The Greek Patronymics in -() / -() Author(s): M. B. G.
Keurentjes Reviewed work(s): Source: Mnemosyne, Fourth Series, Vol.
50, Fasc. 4 (Aug., 1997), pp. 385-400 Published by: BRILL Stable
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4432752 . Accessed: 18/07/2012
02:37Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the
Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars,
researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information
technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new
forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact [email protected].
.
BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Mnemosyne.
http://www.jstor.org
THE
GREEK
PATRONYMICS
IN
-(?)da?
/ -(?)d??
BY
M.B.G. ABSTRACT
KEURENTJES
The suffix -?da? (Ionic-Attic -?d??) is often considered to have
originally formed patronymics, and hence, by widening of sense,
also family-, deme-, and other group-names (?1). As it is difficult
to give an acceptable explanation for '?-?dd?' starting from an
original meaning lson of x' (?2), I will propose here a new
solution: -?dd? as patronymic is a restricted use of the original
meaning 'member of the clan, group of...'. The suffix is a complex
of-?d- and -d-, both of pre-Greek origin (?3 & ?4). The first
is, among other things, attested in territorial and phyle-names:
F????, ???????, ??????, ??a?t?? (f???). The second denotes male
inhabitants of a territory and members of a phyle: ?????a?, ????d?,
??a?t?d?? (member of the Attic phyle ??a?t??) (?5). -?d- and -(?)d-
are allomorphs of the same pre-Greek suffix, and -da? is probably a
more original form than -?da? (?6)1).
suffix -?da? /-?d?? is ?1 It is generally agreed that the
patronymic a complex of the pre-Greek suffix -?d-2) and -a?, the
last of less certain origin, but always denoting male persons. As
specifically patronymic, the use of -?da? is restricted to the
epics of Homer. But there are also four examples in Cypriot
inscriptions: = o-na-sa-to a-ra-wa-ti-ta-u 'of Onasas,
???sa(?)t?(?) ???at?da?3); son of Arwatos' e-ke-ti-mo
te-o~to-ki-ta-u = ??et??d Te?d???da?4); 'of Echetimos, son of
Theodokos' ? sa-ta-n-wo-se t? to-pa-po-pa-si-le-wo-se
sa-ta-si-pi-li-ta-u St?s???? 1) I would like to thank here
explicitly my teachers Prof Ruijgh for his inspiring lectures and
help with this article, Dr. Waanders for his help with the English
and Prof, te Riele and Dr. Worp for their help on epigraphical
matters. 2) For a description of this suffix see Meier (1975). An
important new thesis of this work is that -?d- (in ?sp?d-,
(?)staf?d-, ??a??d-, etc.) is of pre-Greek origin. 3) SEG XX 248.
See also Terence B. Mitford & Olivier Masson (1986), appendix
I, p.89-91. 4) Terence B. Mitford & Olivier Masson (1986), 61
(no.43).
?> Koninklijke Brill, Leiden, 1997
Mnemosyne,Vol. L, Fase. 4
386
M.B.G. KEURENTJES 'of Stasis, = of Paphos, ????s???da?6); son
of
??f?
?as??????
Stas?f???da?5); ti-wi-so-ni-ta-se
king
Stasiphilos' o-na-si-ti-mo-se son of Diwison'
'??as?t????
?.,
the genitive of the father's name is used in the patronymic use
of the adjective suffix Mycenaean attested: a-re-ke-tu-ru-wo
e-te-wo-ke-re-we-i-jo (PY An 654) In the epics of Homer -io- is
also used ?te????e??hio?. Normally nymic ??a? lived
Cyprus. In -io- is well ??e?t???? in a patro-
than -?d?-, -??d?-: ?e?a?????? sense, though less frequently ?
528, etc.). In the Aeolic dialects patronymic -??(Homer on in
classical times7). In archaic and classical Greek (except with the
father's name in the dialects) the construction where ???? can be
supplied, is the normal one: ?????e?? 76), Fe?d???? found ????
St?e???d?? (Aristoph.,
the Aeolic genitive,
1917, ????????? (Bechtel: Nub., 1. 134). The suffix -?dd? is
also in the broader
areas than Cyprus, but the family / group of...': always
????e???da?: (members of) the famous noble family at Athens
???sse?da?: (members of) a phratria in Argos and Thebes ???a??da?:
(members of) a deme in Attica, etc. sense of 'man from In personal
names like S?????d??, T????d?d?? (Ionia, Attica) and Herodotus: the
original ??t???dd? ?e?t???d??), (Sparta; meaning can have been
patronymic or wider: 'descendant of...'. For instance the famous
There is the grandson of Leon8). king Le?nidas is no way to find
this out. But names as for instance because couldn't ever have been
patronymic, ????p?d??, ??as?da? are derived from geographical
names. ????p?? is the word for they Euboea and the narrow between
water-way a personal name. The same holds for ??as?da?: Boeotia,
name *???s??, but there is an ethnicon there is no personal ???a
canal, especially and never 5) ICS(=Masson: 1983), 110 (no. 15).
See also 'addenda nova'. 6) ICS(=Masson: 1983), 140 (no.84). 7) In
the Aeolic dialects -io- was used in patronymic derivations of
a-stems and -e??- in the other derivations. See J.T.Killen (1983),
66-99. 8) In Ovidius (Ars Amatoria1,11) Chiron is called
Phillyrides 'son of the nymph Philyra', so the suffix -?d?? is here
used 'metronymically'. I consider this use of the suffix as late
and artificial (if it existed in Greek it would probably be
F?????d??, see ? 6). Chiron was the son of Kronos and Philyra;
PhiUyrides is chosen for metrical reasons and because Kronides
would be ambiguous.
in other
GREEK PATRONYMICS IN -(?)da? s???, a place name *???s?? which
implies here 1917, p. 561). So the originad meaning from...'.
bitant of.../person
/ -(?)d??
387
must
or *???s?? (Bechtel, have been: 'inha-
Risch by for instance (1974, ?2 One explanation, propagated and
Meier (1975, 89) is the Mowing: 141-142,147-148) originally the
suffix -?d- could be used without regard to sex. According to this
in Greek of '?t?a?', must '?t?a?t??, theory 'daughter meaning have
Afterwards, period also 'son of "?t?a?'. would have been extended
the masculine by the suffix -a-, so that in Meier's words: -?da? it
could be distinguished from the feminine; is "Maskulinisierung
-?d-" (1975, des genusindifferenten Suffixes meant ? 66). The
origin cording to Meier of this -a? is not clear, but comparable,
still acin forms like ???t-d?, and Risch, to the extension etc. In
these forms the Indo-European suffix -(e)t-> which p???t-a?, is
attested in the derivative ???s-??? (< *???t-???), and for
instance in the Latin words *equet-s > eques, nostr?t-ls, has in
a prehistoric phase of the Greek language been extended to
-(e)t~??- (see Risch, 1974, 31 ff.). Now this thesis in an
earlier
The first is that an originally has its problems.
sex-indifferent use of -?d- cannot be proved. It is indeed very
imall of the words in -?d- are of feminine because probable,
gender9). Next to this, it is striking that in this theory the
masculine is the characterised specifically remarks: "dans le cadre
as Ruijgh (1985, 110 n.19) form, because, du syst?me du grec, le
f?minin est le terme
9) Of course there are barytone masculine words in -(?)d-, where
-6- is an extension to an original stem in -?-: masculine personal
names like ????? (pre-Greek) and ??s?? (hypocoristic for ??s?-?a???
etc.). The noun pa?? < n?(f)ic(child' is used both as a
masculine and as a feminine. According to Meier (1975: 58) pa??
consists of pa?- (attested in Cypriot F???pa??? (Masson, ICS 165
(no. 135.1)) and Attic ?a??) and the oxytone suffix -?d-. The
vocative *p??? is so much-used that it would have led to retraction
of the accent in the other cases as well. But there are also other
explanations, and especially that of C. J. Ruijgh is tempting: pa??
could have been a neuter in -? like ????: *pawi, which adopted the
animate gender and received a later extension -d-, *pawid- (Ruijgh:
1985, 110 n. 19). As a second example of original genus-indifferent
-?d-, Meier cites Mycenaean ke-ki and ke-ki-de. But another
explanation is possible here. See for example the article of Ruijgh
(I.e.): ke-ki can be a nickname or hypocoristicon, ke-ki-decan be
m?tonymie or sobriquet. In no way can I see these words as proof
for -?d- as a masculine suffix.
388 tandis
M.B.G. KEURENTJES
est le terme 'neutre', souvent exque le masculin un morph?me
z?ro, de l'opposition". prim? par I have found two other
explanations of the patronymic, which I will discuss here. But I
must remind the reader that these were only marqu?, noted subject.
curious in the while dealing with another margin by their authors,
Pedersen's (1926, 37) was the following: interpretation By a in
-?d?? is derived from the feminine the masculine process
in -?d-, while normally the feminine is derived from the
masculine. His conclusion is that originally there was a form like
???a??? meaone ning 'race of Priam'. This type could also be used
to designate Then -?d- was extended to of Priam, male or female.
-?d-?? to express the male, as different from the female in -?d-.
This use of -?d- as feminine suffix. (We have to resulted in the
exclusive wrote this theory in a time when -?dthat Pedersen
acknowledge descendant suffix. He does reject the explanawas not
yet seen as a pre-Greek -?y, -iyos, tion, usual in his time, of
-??, -?d?? from Indo-European which led some people to the
conclusion that -?dd? is to be analof-??, ysed as -?- + an obscure
suffix -dd-10).) But his interpretation that can't be checked: has
too many pre-historical -?? -?d?? steps, from a collectivum, for
which originating originally genusindifferent, there are, I admit,
semantic parallels, and -a? as singulative11). another explanation.
Ruijgh (1985: 110 n.19) cautiously proposes wife of x', when ? to
him ?-?d- could mean: 'daughter, According is a living being,
?-?d-d? could then mean: 'son of the wife of x'. The 'hen', meaning
opposed -?d- 'wife of may be attested in words like ??e?t???? to
me, is the 'cock'. What is a problem to a???t?? of -d? as 'son of.
I don't think there are good ex-
interpretation
10) See for instance Solmson (1909: 55-58), and for a brief
critique BuckPetersen (1944: 441). 11) This is the term Pedersen
uses. He calls the forms in -?da? 'noms singulatifs\ The origins of
the explanation of -?? as a singulative suffix date back to mid
19th century Germany. As far as I can see, the term
'individualisierend* makes its first appearance in this sense in
1852 in an article by Schleicher (1852). He thought that Slavic -v
{-ov,-ev)y which is an intrusion in the nominal declension, gave a
certain individual touch to objects described, when used in the
plural. Curtius, following this idea, linked the Slavic with the
Greek -e?? (miscellen 2, KZ 1854, 76Suffixe,KZ 1855, 21179), and
coined the term 'individualisierend' (Individualisirende 217). Alex
Leukart (1973) describes the suffix -d? as "substantivische
Karakterisierung der Individuen als m?nnliche Tr?ger bestimmter
essentiellen Eigenschaften: sozial und geographisch".
GREEK PATRONYMICS IN -(?)da?
/ -(?)d??
389
of it. And let us recedi that of the foregoing amples
explanations in -?da?, took into account the many group-names
Pedersen's only names deand that none can explain the use of -?da?
in personal rived late have nymic geographic and formations, come
into personal ones. I will being names from names. Of course say
that deme-, after the family-names, can interpret and
phratria-names one and that these the as like
non-patro-
nymic in the Nubes of AristoFor instance that it is in principle
possible. phanes (1.61-71) the name Fe?d?pp?d?? is formed as a
compromise between
return
in -?dd? were formed after the really patrobut must concede to
this problem, here
a name with ?pp?? 'horse' and the grandfather's name it is not a
derivation of Fe?d?pp??. The Attic familyFe?d???d??; in which is in
later times also cited as ??????da?, name ?????e? word value more
exthe patronymic must have plicit12). Also the Persian royal family
of the ??a??e??da? had a name that is graecized with -?da?. It is
not derived from the name ??a??????; then it would have been
??a??e?e?da?. (It is promore directly based upon Old-Persian
Haxamanil.) bably -?da? is an extension of the preceding theories
explains all facts, and none is as far as the supposed semantic is
very satisfactory development concerned. Meier asked himself (1975:
89) if the use of -?da? in could be older, without giving an answer
to family- and clan-names his question. And we saw that Pedersen a
wider sense 'race of...' > 'descendant started of...'. his
explanation from ? 3 None to make
To me it seems a very good possibility that the patronymic
meanfrom an original broader meaning of...'. 'descendant ing
originated in the epics of Homer, This possible older meaning is
still traceable where for instance ??a??d?? is 'grandson, of
??a???* i.e. descendant and not ???e?? the son of ??a???. And
?a?da??d?? ?????e??, means of ???da???', with which term different
persons can be indicated: in G 303 it is used for ???a???, in ?166
?????, of Priam, is meant. The same not stricdy patronymic
grandfather use we find in family-names, The ????e???da? in Attica
cendants of ???????. mosdy noble, in the whole of Greece. are the
persons who claim to be desMany of these names we find in Attica,
as 'descendant
12) See G. De Sanctis (1975: 81) for more examples.
390
M.B.G. KEURENTJES
for instance Ta?????da? ???t?da?, (for a list of Attic
genos-names see e.g. De Sanctis, 79 n.71). Outside Attica there is
for in1975, stance in Sparta, Thera and Cyrene the family of the
???e?da?, in Elis the family of seers ?a??da? ode of (see the sixth
Olympic the family of priests ??a???da? (after whom also Pindar),
in Didyma The the temple and place is sometimes called ??a???da?.
See also n. 14). classic example be the well-known name for the
Dorians: may ??a??e?da?. and patra-names Many of the phratria-, (a
patra is comparable cult) consist of a phratria in Thebes and
(members of) as their ancestor or ???sse?? (cf. ?d?sse??) there are
the ?apas?da?, of people with a common
to a phratria: it is a group names in -?da?: ???sse?da?:
Argos,
with probably hero. In Miletus worshipped
in Delphi the s.v. phra?a???da? (see for a list of
phratria-names Pauly-Wissowa we also find the patra ?e??e?da?
tria)^). In Miletus (of course from ?e??e??). thought to descend
Also in deme-, trittys- and similar names -?da? appears. These are
from Attica: ???a??da?14): a deme of the phyle ?e??t??; ????da?: a
deme of the phyle ?pp????t??15); S?a?????da?: city-tritbest known
named after the deme S?a?????da?). (probably is used for naming
which Lastly -?da? phyle-members, known from Attica: mainly
??a?t?d?? is a member of the phyle ??a?t??, which means tys of
?e??t?? is also 'mem-
13) -(?)da? is a variant of -?da?, see ? 6. 14) Deme- and
phratria-names are usually given in the masculine plural, which, by
the way, shows the lack of political influence of women in Attica.
The demes, which were the foundations for the Athenian democracy
(citizenship and political rights were dependent on membership of a
deme after the reforms of Clisthenes), were supposed to consist of
men, not of women. Only sporadically the expected form in -??, -a?
is found. One deme is cited as ?af?? and ?af??da?, but the
attestation ?af?? is late (Strabo, IX, 1, 22) and may show
influence of the phyle-names. ?????? (an ???? in Attica and
according to Bekker (1814, 1,275) also a naukrarianame) is probably
the same as ?????da? in an inscription (Roehl: 1882, 352). An Attic
phratria is known by the name ???a?t??, which might be connected
with the name of the deme ???a?t?da?. The masculine plural is also
used in city-names, for example ?????da? which denoted originally
the inhabitants (Thuc. 11,82 etc.), then also the city itself.
Compare the city-name ???????. In koma-names like ?e?s?? in
Cyrenaica the expected form is found (according to Aristode ???a
was the Doric noun for d????). 15) See for the Attic deme-names
Pauly-Wissowa s.v.
GREEK PATRONYMICS in -(?)da? ber
/ -(?)d??
391
'member
or hero'. ??e????d?? of a phyle that has ??a? as its ancestor of
the phyle ??e?????', etc. were old patIt would be very strange if
all these group-names
used in a wider sense, because many of these groups are
ronymics, This is only logical as far as ancestor. not named after
a common are concerned, but even families are not always named
deme-names after an ancestor. is the family of the Sa?a?????? and
that of one called after its geographical the already mentioned
?????e?, For this reason they exercised. origin, the other after
the profession it should not surprise us if many names in -?da? are
not derived There from a personal name. I remark here that many of
these names are words: of pre-Greek or at least derived from
pre-Greek origin, etc. The suspicion arises that the ?a??da?,
???sse?da?, ?a???da?, is a pre-Greek use of -?da? in clan-, family-
and group-names prowith the social institutaken over by the Greeks
together cedure, like ???a?, p??ta???, ?as??e?? tions they denoted.
Loan-words have been that many of the pre-Greek social arrangements
over by the Greeks. ? 4 For the development lowing explanation:
-?d- forms clanthe Attic of the suffix -?d-d-, I propose down prove
taken
the folto us in
or family-names,
that are handed with
as ??e??e?? ??e?????: phyle-names: phyle (clan) common or
worshipped ancestor hero; ??a?t??: phyle (clan) with ancestor or
hero. This clan-name could indicate a ??d? as common of people as
well as the land they inhabited: ??e?????: group phyle land of the
phyle) of ??e??e??; ??a???: (tribe and) land of the (and '??a???
(between brackets I give the sense that is not attested, but
reconstructed). A good semantic
parallel for the use of the same name for the and the land in
which they live, is the word d????/d????: people 'land and people'
cf. da???a?). The con'part, section', (originally of a people and
their land as one entity, can also be shown ception by a city name
like ?????da?, originally the name for its inhabitants, or ???????
(see note 14), and expressions like ?? ???sa? 'to Persia'. Now
'x-?d-' could signify two things ('x' being a personali name or
ethnicon): 'tribe/land of a tribe' and 'female person of this
land/
392 tribe':
M.B.G. KEURENTJES ??a??? of the '??a???; 2) (tribe/)land of
??a?>) daughter of ??d?, 2) between brackets is not attestcould
member be added the suffix member -dof
woman, 1) Achaean from the tribe ??a?t??: 1) (woman clan of ??d?
(the meaning (land/) ed)16). Behind to indicate the the stem the
male of the clan-name member
of the tribe:
??e?????; ?a?da??d-??: phyle ethnics: ???17). This -d- is also
found in pre-Greek man from the region ??????. from the region
???????; ????-d?: Here especially the alternation with -?? might
indicate that -a? is also a pre-Greek suffix18). -?d- (country) and
-d- (ethnicon) are added to a stem that is not found in isolation,
as But happens also for example in F???? (region): F??e??
(inhabitant). of a derivative, is a complex suffix (as -?d-d?,
being a derivative which is derived from the base, and not from
against e.g. ?????-d?, for example the inhabitant's the
derivative). In ?a????: ?a???de?? above names suffixes name ?a??-.
is also derived I consider from the city's name, and not from the
stem that -?dd? as a complex suffix exit very probable in the
pre-Greek and that it was not created language, In the mentioned
the
??e????d-??: of the race
of ???daman ?????-d?:
First of all there are the many forms themselves19). stems (see
the last in -?da? which are clearly derived from pre-Greek elements
of the pre-Greek society. part of ?3), and seem to continue -?d-
was adopted And secondly, by the Greek language, although as an
ethnic suffix. For this the -d? did not become productive Greek
used -??-, -??-, -td-. Now if this theory is correct, if ?-?d- is
of x' and ?-?d-d- 'member of the group of x', we 'territory/group
of personal should expect to find this suffix not only in
derivations from geographical names, but also in derivations are
examples of this: the people of the Arcadian accented ?e????) are
called ?e???da?, and ?????da? names. place And there ?e???? (also
(with -?d- instead
isted already by the Greeks
16) Compare the possessive adjective '?tt???, which
substantivized could mean 'Athenian woman' and 'Athenian land'. 17)
???da??? is also attested as a toponym, and ?a?da??? as the name of
a region; cf. ?e?a??? 'region of the town of ???a?a'. In this
framework, the original meaning of ?a?da??d?? might have been 'man
from the region of ???da???\ 18) See Ruijgh: 1992, 559, for this
pre-Greek suffix -??(?). 19) Cf. the Mycenean personal name
ko-ki-da, e.g. G????dd?.
GREEK PATRONYMICS IN -(?)da? of -?d-, see ?6 and note
/ -(?)d??
393
name 14) is derived from the geographical ??????. And lastly,
there are also personal names which show that the suffix was used
in pre-classical times for derivations from geographical names.
must have meant from the ????p?d?? originally 'person ????p??', and
not 'son of ????p??5 because there is no such personal name names
name 1917: 548-549 (Bechtel in -?d??/-(?)da? derived have had
????p?? might and from the 560-561 gives a collection of
geographical names). strict sense of 'canal between In this
Euboea and Boeotia' and *????p?? 'district (and people) of the
????'district of ???a?a', and ?a????? 'district ?e?a??? p??'20).
Compare of ???????' In Hierapytna on Crete there was a phyle
(Rhodes). from ?a????? (Cauer-Schwyzer, 1923, 200), of course not
derived the Rhodian but from the same pre-Greek stem. place-name,
Another 'son of names (1917) name seems meant argument against the
theory that -?da? originally names that are derived from may be
found in the personal of gods, like ?p??????d?? Bechtel (see for
more examples to give one's son to' or 'descendant sense. the of
the
It would be very strange 533-535). 'son of god x'. A meaning
'belonging more plausible. often come -ioto be used
Suffixes adjective
in a narrowed have the
Thus,
'belonging special meaning or that of an ethnic noun (????s???
'being the son of (?e?a??????) of Miletus'). 'citizen The same has
happened to -?dd?: ??a?t?d?? 'man belonging to the clan of ??d?'
then 'descendant of ??a?' (so must at least ??a??d??), finally 'son
of ??a?'. This specific meaning have existed use in Homer it is not
in late Mycenaean and in Cyprus, in our times on account date but
may further of the patronymic back although names like
suffix
to' could
found
Mycenaean
texts21).
Personal
20) ????p?? is not composed of e? and ??p?, as is shown by
Mycenaean e-wi-r?pi-jo (PY Aa 60). If it was, it would have been
written *e-u-n-pi-jo (see Ruijgh: 1967, ?144). The word is probably
of pre-Greek origin. If the wind-name ????p?d??, which some people
want to read in Hesychius (E. Maa?, KZ 41, 204) is not a phantom,
then the suffix would show the same semantic development as the
windnames in -e?? (e.g. p?ta?e??) and -a? (e.g. et?s?a?). 21)
Possibly, the standard language of the Mycenaean courts preferred
the old Indo-European suffix -io- (cf. the Latin type Marcus
Tullius) to the pre-Greek suffix -?d-d-?. See n. 19.
394
M.B.G. KEURENTJES dialects, don't
Fe?d???d??, S?????d??, which are found in all Greek a
specifically meaning22). prove patronymic
comes ?5 Because most of the material of phyle- and deme-names
dates from the time from Attica, and we know that this material
after the Clisthenic reforms, one has to ask if the names are older
than the reforms. It is clear from Herodotus (V,66) that
Clisthenes, while reforming the Athenian constitution, put aside
the old Ionic and distri???????e??, ???ade??, Ge????te?,
"?p??te?23), phyle-names to their demes buted the Athenians into
ten new phyles, according and trittyes. For these phyles he chose
new names, as says Herodothem, as states Aristode tus, or he let
the Pythia choose (Ath. Pol. he also divided the land to Aristode
(o.e. XXI,4-5) XXI). According into thirty trittyes and the old
naukraries he renamed demes. Some were lies called (????), after
their place-name, brotherhood-communities he let exist others after
a founder. and The colleges famiof (f?dt??a?) as he found them.
priests The
agree upon the fact that the old, already existsystem after a
reorganizaing demes were put into his political tion24). This could
mean that he created some new demes, beside the already existing
ones, which were only small villages, in order to give every
Athenian By this he made political rights according the demes into
institutional, to his dwelling political orga-
(?e??s??a?) commentators
place.
22) The god's name ? ?d?? might also be a derivative of *???:
'the one from *???\ Most scholars think that forms like gen. "??d??
are based on a compound *?-f?d- 'not to be seen' and that ??d??
contains the extended stem *???d-8- (cf. (?d?p?d??: ??d?p???):d????
"??d??e?s? 'to the house of Hades'. But it has sometimes been held
that *"??? meant originally 'underworld', for example in ? 244 e??
d ?e? a?t?? ???? "??d??e????a? (the locative use of the dative
presupposes a spatial noun, not an animate noun) and ??d?? 'god of
the underworld'. Then "??d?? instead of *??d?? could be explained
by Aeolic barytonese. I think that these nouns are pre-Greek
loanwords and that they have been brought into connexion with ?-
and ??d- by popular etymology. At any rate it would not be
surprising if the Indo-European Greeks with their gods of light and
heaven, had borrowed the conception of an underworld where the soul
lives on as a shadow, from the autochthonous Helladic people. 23)
Here the sufFixes are -??- (???????-?^-) and -?t- ("?p?-?t), that
is PIE -etwith vowel lengthening and -??t- (Ge?e-??t-?). Other
suffixes used are -??- (in Doric ?????e?), -t?- (?p???????ta? in
Megalopolis), -io- (?e??e??a??? in Ephesos), all of them being
usual ethnic suffixes. 24) See for example D. Whitehead (1986),
364-368.
GREEK PATRONYMICS IN -(?)da? nizations and cast aside the old
division, of their names
/ -(?)d?? gave have political existed
395
which must
rights before
to ????. according So the demes and most Clisthenes'
time. But even the new demes may have got old names. It is for
example sometimes stated (see Pauly-Wissowa s.v. Butadai) its name
to ?te????that the noble family of the ???t?da? changed of the deme
???t?da?, called so t?da? after the forming probably because With
dotus Herosources, agree that their names are new. Though many from
pre-Greek names, like ??e?????, personal seem old, they were coined
by Clisthenes and therefore ?e???p??, or the Pythia (who was
according to Herodotus, I.e., bribed by him). But the process of
making phyle-names in -?d- can very well be old, because
phratria-names25), -?d-: ?a????? in Hierapytna phyle-names in
Euboea (IG XII,9, 1923, 200); ??a?t?? (Crete, Cauer-Schwyzer: in
Phokaia 1923: 1.220); ?a???? as territo946); ??a???? (Jacoby, rial
and phyle-name all unfortuin Erythrae VII,5,12); (Pausanias,
demosin nately are attested or imperial late, in the Hellenistic
age. Only in Miletus dates from the fifth century B.C. But we know
?s?p?? that by this time the Milesians had already taken over the
ten phylenames of Athens, two to get as many phyles as there are
adding months in the year. Also in Priene the ten Attic names were
taken over cities dence. at least earlier The were in the fourth
than formed attested As none of these names are century26). the
Attic names, and the constitutions of many after the Athenian,
there is no conclusive evimust clanbe that than there Clisthenes'
is no certainty that the reforms. But the use of the and many of
that noble family lived there. the phyle-names the case is
different: both
and Aristotle, of them are derived
just as in the case there are non-Attic
conclusion -?d- to form
phyle-names of the suffix
in -?d- are older
is this -?d- that Clisthenes
must be old, and it or group-names The other used to form his
phyle-names.
with the word 'phyle' underexplanation, taking -?d- as
adjective, In that case we should rather have stood, is certainly
less attractive. 25) It is difficult to find Athenian deme-names in
-?d-, because almost all of them are given in the genitive plural
of the male inhabitants: ?? ?-?d?? = 'from the deme ?-?d-', and 'in
the deme ?-?d-' is normally expressed: (??) ?-?da??. See also note
13. 26) See F. Hiller von Gaertringen (1906), page X.
396
M.B.G. KEURENTJES feminine form in -d/-?d, which is
amount of family-names in -?da?, the not always strictly
patronymic use of -?d?? in Homer, the demein -?da?, many personal
and family-names and phratria-names derived from geographical of an
explanames, and the impossibility nation starting from the
patronymic, that this justifies the conclusion was not the original
meaning. -?da? was sometimes added Although to family-names, names
without or -?d?? to personal real significance, as I stated at the
end of ?3, it is difficult to assume this for clear names as
????p?d??, ??as?da?, ??d??dd?, morphologically and etc. They are
derived from pre-Greek ??es?dd?, place-names, to be old. therefore
suspected that besides names in -?da? also names in ?6 It is
remarkable after -?- the suffix -?d- is replaced -dd? or -(?)?dd?
occur. Normally from the its allomorph -?d-: ????? (????, p???s??)
is derived by The same holds from "?s???/?s??. "?????/'?????, ?s???
place-name < "?s??? for patronymics like ?e???d?? < ?e????
(Homer), ?s??d?? It has been supposed (also Homer). (Meier 1975,
61-64 and Risch of-?a and -?d-, as ???????a1974, 147) that -??d- is
a contamination of ???????d. ??? may be derived from ?????????
under the influence that cannot be also exist a lot of forms in
-?da?/-?d?? Thessalian ??e??da? this way: ?a???da?, (a royal
family), explained ?e??d?? (son of ?????, Homer ? 692), ?pp?t?d??
(= Aiolos, son of ? 2); and Homer ??d??dd?, ?????dd?, ??es?dd?,
'?pp?t??, from pre-Greek which derived are probably ???s?dd?,
Fe??dd? 1923, I, 264). While in the derivatives (see Bechtel:
place-names But there from second (: ??????) of -a-stems and third
declension ??a?e?????d?? and the suffix is -?dd-: ?????d?? it is
-dd- in derivatives (: ??a??????), with short a before -dd-.
Likewise -?dnames nouns ????: seems to corp??e?a: of -a-stems:
????d-;
the much more common expected attested in other regions27). To
sum up: the overwhelming
(first declension), in derivatives from second and third
declension with -d- in derivatives respond pe?e??d-; a?????:
??????d-.
27) See for a (in its time) complete list of phyle-names: E.
Szanto (1902), 72-74. It is supplemented in PW, s.v. phyle. Besides
-?d-/-??d- the following suffixes are used: -d (?d??a?? in Prusias
ad H.) and -?d (??s?????d in Samos).
GREEK PATRONYMICS IN -(?)da? The most likely explanation
/ -(?)d??
397
for this seems to me the following: suffix -fov-28)), in
Ionic(with the pre-Greek starting ??-???-e? of accent) besides to
"??? with change Attic contracted ??-d-, and besides suffix -??- as
in ??a????29)) the pre-Greek "???-?? (with from one could abstract
a suffix -?d- or even ????-d-, words better -d-. The same suffix
-(?)d- is to be found in pre-Greek with the same root as pa????,
-a?t?? 'youth, like ?a???? (?&???), F. Jacoby, lad'
(Philistides; Fragmente der griechischen Historiker I: ???-?dor
likelier also p???a?); ????? 'stone(-shower)'; compare 'wild
pear'30). Possibly -?-d- and -?-dchovy'; ????? suffixes. in the
pre-Greek language complex 1923-; There 'an?e????? were
originally
also exists a suffix -?d- in a few pre-Greek ???? borrowings:
'fresh-water ??a??? tortoise', p??a??? 'young tunny', (or ????)
cloak' (where -?- proves the word to be older than 'short mande,
< *????-?a < *????-?a and ??a???, the latter built after
??a??a This can have been a complex *????-?a). -?d-: -?d- from -?-
and -d-). This situation looks suffix parallel to -?d- and very
much like that ????-
of the pre-Greek -??(?)-: most forms end in -???(?)- (?s??????-,
some in -???(?)- (??????-), or -a??(?)- (????a???-)31). ???-), I
give ?7 To conclude tioned in Dornseiff-Hansen sonal form because
name I found the a list of names
in -da?/-d??, them; reconstructed same words
in -?da?/-?da?, not menbut only as per(a few are mentioned, not
as group name); they are cited in the
place, even if there those in -?da?: ??a???????da?: 524,29
patra(?);
parts are almost always certain, more than once. I give only one
appear are more. First come the forms in -?da?, then 1,695,80
IG.IX,2, ????????da?: patra; ????a?d??da?: IG.IX,2,524,6
patra(?);
IG.XII, ??ast?da?;
28) Heubeck 1961 and Ruijgh 1968. 29) "????? is probably a
back-formation from ?a??????e? and therefore barytone. 30) There is
only one pre-Greek word in -?d- that is masculine: ????d-. The
other forms are late, post-Homeric Greek: f????, ?????, etc. The
connection with the feminine suffix is difficult. 31) A remark of
Prof. Ruijgh. It is an open question whether the Boeotian names in
-??dd?/-??da? like ?pa?e????da? can be explained by way of an
original suffix -d-??, or whether they are late (syncopated?)
forms.
398
M.B.G. KEURENTJES Ver'politischer IG.XII,2,695,42
Bechtel 1981,151 family; ??f?a??t?da?: Hesych., ID, 396?22;
band'; ??f???e?da?: ???st?[t?]??da?: patra; ??????da?: 5876,2
IG.IX,2,524,24 IG.II(2), patra(?); ?e??(e)???d??: Att. demos;
????????da?: IG.IX,2,524,2 (=?e?e????d??) IG.XII,2,695,20 IG.XII,2,
patra; ???a????da?: patra(?); ???????da?: G?a???d??: IG.IX,2,524,21
?a??t?da?: 695,41 patra(?); patra;
IG.XII,2,695,69 IG.XII,2,695,71 patra; ?e?????da?: patra;
????t????da?: IG.II(2),1237 Ditt.Syll.III3, phratria; ??as?d??: p.
16 fami/ Szanto (1902) p.61 phyle; Caria,Iasos, doc.215,1 ly;
?p???e?d??: IG.XII,9,20,5 [???s??]????d??: IG.II(2),4991,2 family;
??d???d??: 18 family(?); ??te??d[a?]: IG.XII, family; ???a??da?:
Ditt.SyU.III3, p. 2,695,45 ??da?]: patra; [?e]????d?: SEG.XXIX,
demos; IG.II(2),2362,col.III,49 135,8 ????da?: ??[???family;
IG.IX,2,524,20
IG.XII,2,695,52 IG.IX.2, ?f????da?: patra(?); patra;
?at??[?]da?: 524,3 patra(?); ???d??: IG.II(2), 1053,6 demos (prob.
v.l. of ??d??); ???t?da?: Strabo VI, 17,6 ???a?d??: (= ?e???ad???);
IG.II(2),6311,2 ??????da?: IG.IX,2, IG.IX,2,524,14 ??a???da?:
family; patra(?); demos; 524,8 patra(?); ???p?da?: ???te?da?:
IG.II(2),848,col.IV,14 ??ss?da?: IG.IX,2,524,22 demos; patra(?);
IG.II(2),1775,col.II,54 ?a????da?: IG.XI,2,199,A12 IG.XII,2,695,76
?a????d??: patra; ?ett?da? (acc.sing.): Ditt.SyU.III3, p. 17
family; 18 demos/pagus; IG.IX,2,524,19 '??f?da?: patra(?);
Ditt.SyU.III3, p. ?as?e??[a]d??: ?a??????[da?]: IG.IX,2,524,4
Ditt.SyU. patra(?); Ditt. patra(?); ?????da?: III3,p.l7 family;
???d?da?: IG.IX,2,524,17 trittys; ??st?d??: FouUles de Delphes
111,2, ????a[?]?d??: SyU.III3, p. 16 family; doc.7,1,11 S?????da?:
Ditt.SyU.III3, p. 17 famifamily or phratria; 10 family or place(?);
?e?ta??da? ly(?); S?t?d??: SEG.XXI,541,collii, ??[?e?d??]:
15,doc.372,col.III,29; Agora in Eretria; ????e?da?:
IG.XII,9,245,A46 IG.II(2), 1746,36 demos(?) IG.XII,2,695,13
[F?]???????d?da?: patra; F???????(= ?????da?); F????da?: d??:
IG.II(2),1582,A,col.II,71 IG.IX,2,524,7 demos(?); (=
?et/??ta??da?): Attica, ?a??da??da?: IG.IX,2,524,30 F???a???da?:
patra(?); patra(?); area; ??eaIG.XII,2,695,53 ?a????da?:
IG.II(2),1594,A,6 patra; ????e?d??: ??da?: Hesych.
IG.XI,2,199,B,91; (= ??e??da?); ????d??: IG.IX,524,18 ???at??da?:
IG.IX,524,12 patra(?); ??a?ad??: ????ad??: IG.V, 1,1445.3 IG.II(2),
place(?); patra(?); 2621 phratria; ?a????d??: IG.II(2),2949 genos;
G?a??da?: IG.XH,2,
GREEK PATRONYMICS IN -(?)da? 695,22 patra; G????da?:
IG.IX,524,28 patra(?);
/ -(?)d?? ?????da?:
399
695,84 ?pe???da?: IG.IX,2,524,9 patra; patra(?); Athenian vol.
XV 15,425,col.II,25 Agora, (1974, Princeton) (= Ta?s??da?:
IG.XII,2,695,55 IG.XI, ?????da?); patra; T?estad??: T???da?:
2,199,B91; IG.XII,2,695,23 IG.IX,524,5 patra; ???da?: patra(?);
?a??da?: ???t???da?: IG.IX,524,13 IG.XII,2,695,29 ?a?a???da[?]:
patra(?); ?a?d?da?: IG.IX,524,16 IG.IX, patra(?); 524,25 patra(?);
1053 patra; IG.IX,524,26 patra(?). 37 ?e?a?t?da[?]:
IG.XII,2, The ????da?:
TC Amsterdam,
Schimmelstraat
Bibliography F. Bechtel: 1917. Die histor?schen Personennamen
Griechischen zur Kaiserzeit.Halle. des bis ?: 1923. Die
Griechischen Dialekte. Berlin. ?: 1981. Kleine Onomastische
Studien.K?nigstein. Bekker: 1814. AnecdotaGraeca.Berlin. C. Buck
and W. Petersen: 1944. A reverse index of Greeknouns and
adjectives. Chicago. P. Cauer-E. Schwyzer: 1923. Dialectorum
Graecarum exempta epigraphica potiora.Lipsiae. F. Dornseiff-B.
Hansen: 1957. R?ckl?ufiges W?rterbuch griechischenEigennamen. der
Berlin. ?. Heubeck: 1961. Praegraeca, zum
vorgriechisch-indo-germanischen Sprachliche Forschungen
Substrat.Erlangen. F. Hiller von Gaertringen: 1906. Inschriften
Priene. Berlin. von F. Jacoby: 1923. Die Fragmenten griechischen
der Histonker.Berlin. in J. T. Killen: 1983.
Mycenaeanpossessiveadjectives -e-jo. Transactions of the
Philological Society, 66-99. ?. Leukart: 1973. ??? Uwkunfi
dergriechischen Nomina vom Typus a???t??, o?K?xr\qund Akten der
Fachpe??-?t?t??, ???-???t??, in: ?. Rix (ed.): Flexion und
Wortbildung, tagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, 175-191. O.
Masson: 19832. L?s inscriptions chypriotes syllabiques(=ICS).
Paris. M. Meier: 1975. -?d-. Zur Geschichte ?nes vorgriechischen
Nominabuffixes.G?ttingen. Demos, Phratria,Phyle, Thiasos.
Pauly-Wissowa s.v.: Geschkchter, T. B. Mitford & O. Masson:
1986. The syllabic inscriptions Rantidi-Paphos.Konof stanz. H.
Pedersen: 1926. La cinqui?me d?clinaison latine. Copenhagen. E.
Risch: 19742. Wortbildung homerischen der Sprache.Berlin. H. Roehl:
1882. InscriptionesGraecae antiquissimae(praeterAtticas in Attica
repertas). Berlin. et du Amsterdam. C.J. Ruijgh: 1967. Etudessur la
grammaire le vocabulaire grec myc?nien. ?: 1968. L?s noms en -won
(-awon, -iwon), -uon en grec alphab?tique en myc?nien. et Minos 9,
109-155. ?: 1985. Probl?mes philologiemyc?nienne. de Minos 19,
105-167. ?: 1992. po-ku-ta et po-ku-te-ro,d?riv?sde *poku petit
b?tail3,in: Mykenaika,Actes du
400
M.B.G. KEURENTJES
IXe Colloque international sur les textes myc?niens et ?g?ens.
Paris. G. de Sanctis: 1975 (reprint). Atthis. Storia della
Repubblicaateniesedalle originialla et? di Pericle.Firenze.
Schleicher: 1852. Ueber? (-ov, ev) vor den casusendungen
Slavischen,in: Sitzungsberichte im derAkademieder Wissenschaften
Wien. Phil. Hist. Klasse. Februarheft 1852. in F. Solmson: 1909.
Beitr?gezur griechischen Wortforschung. Stra?burg. E. Szanto: 1902.
Die Griechischen der Akademie Phylen, in: Sitzungsberichte
Oesteneichischen der Wissenschaften. Phil.-hist. Klasse 144, 5. D.
Whitehead: 1986. The demesof Attica. Princeton.