As translator I had resolved to keep myself in the background and act solely as the interpreter of the author. Much to my regret I found myself unable to maintain this attitude uniformly. The text was already in type when it was borne in upon me that the subject of the book, dealing as it does with the lands of Eastern Europe, was a _terra incognita_ to the average American reader, and that many things in it must perforce be wholly or partly unintelligible to him if left without an explanation. There was nothing for me to do but to step into the breach and supply the deficiency. I did so by adding a number of footnotes, which, in distinction from those of the author, are placed in brackets. With very few exceptions these notes are not of a supplementary, but of an explanatory, nature. They are confined to such information as the reader may need to grasp the full bearing of the text. I trust that in some small measure these detached notes may serve instead of a systematic account of the general development of Eastern Europe, which, it was originally hoped, might be supplied by the authoritative pen of Mr. Dubnow himself, as a background for the history of Russo-Polish Jewry. An attempt in this direction, within a narrow compass and with no pretense to completeness, has been undertaken by the present writer in a recent publication of his own.[1] A word must be said concerning the spelling of foreign names and terms, which are naturally numerous in a work like the present. After considerable deliberation I decided on the phonetic method, as being the most convenient from the point of view of the reader. I have consequently endeavored to reproduce, as far as possible, the original sounds of all foreign words in English characters. In conformity with this principle, I have adopted the spelling _Tzar_, instead of _Czar_. As far as I am aware, the only exception is the Russian word _ukase_, which reflects in its spelling the effect of French transmission, and is to be pronounced _ookaz_, with the accent on the last syllable. Needless to say I have had to resort to artificial contrivances to indicate those sounds which are unknown in English, but I have reduced these contrivances to a minimum. They are as follows: _zh_ represents the Slavic sound which corresponds to French _j_; _kh_ stands for the sound which is to be pronounced like hard German _ch_ (as in _lachen_, not as in _brechen_); _tz_ is the equivalent of a Slavic letter which is to be pronounced like German _z_. To avoid mispronunciation, _g_ in all foreign words has been spelled _gh_ before _e_ and _i_. _U_ in these words is to be pronounced like _oo_, and _a_ like French and short German _a_. With every desire for uniformity, I have yet little doubt that inconsistencies will be found, particularly in the transliteration of Hebrew, which, as a Semitic idiom, is more difficult of phonetic reproduction than are even the Slavic languages. I hope that these