In part #1 we examined the etymology of the ethnonym of the Macedonians and its different versions, the toponyms of the Macedonian Homeland and the personal names used by the Macedonians. Based on these, it can be assumed that the Macedonians were bearers of Greek speech. In this part we will deal with additional evidence.
1. EPIGRAPHY
What had troubled historians and linguists for years is the absence of continuous texts written in Macedonian. However, in 1986 I.M. Akamantis discovered at Pella a tablet dated to the 4th century BC. This inscription, along with other inscriptions found in Macedonia, have a common important characteristic: they are all written in a non-Attic dialect. This is important, because the Macedonian court used the Attic dialect as an official language since the 4th century. The text excavated at Pella, commonly known as "Pella curse tablet" can be found here. We will comment on the inscription with the help of J. O'Neil's presentation entitled "Doric Forms in Macedonian Inscriptions" ¹:
• The first dialectal feature is found on line 1 inside the name Θετιμα: the name corresponds to Attic-Ionic Θεοτίμη, consists of the words Θεός (=God) and τιμή (=honor). The loss of o from θεο- is a Doric feature and the long ᾱ in Θετιμᾱ instead of Attic ῆ is an Aeolo-Doric feature. This feature was also very common in the Macedonian personal names presented in part #1.
• In the same line we find the form τᾱν αλλᾱν πασᾱν. This is the regular first declension plural form in Doric instead of Attic τῶν αλλῶν πασῶν (usage of ᾱν instead of ῶν). This feature is also observed in the Epirote Dialect. In an inscription from Dodona ² we find the form Ἀπειρωτᾶν instead of Attic Ἠπειρωτῶν.
• In line 2 we observe the Aeolo-Doric feature of apocope of prepositions. παρκαττιθεμαι is used instead of Attic παρακατατιθεμαι (παρ- instead of παρα- and κατ- instead of κατα-). This phenomenon is present on the Macedonian name Περδικκας which probably corresponds to Attic *Περιδικαιος. In Spartan Doric too, the Attic name Περικλής is found as Περκλης ³.
• The usage of ε instead of Attic ι in διελεξαιμι (Attic διελιξαιμι) is paralled with other Macedonian inscriptions. In a 4th century BC epitaph from Pella ⁴, we find εσστε instead of εστι.
• Northwest Greek features are found on line 7 and 8: the pronoun εμιν instead of εμοι and the form γενεσται instead of Attic γενεσθαι
• The phrase ΔΑΓΙΝΑΓΑΡΙΜΕ troubles the researchers. Laurent Dubois suggested that Γ in ΔΑΓΙΝΑ is actually a "damaged" Π and thus the phrase should be read as δαπινα γαρ ιμε corresponding to Attic ταπεινη γαρ ειμι ⁵. The form *δαπινα → ταπεινη aligns with Macedonian phonological rules and could be paralleled with the case of Δρεβελαος → Τρεφελεως ⁶. O'Neil considers Dubois' interpretation very plausible.
Therefore, the text that appears is written in a West Greek Dialect with forms found in neighbouring to Macedonia Greek dialects (Aeolic and Doric). O'Neil writes:
«The curse tablet can definitely be seen to be in some form of West Greek, with forms corresponding to Doric and Aeolic dialects, but quite clearly differing from Attic-Ionic. It does seem in its use of the form δαίμοισι to be distinct from either of the known West Greek dialects spoken in the areas to the south of Macedon, Thessalian and Northwest Greek. So it seems unlikely that its use at Pella is due to the migration of an individual from the areas immediately to the south of Macedon, or to the adoption of one of the dialects spoken in those areas by a Macedonian native. On the other hand, the form ἀνορόξασα, with its omicron in place of the regular upsilon, does have parallels with attested Macedonian glosses and there is reason to think Macedonian may have had more open pronunciation of short upsilon and iota. The simplest explanation for the dialect forms in the curse tablet is that it has been written in the original Macedonian dialect, and that that dialect is a West Greek one, related to, but distinct from its more southern neighbors, Thessalian and Northwest Greek»
Other dialectal inscriptions have been found in important Macedonian cities, which bear non-Attic characteristics and support the Doric-like character of the native Macedonian speech. Two statue bases from Aegae honouring Euridike, the mother of Philip II, have been found. The first one reads ⁷:
Εὐρυδίκα Σίρρα Εὐκλείαι
and the second one ⁸:
Ε̣ὐ̣ρ̣υ̣δίκα Σίρ[ρ]α̣.
Both inscriptions show the Aeolo-Doric form Ευρυδικᾱ instead of Attic Ευριδικη, but also the Macedonian masculine genitive case Σιρρα instead of Attic *Σιρρου. In Macedonian coinage we find the forms ΠΑΥΣΑΝΙΑ, ΠΕΡΔΙΚΚΑ, ΑΜΥΝΤΑ instead of ΠΑΥΣΑΝΙΟΥ, ΠΕΡΔΙΚΚΟΥ, ΑΜΥΝΤΟΥ. This is also a characteristic of the Modern Greek language.
Finally, a more recent epigraphic discovery from Dodona took the interest of linguists, as it shows Doric-like and typical Macedonian peculiarities:
Ζεῦ καί Διώνα ᾖ ἔσσονται παῖδες ἐκ τᾶς γυναικός Κεβαλίωι τᾶς νῦν ἔχει κ[α]ι ζώσοντι; ⁹
We encounter again the non-Attic long -ᾱ: Διωνᾱ instead of Διωνη and τᾶς γυναικός instead of τῆς γυναικός. But we also encounter the name Κεβαλιος which shows the typical Macedonian trope φ →β as in κεφαλη → κεβαλη ⁶.
2. PHONOLOGY & THE MACEDONIAN LINGUISTIC "PROBLEM"
While examining these Macedonian inscriptions, we occasionally encountered forms such as *δαπινα → ταπεινη and Κεβαλιος → *Κεφαλιος and mentioned other examples like κεφαλη → κεβαλη and Δρεβελαος → Τρεφελεως. This Macedonian phonological feature was observed by Plutarch who wrote that the Macedonians pronounce β instead of φ and say Βιλιππος instead of Φιλιππος, Βαλακρος instead of Φαλακρος and Βερονικη instead of Φερονικη ¹⁰. This tendency of Macedonians to say <β,γ,δ> instead of <φ,χ,θ> or <β,γ,δ> instead of <π, κ, τ> was once considered to be proof of a language separate from Greek, since what differentiates Greek from other Indo-European languages is the change of the IE voiced aspirates <bh, gh, dh> to <φ,χ,θ> and thus Macedonian did not take part this Greek development ¹¹. However, several Macedonian words took part in Greek phonological developments. The Macedonian toponym Αμαθος shows the development *sámh₂dʰos > αμαθος. The Macedonian name for Muses θουριδες shows the development *dʰerh₃- > θουριδες as Proto-Greek *tʰorwos. The Macedonian name Κεβαλιος (from κεβαλη) shows the development of *gʰebʰ-l̥ > κεβαλη as Proto-Greek *kʰepʰəlā́. If Macedonian had a Thraco-Phrygian-like development, one would expect *Γεβαλιος ⁶. According to van Beeek:
«Κεβαλιος presupposes that Macedonian took part in Grassmann’s Law. If this is correct, Macedonian started off as a NWGr. dialect which subsequently underwent its proper Lautverschiebung in the stops» ⁶.
It should be noted at this point that Macedonian is not the only ancient Greek dialect to show "anomalous" phonological developments. According to equally outdated theories, Doric dialects were classified as "Illyrian" because they showed the development of PIE *bʰ into β instead of φ (cf. Laconian βερνωμεθα ¹² from PIE root *bʰer- and Elean βρα ¹³ from PIE root *bʰréh₂tēr), or the development of PIE *dʰ into d instead of θ (cf. αιδωσσα instead of αιθουσα ¹⁴). Should we consider Laconian as a separate language inside the Graeco-Phrygian linguistic branch? The irony is that Macedonian in some instances is less "anomalous" than other Greek dialects. The Perrhaebian (*) name Βουλομαγα (Att. Φυλομαχη) renders <φ,χ> as <β,γ> while in Macedonia the name appears as Φυλομαγα, with Φ ¹⁵.
| ____________________ Sources/References: |
¹⁰ Quaestiones Graecae, 292d-f
¹¹ Crossland (CAH 3.1,1983)
¹² Hesychius
¹³ Hesychius
¹⁴ Hesychius
(*) Perrhaebians probably spoke Aeolic
