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 support@jstor.org.

.

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.