# Spanish: Cristóbal



## francisgranada

Buenas tardes,

¿Cuál es el origen o la etimología del nombre español _Cristóbal_?

Con otras palabras, ¿por qué no _Cristóforo_, si corresponde a _Christophorus_ latino (de origen griego, obviamente)? 

Gracias.


----------



## basicamenteyo

http://etimologias.dechile.net/?Cristo.bal


----------



## francisgranada

basicamenteyo said:


> http://etimologias.dechile.net/?Cristo.bal


 
Gracias, el artículo es interesante (este sitio lo conozco tambien yo...). Pero no explica el origen de la propia forma _Cristóbal_, es decir ¿por qué _Cristó*bal*_ y no _Cristó*foro*_?


----------



## miguel89

/f/ could have become /v/ or /β/ after voicing, being a consonant between vowels. /r/ to /l/ can be explained with dissimilation with the first /r/ of the cluster. Regarding the vowel change and the apocope, I don't know how to explain them, although there are many cases of both along Spanish history.


----------



## francisgranada

miguel89 said:


> /f/ could have become /v/ or /β/ after voicing, being a consonant between vowels. /r/ to /l/ can be explained with dissimilation with the first /r/ of the cluster. Regarding the vowel change and the apocope, I don't know how to explain them, although there are many cases of both along Spanish history.


 
I understand what you want to say, I myself have tried to think this way ... Neverthless this explanation seems to me a little bit "complicated". 

(Enfin, no decimos "_semábal_" o "_fósfobal_"  en vez de _semáforo_ o _fósforo_ ...)


----------



## artion

If we agree that the first part is Christo- then we have a problem to explain the -bal. Doesn't sound close to anything in greek, so it could be a loan from other language. The closest Gr. name is Chistophilos (Christophile) which can be the origin instead of Christopher. 
But if we agree that _-bal_ is correct, then the _Christo_- is problematic. 
See what I mean: There is a Gr. christian name _Chrysobalantes. _The first part is from chrysos (gold) and the latter from _valantion_ (Latin _bursa_, pouch to carry coins).  
Chrysos and Christos sound very close in Gr., and have religious/ spiritual/symbolic and grammatical associations. For example, in old books and manuscripts the phthogue -st- is written with a letter that looks like -s-, with no -t- visible. 
So I could imagine the scheme _Chrysovalantes>Christobal _occuring among the early spanish christians.


----------



## francisgranada

artion said:


> If we agree that the first part is Christo- then we have a problem to explain the -bal. Doesn't sound close to anything in greek, so it could be a loan from other language. The closest Gr. name is Chistophilos (Christophile) which can be the origin instead of Christopher.
> But if we agree that _-bal_ is correct, then the _Christo_- is problematic.
> See what I mean: There is a Gr. christian name _Chrysobalantes. _The first part is from chrysos (gold) and the latter from _valantion_ (Latin _bursa_, pouch to carry coins).
> Chrysos and Christos sound very close in Gr., and have religious/ spiritual/symbolic and grammatical associations. For example, in old books and manuscripts the phthogue -st- is written with a letter that looks like -s-, with no -t- visible.
> So I could imagine the scheme _Chrysovalantes>Christobal _occuring among the early spanish christians.


Interesting. Your theory could even explain (at least partially) the nasal _"ã" _in _Cristóvão, _the portuguese version of this name_. _
In such case, the scheme for the portuguese version could be something like this:_ Cris(t)óvalante > Cristóvalan(o) > Cristóvan(o) > Cristóvão. _


----------



## MRossi

http://www.scanno.org/images/cristoforo_colombo_firma_02.jpg


However if spanish works like italian (and it is possible) that "fero"=llevar could transform into lle*B*ar/lle*B*a*l*/lleva*l*/.
Because :
LINGUALI         L R
LABIALI         P B M F V

insomma possono cambiare facilmente quelle lettere.

Cristo-lle*B*a*l*--->Cristo-*B*a*l*.

*Christopher Columbus* the man of Americas!

but i don t understand form where come llevar ,maybe from levo

wiki


> *Verb*
> 
> _present active_ *levō*, _present infinitive_ *levāre*, _perfect active_ *levāvī*, _supine_ *levātum*.
> 
> 
> I raise, elevate, lift up
> I make light, lighten
> I relieve, ease, comfort
> I mitigate, alleviate


----------



## relativamente

The name in Catalan is Cristòfol 
It seems the r is turned into l and the f into b


----------



## francisgranada

MRossi said:


> http://www.scanno.org/images/cristoforo_colombo_firma_02.jpg
> 
> 
> However if spanish works like italian (and it is possible) that "fero"=llevar could transform into lle*B*ar/lle*B*a*l*/lleva*l*/.
> Because :
> LINGUALI L R
> LABIALI P B M F V
> 
> insomma possono cambiare facilmente quelle lettere.
> 
> Cristo-lle*B*a*l*--->Cristo-*B*a*l*.
> 
> *Christopher Columbus* the man of Americas!


 
Everything is possible, but _Cristo-llevar_ doesn't have too much sense... A hypothetical translation of _Christoferens_ should rather be "_Cristollevante" _or_ "Cristollevador". _



> but i don t understand form where come llevar


 
It comes from the latin _levare_ (accornding to the DRAE), but don't know why the double "ll" in such case.


----------



## francisgranada

relativamente said:


> The name in Catalan is Cristòfol
> It seems the r is turned into l and the f into b


 
The catalan version of this name seems to be perfectly clear: _Cristóforo > Cristófor > Cristófol_. The omission of the final *-o* is in catalan normal (e.g. _fósfor, semáfor, sabater ...),_ the transition _*r>l*_ at the end of the word is not standard, but surely possible.

Neverthless, in case of the Spanish we have to suppose too many atypical changes at the same time to get _Cristóbal_ from _Cristóforo_:

1. omission of the final -o (not typical: _fósfor*o*, semáfor*o*, zapater*o* ...),_ 
2. f>b (not typical)
3. o>a (not typical at all)
4. r>l (not typical, but possible: _árbor > árbol_)

That's why I think, that _Cristóbal_ doesn't come directly from _Cristóforo_ (< _Christoforos)_. But maybe it's only the opinion of mine ...


----------



## CapnPrep

francisgranada said:


> That's why I think, that _Cristóbal_ doesn't come directly from _Cristóforo_ (< _Christoforos)_. But maybe it's only the opinion of mine ...


_Cristóbal_ does not derive from _Cristóforo_ by regular phonetic changes, but I think that this must still be the origin. This is a well-established saint's name, so I don't think it could be replaced at any point by a totally different formation (_Chrysovalantes_ or _Cristo-llevar/llevante_ or whatever, none of which gives the right phonetic result anyway). 

According to Menéndez-Pidal (cited here), the evolution was as follows:
Christophoru > *Christó*b*oru > *Cristób*alo* > Cristóbal​The first and last changes are phonetic. _f_ > _b_ and loss of final _o_ (< _u_) are "not typical", as you said, but nevertheless can be observed in quite a few examples besides this one:

Ste*ph*anum > Este*b*an, tri*f*olium > tré*b*ol, ra*ph*anum > rá*b*ano, …
angel*u*m > ángel, secund*u*m > según, mult*u*m > muy, …
The change from _-oru_ to _-alu_ can be explained perhaps by dissimilation (to avoid the sequence of three back vowels _o_-_o_-_u_, and the repetition of _r_, as miguel89 suggested), and/or as an example of "the intrusion of the unstressed elements suffix _-ănu_ and _-ălu_, indigenous to the Iberian Peninsula".


----------



## francisgranada

CapnPrep said:


> _Cristóbal_ does not derive from _Cristóforo_ by regular phonetic changes, but I think that this must still be the origin. This is a well-established saint's name, so I don't think it could be replaced at any point by a totally different formation (_Chrysovalantes_ or _Cristo-llevar/llevante_ or whatever, none of which gives the right phonetic result anyway).
> 
> According to Menéndez-Pidal (cited here), the evolution was as follows:
> Christophoru > *Christó*b*oru > *Cristób*alo* > Cristóbal​The first and last changes are phonetic. _f_ > _b_ and loss of final _o_ (< _u_) are "not typical", as you said, but nevertheless can be observed in quite a few examples besides this one:
> 
> Ste*ph*anum > Este*b*an, tri*f*olium > tré*b*ol, ra*ph*anum > rá*b*ano, …
> angel*u*m > ángel, secund*u*m > según, mult*u*m > muy, …
> The change from _-oru_ to _-alu_ can be explained perhaps by dissimilation (to avoid the sequence of three back vowels _o_-_o_-_u_, and the repetition of _r_, as miguel89 suggested), and/or as an example of "the intrusion of the unstressed elements suffix _-ănu_ and _-ălu_, indigenous to the Iberian Peninsula".


Many thanks for your precise explanation.

I looked up a little for other romance languages and I've found versions like _Cristóvão, Cristovo, Cristobo, Cristófo, Cristófor, Cristoffa, Cristófuru, Cristophe _... so the common origin from *_Cristoforo_ and the_ f>v/b_ transition and the loss of the final -o/-u (or even -ro/-ru), is evident also from these examples. The _"f"_ is mainteind in Catalonia, Aragonia, France and Italy, while in the rest of the iberian peninsula we have _"b/v"._

What still remains unclear (at least for me ), is the nasal _ã_ in portuguese...


----------



## ilocas2

francisgranada said:


> Many thanks for your precise explanation.
> 
> I looked up a little for other romance languages and I've found versions like _Cristóvão, Cristovo, Cristobo, Cristófo, Cristófor, Cristoffa, Cristófuru, Cristophe _... so the common origin from *_Cristoforo_ and the_ f>v/b_ transition and the loss of the final -o/-u (or even -ro/-ru), is evident also from these examples. The _"f"_ is mainteind in Catalonia, Aragonia, France and Italy, while in the rest of the iberian peninsula we have _"b/v"._
> 
> What still remains unclear (at least for me ), is the nasal _ã_ in portuguese...



How is it in Romanian?


----------



## artion

You know the famous silverware brand Cristofle. Their official site says that Cristofle was from Paris, but doesn't go back beyond mid 19th c. If this family is genuine french, then we have the same phenomenon in that language. 
I wonder why this name must come from _Christopher_ and not from _Christophile_. It seems that St. Christophile also existed and has some toponyms in Americas. 
http://www.mapsofantiquity.com/store/inventory.pl?id=CAM029

Apart from a real christian name, it was also a prosonym given to St. Paul:
http://books.google.gr/books?id=qkg...cQ6AEwCg#v=onepage&q=st. christophile&f=false (page 68)

It was also a name in medieval England: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Becon,_Thomas_(DNB00)


----------



## francisgranada

ilocas2 said:


> How is it in Romanian?


 
_Cristofor_ (at least when speaking about Columbus)


----------



## CapnPrep

This website about Italian family names list several variants of _Cristoforo_, with some ideas about their origins (no specific sources given):


 *Cristofalo/Cristofolo*: from the Byzantine name _Christophalus_ or _Christopholus_, archaic forms for "Cristoforo", or alterations of the name _Christopoulos_ (son of Christ).
 *Cristofano*: derived from the auspicious name confused: _nome beneaugurale_) _Christhophanus _[sic]
*Cristofaro/Cristofero/…*: from the Byzantine name _Christopharus_ or _Christophorus _



francisgranada said:


> What still remains unclear (at least for me ), is the nasal _ã_ in portuguese...


See _Cristofano_ above (although the explanation is incomplete). The main Corsican form of "Christopher" is apparently also _Cristofa*n*u_, so we find the nasal in other languages besides Portuguese.


----------



## artion

CapnPrep said:


> This website about Italian family names list several variants of _Cristoforo_, with some ideas about their origins (no specific sources given):
> 
> 
> *Cristofalo/Cristofolo*: from the Byzantine name _Christophalus_ or _Christopholus_, archaic forms for "Cristoforo", or alterations of the name _Christopoulos_ (son of Christ).


You are  right. I found the name Christofalo, belonging to a Lord from Venice, in a Gr. text refering to events of 1628. It seems to be a corrupted and latinized form of Christophorus or Christophilus. Also, Ι found that the surname (but not christian name) Christofalos is used in Greece today. Also exists in Italy as Cristofaro and Cristofalo or Cristofali. 
This name might have been transfered to Spain by Greek mercenaries (estradiotes) who migrated to Spain after the turkish invation in the Balkans (15th-16th c.).


----------



## francisgranada

CapnPrep said:


> This website about Italian family names list several variants of _Cristoforo_, with some ideas about their origins (no specific sources given):
> 
> 
> *Cristofalo/Cristofolo*: from the Byzantine name _Christophalus_ or _Christopholus_, archaic forms for "Cristoforo", or alterations of the name _Christopoulos_ (son of Christ).
> *Cristofano*: derived from the auspicious name confused: _nome beneaugurale_) _Christhophanus _[sic]
> *Cristofaro/Cristofero/…*: from the Byzantine name _Christopharus_ or _Christophorus _
> See _Cristofano_ above (although the explanation is incomplete). The main Corsican form of "Christopher" is apparently also _Cristofa*n*u_, so we find the nasal in other languages besides Portuguese.


 
There exists also _Cristoffa_, a genovese variant. So according to these facts we could also suppose, that at least in part of Italy and in part of the Iberian peninsula, the initial form was *_Cristofalo/no_ and not *_Cristoforo_. 

In such case the Catalan _Cristófal_ requires no additional explanation and the Spanish _Cristóbal_ and portuguese _Cristóvão _become much easier to explain. 

*********************
Wth a little bit of phantasy , an opposite direction is imaginable, too, at least for the Galician _Cristovo_ and the Mirandese _Cristobo._ The hypothetical scheme could be: *_Cristofalo_ > _Cristoval_ > _Cristovau_ > _Cristovo._ In this case, all the iberoromance and part of the italian variants would have a common origin.

The next step could be to consider, whether _Christopher_ and _Cristoforo_ are not later "learned" variants (cultismos, parole dotte) that in some cases might have replaced an older popular form derived from *_Cristofalo/no._


----------



## Webej

Unmentioned so far:
Christophanos would mean Christ appearing/revealed
Christophalos would mean Christ shining.
Christopolous does not so much mean so of as (diminutively) progeny of


----------



## Cossue

The name is registered in Medieval Latin charters from Galician as *Christovalo *(GMH: Resultados; you can check also here: CODOLGA, searching for christov*).

Of course, this area does not belong to Spanish language, but to Galician, for which further evolution is > C(h)ristovao > C(h)ristovoo > Cristovo (the modern form of the name). Anyway, given the closeness of Galician -and Portuguese- to Spanish, I guess this helps.


----------



## Penyafort

The Catalan fixed forms these days are Cristòfor and Cristòfol but there certainly are and have been other forms too, such as Cristòfel, Cristòfer, Cristòfal... The typical shortened form is _Tòfol_, as Catalan tends to shorten names taking the last syllables.

Surprisingly -or not-, one of the first attested in documents of the 12th century is c_ristoual_, that is, Cristòval, in accordance with the other Iberian solutions.

As for Spanish, _Cristoval _also seems to be early attested. So the idea of it being a 15th-century import is not a possibility.

What's evident is that there have been a variety of forms alternating at the same time, with _Cristoval _being one among the oldest. Change of liquid consonants and unstressed vowels are not uncommon, but the fact of two origins for names that later would merge isn't rare either, so I wouldn't rule the -phalos component out.


----------



## Cossue

Penyafort said:


> As for Spanish, _Cristoval _also seems to be early attested. So the idea of it being a 15th-century import is not a possibility.




Also, _Christophalo_, as a personal name, and _Sanctum Christophalum_, are attested in the 10th century in the Chartulary of Celanova, southern Galicia: GMH: Resultados.


----------

