Compounds in σοφο-

The name Σοφοκλέης/Σοφοκλῆς is very family, but there are surprisingly few compounds with σοφο- as a first member (contrast φιλό-σοφος, etc.). LSJ knows σοφο-τέχηνης from an inscription of 149 AD, σοφό-νους as a nonce-word in Lucian (Colvin 2007: 270-271, no. 92),  and cites the curious σοφιβόλος from P.Oxy. XVI 1873 (actually a ghostword: ἀ<μ>φιβόλον is now read instead of σοφιβῶλον), but reports no others.


That inscription ends with a Roman date (by consuls and with reference to the Ides of No(v)ember) in a dative (!) absolute: Ὀρφίτῳ καὶ Σοσ|σίῳ Πρείσκῳ ὑπάτοις, εἴδοις Νοεμβρίαις. Jannaris (1897: 499-500) cites several examples, but not this one.

The Revised Supplement, p. 279, reports σοφο-διδάσκαλος from an inscription from Sardis.

E.A. Sophocles, pp. 1001-1002, reports σοφό-δωρος (and a feminine counterpart in -δοτις) and σοφο-ποιός with its derivatives, all from Pseudo-Dionysios.


The onomastic data confirms the rarity of σοφο- compounds:

[ Note that Λαϝόσοϝος is falsely returned (see CEG I 444). ]

All of this serves to underline that the Teacher of Rhetoric's suggestion that one should sprinkle in words like σοφόνους is comical. There too χειρί-σοφος is recommended, which appears as a name 4x. Colvin translates 'cheirosophic'.

From phrase to compound adjective

ἀγκύλα τόξα Il.5.209+ : ἀγκυλό-τοξος Il.2.484+


θρόνα ποικίλα Il.22.441 : ποικιλό-θρονος Sapph.1.1.

Pindar has ἀγλαό-γυιος (N.7.4) and -δενδρος (O.9.20) and the Homeric Hymn to Demeter has -δωρος, while Homer has ἀγλαά both of γυῖα (Il.19.385) and of δῶρα (Il.1.213+) and Pindar has it of δένδρα (O.2.70). The Odyssey has ἀγλαά ἔργα, while Maximus (hexameter 68, section 5 'about marriage') has ἀγλαο-εργός 'ennobled by works' (LSJ s.v.).

For Pindar's Ἀγλαο-τρίαινα (Ο.1.40), cf. N.11.4 ἀγλαῷ σκά̄πτρῳ πέλας.

δημιουργός [δημιοεργός (Od., Hdt.), δημιοργός (Ion.), δᾱμιοργός (Dor., NWGr., Arc., Boeot.), δᾱμιωργός (Astypal.), δᾱμιεργός (Astypal., Nisyr.) name of an official.] "from *δημιο-ϝεργός, in turn from <*>δήμια ἔργα with verbal reinterpretation of the second member after the types ψυχο-πομπός; partly from -ϝοργός." (Beekes, s.v.).

ἀκρὴ πόλις Il.6.88, 257 : ἀκρό-πολις Od.8.494+

κύνες πόδας ἀργοὶ (ἕποντο|) Il.18.578 (cf. 18.283 πρίν μιν κύνες ἀργοὶ ἔδονται. |): Πόδ- and πόδ-αργος. See Meissner-Tribulato 2002: 297.

πόδας ὠκὺς Ἀχιλλεύς Il.1.58+: ποδ-ώκης Il.2.860. (Contrast the order of elements in

ὠκῠ-πέδῑλος, ον, with swift sandals, swift-footed, Nonn.D.8.220).

οἰνο-βαρής Il.1.225: οἴνῳ βεβαρηότες Od.3.139, 19.122.

ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν (cf. Il.1.7) Ἀνάξ-ανδρος, Ἀναξ-ήνωρ, and Ἀναξ-ά̄νωρ.

From compound to personal name: 
λᾱο-σσόος Hom.+: a Boeotian Λαϝό-σοϝος CEG I 444. 

Lessons from short fragments of Corinna

660.1-2 PMG illustrates the digamma in Boeotian, but also both <η> for <αι> (4x) and <ω> for Attic-Ionic's secondary <ου>:
πῆδα ϝὸν θέλωσα φίλης | ἀγκάλησ’ ἑλέσθη (De-Boeotianised: παῖδα ὃν θέλουσα φίλαις ἀγκάλαις ἑλέσθαι)
'... while she was wishing to take her son with her loving arms...'.

The fragment was quoted for ὅς with a digamma.


661 PMG: τού τε νῶε (De-Boeotianised: σύ τε νῶε).
Note <ου> for Attic-Ionic <υ> and the by-form of νῶ 'we or us two, the pair of us' (cf. Lat. nō-s)

I have since found that Palmer (1980: 118) quotes 654.iii.12-21 PMG as an illustrative passage. 654.i.12-37 PMG would serve as another slightly longer extract to illustrate Corinna's Boeotian.

Plans and clods

Εὔ-βωλος is a dialect form of Εὔ-βουλος, not a name formed from βῶλος 'clod', unlike ἐρί-βωλος in Homer.

LSJ has a lemma εὔβωλος (βῶλον), which is in Dorotheus, but the entry only points to εὔπωλος, which is at Il.5.551 and S.OC.711.

The name Εὔβουλος is attested numerously (330x), but the few attestations of Εὔβωλος (15x) are far more restricted, chiefly to the regions of IG VII (hence <ω> not <ου> as the residue of *boln-) and to Tanagra in Boeotia at that.

Also, from a coin from Cnidos c. 400 BCE, there is ΕΥΒΩΛΟϹ (= Schwyzer 258). 


IG VII 3171 (line 3, inter al.) has the (loc.)dat.sg. Εὐβώλυ: another helpful Boeotian (see also this earlier post, its forerunner, and some of my favourite Boeotians)!
This one (LGPN IIIb. s.v. 19) can be found in the online database by searching for Εὔβουλος (!): 'IG VII 3171, 3, 15 etc. (Εὔ[βω]λος: s. Ἀρχέδαμος)'. The printed volume has Εὔβουλος as its lemma, and reads, for this 19th individual from Elateia in Phokis, 'IG VII 3171, 3, 15 etc. (-βω-: s. Ἀρχέδαμος)'.

Very early Boeotian inscriptions

Buck, no. 38.2 (= Schwyzer 440.12 = Wachter, R., Non-Attic Greek Vase Inscriptions, Oxford 2001: n. 45 on BOI 10f + n. 74) is cited from Arch.Eph. 1900.107. The materials behind LSAG (94, no. 2, pl. 7, no. 2) seem to be all that is available online.

For ϝισϝ-, see IPArk 15 and IG V, 2, 321A21.

The LSAG materials for Buck, no. 38.1 (cited from the same periodical) are also available. Δε̄μοθέρε̄ς is described as a 'Euboic name on a bronze lebes from Thebes' at 88.23. Schwyzer notes simply: 'Δε̄μο.: ε̄ alienam originem prodit.'.

LSJ and the Greek dialects

LSJ's entry for πλῆθος is instructive, in that it repeats the lemma as a dialect form:

πλῆθος, εος, τό, Dor. and Arc. πλῆθος Schwyzer 84.8, al. (Argive, found in Crete, v B.C.), IG5(2).6.20 (Tegea, iv B.C.), etc.; Boeot. πλεῖθος ib.7.3171.46 (Orchom. Boeot.); pseudo-Dor. and pseudo-Aeol. πλᾶθος GDI5176.21 (Crete), IGRom.4.1302.18 (Cyme, i B.C./ i A.D.), Hippod. ap. Stob.4.1.93: (πλήθω, v. πίμπλημι):

That is to say that πλῆθος is common Greek, that it came to be written with <ει> in Boeotian (in the Hellenistic period), and that, between the end of the third century BCE and the the turn of the eras, hyperdoric and hyperaeolic forms were used with <ᾱ> for what was always a long e vowel.

It would be simpler and more accurate to give:
'πλῆθος, εος, τό, Boeot. πλεῖθος (3rd c. BCE), hyperdial. πλᾶθος (>3rd c. BCE) [πίμπλημι] ...'.

This neatly illustrates that LSJ simply reports which dialects have which form rather than organising them in accordance with the innovations or divergencies that they showfrom the standard.

Schwyzer 84 provides a neat illustration of a point of which LSJ shows awareness here: the findspot of an inscription does not indicate its dialect. That is determined by certain diagnostic features of the Greek thereon. Although this was found on Crete, its dialect is Argolic. The text is a treat that was brokered between the Tylisi and the people of Knossos, but Argivis mediantibus (cf. no. 83 per Argivos factum, which is Colvin, no, 38 and Buck, no. 85; Anne Jeffery's notes).  

The image in Anne Jeffery's notes for 170.39b seems in fact to be of Schwyzer 84 (B, the central column, beginning δυσμενέας τιθείμεθα καὶ τ|ο̑ν), not DGE 83. It confirms that the script is certainly not green (Cretan), and is in fact blue (B 5 ψάφο̄ν and B 6 μάχᾱ).

LSJ's entry for πῆμα is a similar case:
'πῆμα, ατος, τό (same form in Dor.), ... '.

In other words πῆμα is simply common Greek.

LSJ gives no dialect label s.v. ἔξαστις.
The genitive cited is ιος (Galen uses an acc.pl. ἐξάστιας): its citations (from medical authors) and an inscription from Samos (iv c. BC) are compatible with labeling this as Ionic.

ἐπημοιβός has no dialect label, nor does ἐπαμοιβός. Likewise ἐξημοιβός. However, s.v. ἀντημοιβός we read 'Ep. for ἀνταμοιβός, corresponding, Call.Del.52.'. s.v. ἀντᾰμοιβός, we find only 'v. ἀντημοιβός'.

Patterns of naming

For shared elements in the names of fathers and sons, see Thucydides 1.29.2, which lists the following Corinthians:  

Ἀριστεύς ὁ Πελλίχου, 

Καλλικράτης ὁ Καλλίου, 

Τῑμά̄νωρ ὁ Τῑμάνθους,  

Ἀρχέτῑμος ὁ Εὐρυτί̄μου, 

and Ἰσαρχίδᾱς ὁ Ἰσάρχου. 

The last, with the patronymic suffix, is of particular interest: either Isarchosson son of Isarchos or Isarchos Jr the son of Isarchos Sr.

Note too: a Syracusan called Hermocrates, who was the son of Hermon (Th.4.58.1).

One very early Rhodian inscription reads as follows (LSAG 356.15 adds a few details):
Εὐθυτίδα | ἠμὶ λέσχα |το̑ Πραξσιόδο | τοὐφύλο τοὐφυλίδα.
(with the instances of crasis resolved: το̑ Εὐφύλο το̑ Εὐφυλίδα).

That is, Euthytidas the son of Praxiodos, the son of Euphylos, the son of Euphylosson (or, M(a)cEuphylos). These names are not reported from any other text.

See Bechtel (1917: 214) for other names from θυ- 'sacrifice': Θύτᾱς (Roman imperial: Θύτης), Εὐθύτης, Πολυθύτᾱς (IG VII 2775 (undated), which is suspiciously non-Boeotian in its spelling: *Πολου-θούτᾱς, cf. Πολου -κράτεις, -κλεῖς, etc. and cf. τὺ σιουνθύτη masc.nom.pl. a:-stem 'the fellow-sacrificers' ), and Θυσί-λεως (2x at Sinope, Scythia Minor, mid-Hellenistic).

There was also Δημοσθένης Δημοσθένους (demotic Παιανιεύς: Plu.Dem.20) and Phocus, son of Phocion the Good (Plu.Phoc.20.1-2, 30.1, and 36.3), apparently named after his grandfather. P.Oxy. I 119 is the letter of Theon Jr (Theonatos) to Theon Sr. These onomastic apples did not fall far from their trees.

On the subject of names, Kallis can be a male or female personal name.
Εὐρυσθεύς, which has no historical bearers, looks like it is a short form of Εὐρυσθένης.

Further helpful Boeotians

In an inscription from Athens, we meet one Peilestrotidas (cf. Agora XVII 500), who illustrates (1) the labial treatment of a labiovelar even before front vowels (cf. τῆλε, etc.), (2) -ρο- not -ρα- as the reflex of a syllabic r, and (3) the spelling <ει> for an original long e vowel. Cf. *Τηλεστρατίδης (-ίδᾱς).


We know that he is a Boeotian, despite only appearing at Athens, because his name is followed by an ethnic, Θειβῆος, whose spelling (as with Πει-) is consistent with Boeotian pronunciation (cf. the spelling Θηβαῖος outside Boeotia; Boeotian has κή for καί).

Note that the editions confirm that we have two distinct instances of this name and ethnic, one first published 09.09.1865 (Athenis, nunc EM 9238), another found in a Roman wall 03.05.1949. 'We may have the monuments of father and son or grandson' (Agora, l.c.).

Note, by contrast, the use of the suffix -ίδᾱς, not -ιος, as a deriverative of a (father's) name.


A comparable case of the labial treatment of a labiovelar is illustrated by Θιόφειστος in IG 3172 (c) 90-91 and 92. Cf. Θεόθεστος from Hellenistic Rhodes.

His father's name is given in the genitive: Θιοδώρω (contra Buck, 168a). The context mentions Εὐξενίδας Φιλώνδαο, a neat example of the genitive of the father's name (in -ᾱο as in Homer), itself an -ώνδᾱς formation (see Buck, 168a), typical of Boeotian (Buck, 164.8: also in Thessalian, Phocian, Megarian, and Euboean).

IG II^2 8888 reports a Τηλέμα|χος Θη[βαῖος] (LGPN *Πηλέμαχος).

Notes on early Boeotian inscriptions

Mantiklos (twice only) is CEG I 326 (note the formation and spelling of χαρίϝετταν and, apparently, -οι as a dative singular ending in ϝεκαβόλοι ἀργυροτόξσοι). Anne Jeffery's notes include a drawing of the statuette.

Red alphabet features (as Colvin, no. 12, p. 102): <Χ> for ξ (as in Latin; here followed by a sigma) in ἀργυροτόξσοι and <Ψ> at the start of χαρίϝετταν.

Colvin takes Mantiklos as a hypocoristic for (*)Μαντι-κλείδας. LGPN does not know this name, but has 7 instances of Μαντικλῆς (of which two have an illegible ending), 1 of the Thessalian/Boeotian spelling -κλεῖς, and 1 of the feminine Μαντικλέα.

Echestrotos (unique) is CEG I 334 (but a supplemented text is available as SEG XXIX 449). The second element of the name is Aeolic for *Ἐχέστρατος. Genuine initial and intervocalic digammas are evident (n.b. ποιϝ- < *k^woi-u-: Schwyzer, nos. 101, 105 [ποιϝέσανς], 418.18, 440.8 and 9 [but not 7], and IG IV 1580 [Saronic]). Anne Jeffery's notes on this one include a drawing of the Mantiklos dedication.

The other drawings include:
5 olim 4) Schwyzer 440.10 [= Buck, no. 38.1];
2b) Schwyzer 440.12 [= Buck, no. 38.2];
2a) Schwyzer 440.12b;
4 olim 8) IG VII 2729;
6 olim 5) SEG XXXI 525
For the epithet of Apollo, see LSJ s.v. κηρύκειος.

See further the notes on the cantharus of Mogea (a unique name) and the stele set up by Amphalkes.

Notes on early inscriptions

The Samian Kouros (Isches: cf. Ἰσχέας): IG XII, 6 2:560 (a little from Anne Jeffery);

To Hera, from Cheramyes: IG XII, 6 2: 558A [= DGE 715.3 and LSAG (1961) 328; 341; 414, 4; archive materials];

Funerary monument of Kitylos and Dermys: (Boeotian) GVI 137 [= LSAG² 92; 94, 8; archive materials].

One curiosity is the rarity of the names ιn these archaic inscriptions: Ἀμφάλκης has three recorded instances that make it the most common. One of these is sub-literary (the Diegesis to Call. Iambi fr.191), another is dated c. 218 BCE. Isches is absent from LGPN, along with the rest of the onomastic data from Samian inscriptions.

Notes on inscriptions: a kantharos from one Mogea

Buck, no. 38.5 (Colvin, no. 13) has the unique name Μογέᾱ extra metrum. Anna Jeffery's notes are online and an image (below) is available through Wikimedia Commons.

The West Greek form  δίδωτι is also found in Schwyzer no. 136.8 (Colvin, no. 42), from Corcyra.

Some favourite Boeotians

(1) Pisimeilos in IG VII 3193 at Orchomenos (LSJ s.v. μῆλον A) [earlier (Vth c. BC) there was a Peisimelidas (Πεισιμηλίδᾱς) at Thespiae (SEG XIX 354 j with <ε> for <η>].

The form attested is Πισιμείλυ, which functions as a dative, but is locative in origin (-οι).

The inscription provides data for various issues in Boeotian, for example in the name Κλιώνδη followed by a patronymic genitive Ἀπολλωνίδαο.

(2) Euddugos in Ure, Black Glaze Pottery 58, 1 (cf. εὔζυγος in Hom. and a gen.pl. εὐσδύγων, prob., in Alc.34.9 L-P).

(3) Hnesidamos (Ἠνεσίδᾱμος) in Roesch, IThesp 323/SEG XXXII 505 (Thespiae, v. late 4th c. BC) uniquely has a Boeotian form of the Attic-Ionic name Αἰνεσίδημος (1x); cf. Αἰνησίδᾱμος (34x), Attic-Ionic Αἰνησίδημος (13x). Boeotians with the name Ἠσχίνᾱς (Lat. Aeschines) and Ἤσχυλος (Lat. Aeschylus) illustrate the same development of <αι> to <η>.

Every kind of singer...

... is listed (pretty much) in IG VII 3195, a first-century BCE Boeotian inscription (fr. Orchomenos).

Epigraphic round-up

The Medes appear in the Idalion Bronze (Buck 1955: 211, no. 23, line 1) as ma-to-i, that is, Μᾶδοι. Two words in the same line (ka-te-vo-ro-ko-ne / κατε̄́ϝοργον and ke-ti-e-ve-se / Κετιε̑ϝες) show the treatment of the inherited long e (eta in Attic and Ionic) in contrast to the treatment of the long a (eta in Attic and Ionic) in this ethnic.

The Gortyn Lawcode is IC 72 (Anne Jeffery's notes thereon).

Buck (1955: 146, § 195) on Arcadian refers to a decree of Megalopolis of about 200 BC that 'is mainly in the native dialect' that was found in Caria at Magnesia on the Maeander.

The digamma in Arcadian δερά̄: now you see it (Orchomenos, 369-361 BCE), now you don't (Olympia, 189-167 or 182/181 BCE: Elean ?).

Chian (East Ionic) πρήξοισιν (2x) shows Ionic <η> and moveable nu, but the Aeolic/Lesbian -οισι for -ουσι (from -onsi). For a translation and some commentary, see S. Colvin (2007: 112-115, no. 20).

The first of the Etruscan abecedaria (IG XIV 2420) introduces the series of PHI entries. See also LSJ on the letter Ϻ.

Καρόφι SEG XX 756. ϝοίκω Schwyzer 323 C, line 23 (= Buck 1955: no 52, p. 241), which is functionally equivalent to οἰκόθεν (Buck 1955: 103). 

SEG XLIII 212 (A)
ὅπω]ς δὲ κὴ φανερὴ ἴωνθι τὴ ἐπανγελμένη κὴ δεδωῶση
[γουνῆκες, καταλο]γίττασθη τὸ ὄνουμα κὴ ἐπιπατρόφιον κὴ ὁπόττον κα ἑ-
[κάστα ἴη δεδωῶ]σα·

Boeotian τοῖ (face c, line 76) / τῦ (line 34) / τεῖ (line 4) / (locative in origin) ταμίη (< *αι, an old locative, functionally equivalent to τῷ ταμίᾳ: cf. κή for καί in Boeotian and Il.21.180-181 ἐκ δ’ ἄρα πᾶσαι | χύντο χαμαὶ χολάδες·; -ίᾱι gives -ίᾱι/ίᾳ in Boeotian).

A fun film about the longest (?) inscription of Antiquity, which is non-official to boot: "A Gigantic Jigsaw Puzzle: The Epicurean Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda".

The Thessalian dative plural participle εἴντεσσι is in SEG XXXVI 548.1: εἴντεσσι τοῦν πετταροῦν γενίουν ...

The numeral ἴα outside Homer: Boeotia (SEG III 359).

The adjective ἀταλόφρων is found on Thasos and as a personal name in Attica (col. II, line 63).

The adjective ἀταλός as a superlative adverb in the mid-eighth century: the Dipylon jug (Anna Jeffery's notes thereon).

δεκάω is a ghost word that originated from the first edition of this inscription.

Leumann knew the Dipylon Oinochoe and dated it to the eighth century (1950: 141), but also thought that its wording depended on Il.18.567, which is considered (by Bolling) to be an interpolation: παρθενικαὶ δὲ καὶ ἠΐθεοι ἀταλὰ φρονέοντες.

G. M. Bolling explains the chain of developments that must be assumed for the traditional analysis in Language 27.1 (1951) 68-80, at 73-74: αταλοφρων (sic) > αταλοφρονεων > ἀταλὰ φρονέων > ἀταλάφρων.

Chadwick (1996: 218-221, at 220) compresses this: 'Ἀταλός, probably an artificial back-formation from ταλάφρων, has very much the semantic range of Latin delicatus.'

Chadwick took ΠΑΙΖΕΙ as an indicative in the absence of ἄν. He interpreted the second line as τοῦ τόδε κἄν μιν [.

On the Dipylon Oinochoe's letter forms, esp. the reclining alpha and its iota and lambda (similar to those of early Cretan inscriptions), see C.D. Buck, The Greek Dialects (1955: 348-349): a (partial) photograph (and line drawing) illustrates the alpha, lambda, and pi clearly. Wikipedia has photographs from two angles so as to give the full (legible) text.

A helpful (anonymous) Boeotian

The epitaph printed as GVI 1106 (Boeotian Thebes, 279 BC) is followed by these words:

[Νέω(?)]ν Δαμώνιος Εὐ[αν]ορίδαν
[ἀνέθ]εικε τοῖς θεοῖς καὶ ταῖς θεαῖς.
[— —]νικος Εἱροδότι[ο]ς ἐπόεισε.

The dedicator has a patronymic adjective in -ιος (Δᾱμώνιος), as does the craftsman, whose name has been lost: Εἱροδότι[ο]ς. The latter also shows <ει> for <η> (cf. Herodotos), as in [ἀνέθ]εικε and ἐπόεισε.

Several Boeotians with the name Εἰρόδοτος are known (e.g. IG VII 3179.40-43:

Ὁμολώϊχος Τίμωνος, [Κ]αλλίας Καλλικράτιος,
Θιογίτων Ἀθανίππω, Σαμίας Θίωνος,
Εἱρόδοτος Ἀρχίππω, Δαμάτριος
Ἀπολλοδώρω, Ἀρίσταρχος Φίλωνος.

In which note the fluctuation between patronymic adjectives and the father's name in the genitive: e.g. Ἀρχίππω.

Note too: the formation Ὁμολώ-ϊχος and Θιο/ω- for Θεο/ω-).