are always disputed cases—find their etymology here. When one examines more closely the geographical distribution of the names compiled above, it is striking that in the Baltic, Slavic, and an area adjoining them to the west, formations of the type *Libā/Leibava or *Lībava predominate; -r-derivatives (with the typical zero grade in the Straipsniai / Articles 87 JÜRGEN UDOLPH root) occur, by contrast, especially in the Celtic area (although it does not necessarily follow that these are formations specific to individual Celtic languages), while the remaining derivatives (Lebrontis, Λιβνίου ποταμοῦ, Λίβηθρα, Λίβηθρον, Λοιβανα, etc.) are also found in the originally Celtic area (France, Spain), but also in Italy and Illyria. If the northern Polish river name Leba/Leba goes back to *Loibā, it is to be counted among this group of names. If it is traced to a base *Lēba (which would also be possible on phonological grounds), the etymology of the name remains unresolved. In support of the possibility discussed above of connecting the river name with an Indo-European root *leib, in my view there may also be the fact that a connection between Polish water names and Greek appellatives has already been established several times (cf. Cybava – τυφος, Bzura – φρέαρ, Drama – δρόμος and Udolph 1990: 336 f.), so that a further parallel (cf. especially Greek λοιβή) would not be surprising. In addition, there are quite a few Greek appellatives that have left their traces in European water names; a particularly fine example is the family around Greek λιμήν ‘harbor’, λιμνή ‘lake, pond’, λειμών ‘moist meadow’, which can be found in numerous names, including Lac Léman, German Genfer See (see Wolfgang P. Schmid, Das Griechische und die alteuropäische Hydronymie. In: Schmid 1994: 167–174). 5. LEIPZIG – A PRE-SLAVIC NAME? The proposal that the place name Leipzig may go back to a pre-Slavic substrate has been voiced repeatedly ever since the -b- spellings in Thietmar of Merseburg were taken into account. Thus Eichler (2007: 82) writes: “Since Thietmar of Merseburg reproduces the Slavic pronunciations very carefully and the oldest spellings display –b–, one must reckon with an old water name *Lib, which is also widespread elsewhere in Europe for water names and may also be present here, just as water names in this area such as Luppe, Parthe, Pleiße, etc., are apparently of Indo-European origin. The name was then adapted to Slavic lipa ‘linden tree’ and understood as Lipsk(o), Lipc ‘place of linden trees’.” The most recent statements on the place name Leipzig come from Harald Bichlmeier (2013, 2015). In his 2013 contribution, he proceeds almost exclusively from an analysis with *–bh–, which, in view of the Greek word family that he leaves unmentioned, is not productive. Instead, he offers seven other 88 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung Indo-European roots, some of which are supposed to contain an element *-h₂p, which is unlikely given Leipzig’s location outside the Proto-Germanic settlement area—on this, see below. In his 2015 contribution, he rejects an analysis using an Indo-European root *lei-, *li, and a labial element *-bh- (allegedly “of unexplained origin”), and instead assumes a Proto-Indo-European suffixal element *-bho, which could serve to form participles. Furthermore, he lists half a dozen roots that might be relevant and also considers the operation of Verner’s Law possible. This too presupposes that the Leipzig area belonged to the Proto-Germanic settlement area. This must be rejected both on the basis of investigations into ancient Germanic settlement names (Udolph 1994) and because the name Leipzig itself did not undergo the change from Indo-European *-b- > -p, while other names as well (see below) lack Proto-Germanic sound developments. All this can be avoided if the water names compiled above are taken into account and the Greek word family particularly well suited to explaining water names is considered; it is also mentioned in LIV (2001: 405 f.), with Greek λείβω cited under the entry *leiH- ‘pour’. Thus one cannot avoid an analysis *leib-/*lib, which is also confirmed by the Westphalian river name Leppe mentioned above, which evidently contains Indo-European *-b- > -p. This leads to the conclusion that the place name Leipzig goes back to a pre-Germanic analysis *Libīā or something similar. The shift to Germanic *-p did not occur. The name formation, however, could readily be transferred into Germanic by analogy with a whole series of similar formations; here I mention Heere, Wehre, Lesse, Ecker­de, Hemmingen, Meitze, and refer to NOB (III 425–427) and Udolph (2004: 141–142) for further comparative names and explanations. As I have already suggested several times, apart from the etymology of the name Leipzig discussed here, further names and additional arguments indicate that the Leipzig area did not belong to the Proto- or Old Germanic settlement area. From the investigations into Germanic names (Udolph 1994), it is sufficient here to point to the distribution of formations in –ithi-, the suffixal formations with –r-, –s-, –st- and –str-, and the distribution of –leben-, lar, and haugaz- names. This idea of a late Germanization of the Leipzig area, which has never before been discussed, may now perhaps also shed new light on several place and water names that so far have not been satisfactorily explained. In brief, the following may be mentioned: Straipsniai / Articles 89 JÜRGEN UDOLPH 1. Luppe: The name should probably be understood, following Eichler (1981: 49), Eichler, Walther (2010: 121), and Udolph (1990: 152 ff.), as the pre-Germanic formation *Lupiā and assigned to the group around Lupawa, Lupia, etc., including Lippe < Lupia. The -p- has remained unshifted (so too Eichler, Walther 2010: 121), or alternatively one may assume that an F created by the sound shift was replaced by P in Slavic. 2. Parthe: Eichler, Walther (2010: 122) write: “1040 (forgery/copy)/1285 Parda fluvius, around 1165 Parda, 1215 in medio Parde, etc. [...] The consistent P spelling compels us to assume the same origin for the name: a Germanic basis is therefore unlikely, since the P would have had to develop into F [...].” 3. Pleiße with Pleißengau (which originally was also called Plisna, Plisni, 976 pagus Plisina). The river name: 1021, 1040, 1118, 1285 and elsewhere Plisina, Plisna; in any case, the name must be assigned to a root originally beginning with P. Since an interpretation from Slavic pleso ‘lake’ is phonetically impossible, a connection with Indo-European *Pleisa to *pel-/*pl- ‘flow, run, pour’ is virtually unavoidable, with the consequence that the name did not undergo the Germanic sound shift (Udolph 1979: 386, 388; Eichler 1981: 51). “The Germanic peoples evidently did not yet know the name, since otherwise they would have developed it into *Fl” (Eichler, Walther 2010: 123). 4. Aga: Also significant is a place and river name located approximately 50 km south of Leipzig, which likewise apparently shows no trace of the Germanic sound shift: this is Aga, an approximately 15-km-long tributary of the White Elster, whose name is also borne by the Gera districts Großaga and Kleinaga. The historical attestations have been cited elsewhere²; here is an abbreviated list: 1248 (copy) Heinricus de Ogawe, around 1250 Heinricus de Ogawe, Heinricus de Ogau, 1251 Henricus de Ogawe, 1262 Bertoldus de Ogau, 1296 in Ogawe, 1273 Bertholdus de Ogener, 1364 grozen Agow, wenigen Agow, 1424 Agaw, Grossen Agow, 1432 in der Aga, 1501 Grossen Agow, 1501 Grossen Agow, 1518 Agaw, (around 1530) zu Groß Agaw, 1542 zu grosen Ogau, 1550 klain Agaw, 1553 Grossen Agaw (Bromme 31), 1564 Großen Aga, 1567 Aga major (Kretschmer), etc. This is a difficult name, but research is fairly certain that one must begin with the river name. Elfriede Ulbricht (1957: 237) offers no proposed interpretation; H. Walther (2004: 31, 37) assumes a Slavic name and a basic form *Ogaua, but gives no etymology. A. Greule (2014: 25) regards an Old Sorbian basic form *Ogaua as ² Access: https://www.prof-udolph.com/gera-aga/ [accessed 24.1.2024]. 90 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung as a Slavicization of Germanic *Aγu(j)ā, to which –a(h)wa was added. The two components would then have been Au(e) and –aha ‘water, river’. This is very unlikely, since this combination is otherwise unknown. Moreover, Au(e) would scarcely appear as Ag– in Slavic. One must take a different route. We know that –ava was a typical river-name-forming element in Slavic, clearly recognizable in names such as Wirawa, Ilava, Tynava, Gliniava, Dubrava, Trnava. Therefore, when pre-Slavic names entered Slavic speech, they were not infrequently expanded with this element. We can see this, among other examples, in Opava (German Troppau), Morava ‘Moravia’, and Pilawa in Silesia, among others. Taking this into account, the following sequence of names results: basic form *Agā > Slavicized Ogava (a foreign –a– almost always becomes –o– in Slavic) > German Aga. One should then start, as W. P. Schmid already did, from *Aga, which places the name among a group of old, very old river names, of which the following may be mentioned: Aga, a river name in Latvia; Aire in France, 8th c. Ageira, 11th c. Agira; Ager in Austria, 810 Agira; the Eger, 805 Agara; Eger, tributary of the Wörnitz; Aist in Austria, 853 Agusta, 985 Ag esta, and many others. The basis of these old names is a word family around Old Indian ájati ‘drives’, Latin agō ‘I drive, lead’ (loanword agieren), Old Norse aka ‘to drive’, Old Indian ajiráh ‘swift, nimble’. As so often, water names are formed very simply; here, for example, to be understood as ‘(swiftly) driving, moving’. The following conclusions can be drawn from the statements compiled here: 1) The interpretation of the place name Leipzig must, as always in the field of disciplined name research, start from the oldest attestations, which clearly point to *–b–, not *p–. 2) An influence of the Central German consonant weakening is excluded in view of the stable development of the place name (initially –b–, later –p–). 3) An explanation from Slavic is very unlikely, as the detailed analysis above has shown. Later, however, the name was assimilated by Slavs to Slavic lipa ‘linden tree’ and to formations with –sk– such as Omsk, Vitebsk, Gdańsk. In German, it underwent the High German diphthongization of *–ī– > –ei–. 4) The best connection for an old analysis *Libīja is offered by the Greek appellatives around λείβω ‘to drip, pour’. In this connection, it should be pointed out that water names were generally based on so-called water words. One may Straipsniai / Articles 91 JÜRGEN UDOLPH also view Hans Krahe’s research critically, but his observations concerning the appellative foundations of old and older water names remain valid. He wrote: “In terms of semasiology and etymology, the most primordial and undoubtedly oldest layer of names derives from so-called water words, that is, designations for ‘running water’, ‘spring’, ‘stream’, ‘river’, or ‘to flow’ [...] with countless finer and finest shades of meaning, which were available in abundance to earlier people in their precise observation of nature [...]” (Krahe 1964: 34). Robert Ferguson (1862: 5) had already expressed a very similar judgment when he emphasized: “They were indeed for the most part simple appellatives, being most commonly nothing than words signifying water.” How correct these observations are was demonstrated 50 years ago by Marian Jurkowski (1971) in a collection of hydrographic terms for Ukrainian. His book brings together approximately 6,000 appellatives connected with water. It is therefore anything but convincing to suppose that meanings such as ‘to (join together)’, ‘ground, soil, plank wall’, ‘to nourish’, ‘to press, harass’, ‘way, journey’, and many others have recently been assumed for water names. The study by Dunja Brozović-Rončević (1997) on appellatives in Croatian hydronymy should also be noted. The question remains which body of water or water-rich area in or near Leipzig was designated by this name. The question is difficult to answer. This is due to the (former) network of water names, which I would like to address briefly in conclusion. 6. GEWÄSSER IN UND UM LEIPZIG The question is what the city’s early topography was like. Here too, one must continue to rely on the work of Georg Grebenstein (see below) (Koch 2008: 11). According to Koch (2008: 10), Leipzig arose at the junction of the Elster, Pleiße, and Parthe floodplains. The mature soil appears in the urban area as sand over glacial till. In the floodplain to the north, there is loam up to three meters thick. Koch continues there: “The name of the city probably derives from the Slavic word for ‘linden tree’, but it could also come from ‘to flow’” (Koch 2008: 10, referring to Eichler, Walther 2001: 577 f.). St. Koch continues: “This is a question that is not without significance for the location of the early settlement, since one explanation would suggest a hill above the damp river floodplain, while the other would suggest a low-lying area on the Parthe.” 92 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung G. Grebenstein (1953, 1981, and 1995) reconstructed the course of the waterways in the Middle Ages; urban historians have regularly relied on and continue to rely on his work. The Parthe, coming from the east, initially flowed along today’s Tröndlinring and emptied into the Elster northwest of the city center, where the river formed a marshy floodplain. The Parthe lowland extended from today’s Brühl almost 500 m northward, nearly as far as today’s Uferstraße. It is assumed that the Parthe was diverted and led farther north by no later than the twelfth century, thus creating an area adjoining the city on which the “Hallische Vorstadt” was laid out along Gerberstraße. The natural flowing waters of Leipzig’s inland delta include or included, among others, in the south the Paußnitz, the R ödel, and the Coburger Wasser, and in the northwest the Hundewasser and the many branching Luppe channels, such as the Southern and Northern Old Luppe, Rote Luppe, Heuweg-Luppe, Schlohbachs-Luppe, and Namenlose Luppe. In addition, the Gösel and the Parthe flowed as larger stream floodplains in old Mulde glacial-valley channels, while the Northern and Eastern Rietzschke and the Zschampert, as small streams, flowed into Leipzig’s inland delta. The still-unregulated rivers were characterized by countless side channels, oxbows, and rivulets, which flowed into one another, then divided again, frequently changed course after floods, and thus formed an extensive network of flowing waters. Relics of this include, for example, the Batschke, the Paußnitz, the Kleine Luppe, the Alte Luppe, and the Hundewasser. Altogether, rivers, streams, and ditches flow through Leipzig’s urban area over a total length of approximately 176.4 km. It is impossible to determine which body of water may originally have been named *Libiā or something similar. In my view, the most likely are considerations such as those advanced by Eichler, Walther (2010: 129–133): accordingly, the original naming probably did not refer to a (single) water name, but to the landscape rich in watercourses. This accords with Hengst’s (2009) contribution, which discusses the name Leipzig as an indication of an area rich in water; see also Hengst (2010: 135). The name was then transferred to the developing settlement that became Leipzig. BIBLIOGRAPHY Astor Jacques 1984: Lioran auvergnat et Lieuran languedocien. – Nouvelle revue d’onomastique 3/4, 23–24. Straipsniai / Articles 93 JŪRGEN UDOLPH Babik Zbigniew 2001: Najstarsza warstwa nazewnicza na ziemiach polskich w granicach wczesnośredniowiecznej Słowiańszczyzny, Kraków: Universitas. Bank M.V. 1971: Банк М. В. Спостереження над мікрогідронімією східного Закарпаття [Sposterežennja nad mikrohidronimijeju schidnoho Zakarpattja]. – Питання гідроніміки [Pytannja hidronimiky]. Матеріали III Республіканської ономастичної (гідронімічної) наради [Materialy III Respublika ns’koji onomastičnoji (hidronimičnoji) narady], Київ: «Наукова думка» [Kyjiv: „Naukova dumka“], 61–67. Bednarczuk Leszek 1993: The position of Poland’s water names within Old European hydronymy. Heidelberg: J. Udolph 1990 [review of]. – Onoma 37, 20–261. Berger Dieter 1999: Duden, Geographische Namen in Deutschland: Herkunft und Bedeutung der Namen von Ländern, Städten, Bergen und Gewässern, 2nd rev. ed., Mannheim, Leipzig, Vienna, Zurich: Dudenverlag. Bez laj France 1956–1961: Slovenska vodna imena 1–2, Ljubljana: Institute for the Slovene Language. Bez laj France 1969: Onomastics and lexicology. – Onomastica Jugoslavica 1, 10–21. Bichlmeier Harald 2013: Some Indo-Europeanist remarks on the presumed derivational basis of the place name Leipzig: the Proto-Germanic river name *Lībō or the Proto-Germanic area name *Lībja- (with an excursus on the name of the Rhön and an appendix with further reflections on the name of the Elbe). Namenkundliche Informationen 101/102, 49–75. Bichlmeier Harald 2015: On the etymology of the place name Leipzig. – Leipzig von Anfang an. Begleitband zur Ausstellung des Stadtgeschichtlichen Museums Leipzig 20. Mai – 25. Oktober 2015, 36–37. Bily Inge 1995: Ortsnamenbuch des Mittelelbegebiets, Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Bosse Heinrich 1939: On the interpretation of the field name Liebelose. – Monatsblätter der Gesellschaft für pommersche Geschichte und Altertumskunde 53, 14–16. Brozović-Rončević Dunja 1997: Apelativi u hrvatskoj hidronimiji: Dissertation, Zagreb: Faculty of Philosophy, University of Zagreb. Dauzat Albert, Deslandes Gaston, Rostaing Charles 1978: Dictionnaire étymologique des noms de rivières et de montagnes en France, Paris: Klincksieck. DO – Deutschen Ortsnamenbuch, edited by M. Niemeyer, Berlin, Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2012. 94 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung Domański Józef 1970: The Slavic place names in -jane in Silesia. – Beiträge zum slawischen onomastischen Atlas, edited by R. Fischer, E. Eichler, Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 133–144. Eichler Ernst 1981: Old water names between the Baltic Sea and the Ore Mountains. With an appendix. – Beiträge zur Namenforschung. Neue Folge 16, 40–54. Eichler Ernst 2001: Historical linguistic areas between the Baltic Sea and the Adriatic in the Middle Ages in the light of onomastics. – Namenkundliche Beiträge. Wolfgang P. Schmid zum 70. Geburtstag, edited by F. Debus, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 19–46. Eichler Ernst 2007: Freistaat Sachsen: Alle Städtenamen und deren Geschichte, Leipzig: Faber & Faber Verlag GmbH. Eichler Ernst, Greule Albrecht, Janka Wolfgang, Schuh Robert 2006: Beiträge zur slavoisch-deutschen Sprachkontaktforschung, vol. 2: Siedlungsnamen im oberfränkischen Stadtund Landkreis Bayreuth, series Slavica. Monographs, manuals, textbooks, and dictionaries, 4, Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter. Eichler Ernst, Walther Hans 1986: Städtenamenbuch der DDR, Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut. Eichler Ernst, Walther Hans 2010: Alt-Leipzig und das Leipziger Land: Ein historisch-geographisches Namenbuch zur Frühzeit im Elster-Pleißen-Land im Rahmen der Sprachund Siedlungsgeschichte, series Onomastica Lipsiensia, Leipziger Untersuchungen zur Namenforschung, 7, Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag. Ekwall Eilert 1968: English River-Names, reprint Oxford: at the Clarendon Press. Ferguson Robert 1862: The River-Names of Europe, London, Edinburgh: Williams & Norgate. Fischer Reinhard E. 2006: Die Ortsnamen der Länder Brandenburg und Berlin: Alter – Herkunft – Bedeutung, Berlin, Brandenburg: be.bra wissenschaft Verlag. Fischer Reinhard E., Witkowski Teodolius 1967: On the geography of Old Polabian name types (I). – Zeitschrift für Slawistik 12, 670–694. Förster Max 1941: Der Flussname Themse und seine Sippe: Studien zur Anglisierung keltischer Eigennamen und zur Lautchronologie des Altbritischen, vol. 1: Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Abteilung, Munich: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Frisk Hjalmar 1970: Griechisches etymologisches Wörterbuch, vol. 2: Kr–Omega, Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag. Straipsniai / Articles 95 JŪRGEN UDOLPH Gansleweit Klaus-Dieter 1982: Untersuchungen zur Namenkunde und Siedlungsgeschichte der nordöstlichen Niederlausitz: die Flurund Ortsnamen im Bereich des früheren Stiftes Neuzelle, vol. 34, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. Grebenstein Georg 1953: Die Leipziger Flussbauten während der Kolonisationszeit. Manuscript in the Leipzig Institute for Prehistory and Early History (no. 11668). Grebenstein Georg 1981: Leipzig’s city moat (A geohydrological and wastewater-management investigation). Manuscript in the Leipzig City History Museum. – Wasserwirtschaft – Wassertechnik. Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift für Technik und Ökonomik der Wasserwirtschaft 33(1983), 7, 247–249. Grebenstein Georg 1995: Leipzig’s waterways from the turn of the millennium to the present, editorially revised by H.-J. Böhme, C. Becker. – Neue Ufer 3, published manuscripts by Grebenstein, editorially revised and supplemented with illustrations. Greule Albrecht 2014: Deutsches Gewässernamenbuch: Etymologie der Gewässernamen und der zugehörigen Gebiets-, Siedlungsund Flurnamen, Berlin, Boston: Walter de Gruyter. HE IX – Hydronymia Europaea 9, edited by W. P. Schmid, Stuttgart, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1993. Hengst Karlheinz 2003: Sprache und Vorzeit. Stuttgart: B. Comrie 2002 [review of]. – Namenkundliche Informationen 83/84, 164–166. Hengst Karlheinz 2009: The name Leipzig as an indication of an area rich in water. – Namenkundliche Informationen 95/96, 37–54 Hengst Karlheinz 2010: The name Leipzig. – Eichler/Walther, 134–140. Hengst Karlheinz 2016: Leipzig – a Slavic initial form of the name is possible. – Namenkundliche Informationen 107/108, 462–477. Hoffmann Lothar 1959: Die slawischen Flurnamen des Kreises Löbau, Historische Kommission bei der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. German-Slavic studies on onomastics and settlement history, 9, Halle: M. Niemeyer. Holder Alfred 1904: Alt-celtischer Sprachschatz 2, Leipzig: Teubner. HONBS I – Historisches Ortsnamenbuch von Sachsen 1, edited by E. Eichler, H. Walther, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. Hosák Ladislav, Šrámek Rudolf 1970: Místní jména na Moravě a ve Slezsku 1, Prague: Československá Akademie HEVěd. 96 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung Jurkowski Marian 1971: Ukraińska terminologia hydrograficzna, Monografie Slawistyczne Komitetu Słowianoznawstwa PAN, 22, Wrocław, Warsaw, Kraków, Gdańsk: Zakład Narodowy imienia Ossolińskich. Kaszás József 1977: Changes in geographical names in the Lendva–Lendava area. – Hungarológiai Közlemények 9(30/31), 119–144. Koch Stefan 2008: Neue Erkenntnisse zur Stadtentstehung Leipzigs. Ergebnisse der archäologischen Untersuchungen im Nordwest–Viertel der Leipziger Innenstadt: Dissertation, Bamberg. Access: https://fis.uni-bamberg.de/entities/publication/cf571665-6138-4234-afce-d8b841c2703c/details [accessed 26.1.2024]. Koenitz Bernd 2016: Leipzig – die Herkunft des Namens ist rein slawisch! – Namenkundliche Informationen 107/108, 441–461. Krahe Hans 1964: Unsere ältesten Flußnamen, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. LIV – Rix Helmut, Kümmel Martin, Zehnder Thomas, Lipp Reiner, Schirmer Brigitte. Lexicon of Indo-European Verbs. The Roots and Their Primary Stem Formations, 2nd ed., Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2001. Malingoudis Phaedon 1981: Studies on the Slavic Place Names of Greece, Ser. Treatises of the Humanities and Social Sciences Class, Mainz: Academy of Sciences and Literature. MGH SS(f) XXXVI – Monumenta Germaniae Historica Scriptores (in folio) 36, Hannover: Hahn’sche Bookshop, 1998. NMP IV – Polish Place Names. History. Origin. Changes 4 (J–Kn), edited by K. Rymut, Kraków: Institute of the Polish Language of the Polish Academy of Sciences, 2001. NOB III – Kirsten Casemir. The Place Names of the Wolfenbüttel District and the City of Salzgitter, Bielefeld: Regional History Publishing House, 2003. Pawłowski Eugeniusz 1975: The Place Names of Sądecczyzna 2, Wrocław, Warszawa, Kraków, Gdańsk: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, Polish Academy of Sciences Publishing House. Pesty Frigyes 1888: The Place Names of Hungary from a Historical, Geographical, and Linguistic Perspective, Budapest: Historical Committee of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Profoos Antonín 1949: Local Names in Bohemia 2, Prague: Czech Academy of Sciences and Arts in Prague. Rieger Janusz, Wolnicz–Pawłowska Ewa 1975: River Names in the Warta Basin, Wrocław, Warszawa, Kraków, Gdańsk: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, Polish Academy of Sciences Publishing House. Straipsniai / Articles 97 JÜRGEN UDOLPH Rospond Stanisław 1937: South Slavic Place Names with the Suffix -itj, Ser. Proceedings of the Linguistic Commission, 25, Kraków: Polish Academy of Arts and Sciences. Schmid Wolfgang P. 1994: Linguisticae Scientiae Collectanea: Selected Writings on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, edited by D. Weber, E. Eggers, J. Becker, J. Udolph, Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter. Sclishchev Afanasij M. 1931: The Slavic Population in Albania, Sofia: Publication of the Macedonian Scientific Institute. SHGZ III – Historical-Geographical Dictionary of Polish Lands in the Middle Ages 3, Kraków: Institute of History of the Polish Academy of Sciences, 2003. Skutil Jan 1974: The Czech and German Hydronymy of Moravia on Maps from the 16th to the 19th Century. – Onomastica Slavogermanica IX, vol. 66: Philological-Historical Class, edited by E. Eichler, H. Walther, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 117–127. Stanislav Ján 1948: Slovakia South in the Middle Ages 2, 1st ed., Writings of the Linguistic Department of Matica slovenská, ser. B, vol. 2 + map supplement, Turčiansky Sv. Martin: Matica slovenská. Šmilauer Vladimir 1932: The Hydrography of Old Slovakia, Ser. Proceedings of the Learned Šafařík Society in Bratislava, 9, Prague, Bratislava: Published by the Learned Šafařík Society in Bratislava. Trautmann Reinhold 1949: The Elbe and Baltic Slavic Place Names 2, Ser. Treatises of the German Academy of Sciences in Berlin, Philological-Historical Class, year 1947, 4, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. Trautmann Reinhold 1950: The Slavic Place Names of Mecklenburg and Holstein, 2nd rev. ed., Ser. Treatises of the Saxon Academy of Sciences in Leipzig, Philological-Historical Class 45, 3, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. Udolph Jürgen 1990: The Position of Poland’s Hydronyms within Old European Hydronymy, Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag. Udolph Jürgen 1994: Onomastic Studies on the Germanic Problem, Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter. Udolph Jürgen 2004: Suffix Formations in Ancient Place Names of Northern and Central Germany. – Suffix Formations in Ancient Place Names: Proceedings of an International Symposium in Uppsala 14–16 May 2004, 137–175. Udolph Jürgen 2021: A New Bibliographic Collection on European Place, Field, and Water Names – Notes on Its Use. – Onomastica 65/1, 83–98. 98 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC Der Name Leipzig und die Germanische Lautverschiebung Udolph Jürgen 2022: Nomina Geographica Europaea. Bibliographic Collection on European Place, Field, and Water Names. – Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 87, 123–143. Udolph Jürgen 2022a: East Slavic Place Names – Distribution, Mapping, and a New Bibliographic Collection. – Journal of Slavic Philology 49, 147–173. Udolph Jürgen 2023: Home and Spread of the Slavs and a New Bibliographical Collection. – International Journal of Language and Linguistics 11(4), 136–147. Zugang: http://www.journaloflanguage.org/article/501/10.11648.j.ijll.20231104.16. Ulbricht Elfriede 1957: The River Basin of the Thuringian Saale: A Genealogical Investigation, Halle: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Vanagas Aleksandras 1981: Etymological Dictionary of Lithuanian Hydronyms, Vilnius: Mokslas. Vasmer Max 1970: The Slavs in Greece, Leipzig: Central Antiquariat of the German Democratic Republic. Walther Hans 2004: Historical Layers of Water Names as Evidence of Linguistic, Cultural, and Settlement History (Supplement to Map G II 4, in: Atlas of the History and Regional Studies of Saxony), Leipzig, Dresden. Walther Hans 2009: Leipzig’s Name in the Light of Its Early Records. – Urban History. Communications of the Leipzig Historical Society, 13–18. WdrG III – Dictionary of Russian Water Names 5 and supplement, edited by M. Vasmer, Berlin, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1961–1973. Wenzel Walter 2015: The Slavic Settlement of the Leipzig Region in the Light of Place Names. – Slavs in Germany. Their Names as Witnesses to History, authored by W. Wenzel, edited by A. Brendler, S. Brendler, Hamburg, 251–270. Wenzel Walter 2016: Leipzig – An Old Sorbian Place Name? – Onomastic Information 107/108, 478–481. Wenzel Walter 2017: Where Did the Slavs Settled in the Settlement of Libzi and Its Surroundings Come From? With 2 Maps. – The Early Slavic History of Saxony in the Light of Names, authored by W. Wenzel, edited by A. Brendler, S. Brendler, Hamburg: Baar-Verlag, 171–172. Willich Cornelia 1994: Brandenburg Name Book, vol. 8: The Place Names of the Lebus Region, Berlin Contributions to Onomastic Research, Weimar: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger. Straipsniai / Articles 99 JŪRGEN UDOLPH Zaimov Jordan 1967: Settlement of the Bulgarian Slavs on the Balkan Peninsula: A Study of the Inhabitant Names in Bulgarian Toponymy, Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Institute for Bulgarian Language. Leĩpčigo name and the Germanic consonant shift ABSTRACT The article discusses the etymology of the place name Leĩpčigas. For a long time, it was believed that the basis of the oikonym was the Slavic word lipa ‘linden’. A closer examination of historical spellings, such as Libzi and others, above all those recorded by Thietmar of Merseburg, who knew Slavic languages, led to a correction of the etymology. Moreover, attention had not previously been paid to whether the Germanic tribes encountered this name before or after the first, or Germanic, consonant shift began to operate. This is decisive for answering the question of which Indo-European word group can be regarded as the basis of this place name. Submitted on January 31, 2024. JŪRGEN UDOLPH Centre for Name Research – Göttingen / Rosdorf, Steinbreite 9, D-37124 Rosdorf near Göttingen Göttingen Academy of Sciences and Humanities Office for Place Names between the Rhine and Elbe – Onomastics in the European Context Robert-Koch-Str. 29, D-48149 Münster [email protected] 100 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica XC