You are on page 1of 26


THE The Greek of the N. T. has many streams that flow into it. But this fact is not a peculiarity of this phase of the lan ua e. The itself has this characteristic in a marke! !e ree. If one nee!s further e"amples# he can recall how composite En lish is# not only com$inin %arious $ranches of the Teutonic roup# $ut also incorporatin much of the ol! Celtic of Britain an! recei%in a tremen!ous impress from the Norman& 'rench (an! so )atin*# not to mention the in!irect literary influence of )atin an! Greek. The early Greek itself was su$+ect to non&Greek influence as other In!o&Germanic ton ues were# an! in particular from the si!e of the Thracians an! Phry ians in the East#, an! in the -est an! North the Italic# Celtic an! Germanic pressure was stron .. I. The Term . The wor! # sc. # means simply common lan ua e or !ialect common to all# a worl!&speech (Weltsprache*. /nfortunately there is not yet uniformity in the use of a term to !escri$e the Greek that pre%aile! o%er Ale"an!er0s empire an! $ecame the worl!&ton ue. 12hner&Blass3 speak of 4 o!er .5 6o also 6chmie!el7 follows -iner e"actly. But Hellenic lan ua e is properly only Greek lan ua e# as Hellenic culture8 is Greek culture. 9 annaris: su ests Panhellenic or new Attic for the uni%ersal Greek# the Greek par excellence as to common usa e. Hellenistic Greek woul! answer in so far as it is Greek
1 Kretschmer, Einl. in !ie Gesch. !er riech. 6pr., 1896, pp. 171243. But the true Phrygians were kin t the !reeks. "ee Percy !ar#ner, $ew %h. & !k. 'ist., p. 84. 2 Kretschmer, op. cit., pp. 1(317), 244282. K*hner+B,ass K-'$./+B01"", Ausf2hrliche Grammatik !. riech. 6prache. 3. Aufl. of 12hner. Teil I# B!e. 2, 22 3189), 18924. 3 !riech. !r., B#. 2, p. 22. 4 5.+"ch., $. 6. !r., p. 17. 5iner 52$./, !. B., ;e %er$orum cum praep. compos. in N. T. /su 3183418434. 777, Gramm. !. neut. 6prachi!ioms (,<..*. =. Aufl. %on )2nemann 3,8674. ( 8aha&&y, Pr g. & 'e,,en. in 1,e9. .mp., p. 3. 8aha&&y # es use 'e,,enism ,ike :r ysen in his 'ist. & 'e,,enism, as c rresp n#ing t 'e,,enistic, ;ut he # es s un#er pr test 3p. 3 &.4. 'e wishes in#ee# that he ha# c ine# the w r# <'e,,enicism.= But ' garth 3Phi,ip an# 1,e9an#er, p. 2774 ha# a,rea#y use# <'e,,enisticism,= saying> <'e,,enisticism grew ut & 'e,,enism.= ?annaris ?1$$1/2", 1. $., 1 'ist rica, !reek !rammar 318974. 777, @n the 6rue 8eaning & the 3%,ass. /eA., 19)3, pp. 93 &&.4. 6 'ist. !k. !r., p. 6.

spoken also $y Hellenists !ifferin from Hellenes or pure Greeks. 1rum$acher applies Hellenistic to the %ernacular an! to the 4con%entional literary lan ua e5 of the time#, $ut this is wholly ar$itrary. 1rum$acher terms the Hellenistic 4ein %erschwommenes I!iom.5 Hat>i!akis an! 6chwy>er inclu!e in the $oth the literary an! the spoken lan ua e of the Hellenistic time. This is the %iew a!opte! in this rammar. ;eissmann !islikes the term Hellenistic Greek $ecause it was so lon use! for the suppose!ly peculiar $i$lical Greek# thou h the term itself has a wi!e si nificance.. He also stron ly !isappro%es the terms 4%ul ar Greek#5 4$a! Greek#5 4 raecitas fatiscens#5 in contrast with the 4classic Greek.5 ;eissmann moreo%er o$+ects to the wor! $ecause it is use! either for the %ernacular# the literary style or for all the
Krum;acher K/B8B1%'./, K., Beitr? e >u einer Geschichte !er riech. 6prache 3KuhnCs Deitschr., 188(, pp. 481(4(4. 777, ;as Pro$lem !. neu riech. 6chriftsprache 319)24. 777, ;as Pro ramm !es neuen Thesaurus !. riech. 6pr. 319)94. 777, ;ie riech. )it. !es @ittelalters 31ultur !. Ge enwart# Tl. I# A$t. Aiii, 19)(4. 1 @2nchener 6it>un s$er., 1886, p. 43(. 'atEi#akis '16D2:1K2", !. $., Einleitun in !ie neu riechische Grammatik 318924. "chwyEer "%'5FD./ 3"%'5.2D./4, .., ;ie -eltsprachen !es Altertums 319)24. :eissmann :.2""81$$, 1., Bi;,e "tu#ies 319)14. 6r. ;y 1. !rieAeG c&. Bi$elstu!ien 3189(4 an# Neue Bi$elstu!ien 318974. 777, Bi$lische Gr?cit?t etc. 36he ,. /un#schau, @kt. 19124. 777, ;ie Hellenisierun !es semitischen @onotheismus 3$. ?ahr;. &. #. k,. 1,t., 19)34. 777, ;ie neut. 'ormel <in %hrist = 318924. 777, ;ie 6prache !. riech. Bi$el 36he ,. /un#schau, 19)6, $ . 1164. 777, ;ie /r eschichte !es Christentums im )ichte !er 6prachforschun 32ntern. 5 ch., 3). @kt. 19)94. 777, Hellenistisches Griechisch 3'erE g+'auckCs /ea,encyc., H22, 18994. 777, )icht %om Asten 319)84. 777, 0ight &r m the 1ncient .ast 3191)4. 6r. ;y "trachan. 777, $ew 0ight n the $. 6. 319)74. 6r. ;y "trachan. 777, Papyri 3.ncyc. Bi;,., 222, 19)24. 777, "t. Pau, in the 0ight & " cia, an# /e,igi us 'ist ry 319124.

Greek of the time inclu!in the Atticistic re%i%al. 6o he proposes 4Hellenistic worl!& speech.53 But this is too cum$ersome. It is in!ee! the worl!&speech of the Ale"an!rian an! Roman perio! that is meant $y the term . There is on the other han! the literary speech of the orators# historians# philosophers# poets# the pu$lic !ocuments preser%e! in the inscriptions (some e%en Atticistic*B on the other han! we ha%e the popular writin s in the )CC# the N. T.# the Apostolic 'athers# the papyri (as a rule* an! the ostraca. The term is thus sufficient $y itself to e"press the Greek in common use o%er the worl!# $oth oral an! literary# as 6chwei>er7 uses it followin Hat>i!akis. Thum$8 i!entifies an! Hellenistic Greek an! applies it to $oth %ernacular an! written

2 1rt. 'e,,. !riech., 'auckCs /ea,encyc., p. 629. 3 2;., p. 63). "chweiEer "%'5.2D./, .., Bericht 2$er !ie 'orschun en auf !em Ge$iet !er riech. 6prachw. mit AusschluD !er 1oinE un! !er ;ialekte in !en 9ahren 189)19)3 3BursianCs ?ahres;ericht, c99, 19)4, pp. 11(24. 777, ;ie riech. 6prache in Feit !. Hellen. 3$. ?ahr;. &. k,. 1,t., 19)1, Aii, Aiii4. 777, Grammatik !er per amen . 2nschri&ten 318984. 777, Neu riech. 6ynta" un! alt riech. 3$. ?ahr;. &. k,. 1,t., 19)8, pp. 498()74. 4 Gr. !er per . Inschr., p. 19 &. 6hum; 6'B8B, 1., ;ie 'orsch. 2$er !ie hellen. 6pr. in !en 9ahren 19)219)4 31rch. &. Pap. 3, pp. 443 4734. 777, ;ie riech. 6prache im Feitalter !es Hellenismus 319)14. 777, ;ie sprach esch. 6tell. !es $i$l. Griech. 36he ,. /un#., 19)24. 777, Han!$uch !er riech. :ia,. 319)94. 777, Han!$uch !. neu riech. Golkssprache. .. Aufl. 3191)4. 777, Han!$uch !es 6anskrits. 2, !rammatik 319)(4. 777, /nters. 2$er !. 6p. Asper im Griech. 318894. ( ;ie riech. 6pr. etc., p. 9.

style# thou h he woul! not re ar! the Atticists as proper pro!ucers of the . @ oulton: uses the term for $oth spoken an! literary . The !octors thus !isa ree %ery wi!ely. An the whole it seems $est to use the term (or Hellenistic Greek* $oth for the %ernacular an! literary # e"clu!in the Atticistic re%i%al# which was a conscious effort to write not $ut ol! Attic., At last then the Greek worl! has speech&unity# whate%er was true of the $e innin of the Greek lan ua e.. II. The Origin of the . (a) TRI/@PH A' THE ATTIC . This is what happene!. E%en in Asiatic Ionia the Attic influence was felt. The Attic %ernacular# sister to the Ionic %ernacular# was reatly influence! $y the speech of sol!iers an! merchants from all the Greek worl!. Attic $ecame the stan!ar! lan ua e of the Greek worl! in the fifth an! the fourth centuries
8 u,t n 8@B06@$, ?. '., 1 !rammar & $. 6. !reek. H ,. 2, Pr ,eg mena 319)64. 3# e#. 319)84. 777, %haracteristics & $. 6. !reek 36he .9p sit r, 19)44. 777, Einleitun in !ie 6prache !es N. T. 319114. 777, !rammatica, $ tes &r m the Papyri 36he .9p sit r, 19)1, pp. 271282G 19)3, pp. 1)4121, 423439. 6he %,assica, /eAiew, 19)1, pp. 3137, 434441G 19)4, pp. 1)6 112, 1(11((4. 777, 2ntr #ucti n t $. 6. !reek 3189(4. 2# e#. 319)44. 777, 0anguage & %hrist 3'astingsC @ne+A ,. :. B., 19)94. 777, $. 6. !reek in the 0ight & 8 #ern :isc Aery 3%am;r. Bi;,. .ssays, 19)9, pp. 461 ()(4. 777, 6he "cience & 0anguage 319)34. 8@B06@$, 5. I., an# !.:.$, 1. "., 1 % nc r#ance t the !reek 6estament 318974. 8@B06@$ an# 82002!1$, 0e9ica, $ tes &r m the Papyri 36he .9p s., 19)874. 777, 6he H ca;u,ary & the $. 6. 2,,ustrate# &r m the Papyri an# ther $ n+0iterary " urces. Part 2 319144, 22, 222. 6 Pr ,., p. 23. 2t is n t necessary t #iscuss here the use & <'e,,enistic= !k. as <?ewish+ !k.= 3see <"emitic 2n&,uence= in ch. 2H4, & r it is a;sur#. 6he n ti n that the is 8ace# nian !k. is Juite ;esi#e the mark, & r 8ac. !k. is t ;ar;ar us. 6he the ry & an 1,e9an#rian #ia,ect is ;s ,ete. :u %anges, in his !, ssarium ca,,e# 'e,,. !k. <corruptissima lin ua,= an# $ie;uhr 3H$er !as I yp.&Griech.# 1l. 6chr., p. 1974 ca,,s it <Karg n.= 1 B,ass in#ee# c ntrasts the ,iterature & the 1,e9. an# / m. peri #s n this princip,e, ;ut wr ng,y, & r it is type, n t time, that marks the #i&&erence. <2& then the ,iterature & the 1,e9an#rian peri # must ;e ca,,e# 'e,,enistic, that & the / man peri # must ;e terme# 1tticistic. But the p pu,ar ,anguage ha# g ne its wn way.= !r. & the $. 6. !k., 1898 an# 19)(, p. 2. @n the !k. & 1,e9an#ria an# its sprea# Aer the w r,# see 5ackernage,, ;ie 1ult. !er Ge enw.# Tl. I# A$t. 8, p. 3)4 &.


4The !ialect of Athens# the so&calle! AtticJone of the Ionic roupJpre%aile! o%er all other sister !ialects# an! e%entually a$sor$e! them. It was the Attic# $ecause Athens# particularly after the Persian wars# rose to a$solute !ominion o%er all the other Greek communities# an! finally $ecame the metropolis of all Greek races.53 This is rather an o%erstatement# $ut there is much truth in it. This classic literary Attic !i! more an! more lose touch with the %ernacular. 4It is one of our misfortunes# whate%er $e its practical con%enience# that we are tau ht Attic as the stan!ar! Greek# an! all other forms an! !ialects as !e%iations from it K when many rammarians come to characteri>e the later Greek of the @i!!le A es or of to&!ay# or e%en that of the Ale"an!rian or N. T. perio!s# no a!+ecti%e is stron enou h to con!emn this L%er!or$enes# %eruneini tes Attisch05 (6. ; ickey# Princeton Rev.# Act.# ,MN3*. The literary Attic was allie! to the literary IonicB $ut e%en in this crownin !e%elopment of Greek speech no har! an! fast lines are !rawn# for the artificial ;oric choruses are use! in tra e!y an! the %ernacular in come!y.7 There was loss as well as ain as the Attic was more e"tensi%ely use!# +ust as is true of mo!ern En lish. 4The orators ;emosthenes an! Oschines may $e counte! in the new Attic# where other lea!in representati%es in literature are @enan!er# Philemon an! the other writers of the New Come!y.5, As the literary Attic li%e! on in the literary # so the %ernacular Attic sur%i%e! with many chan es in the %ernacular . -e are at last in possession of enou h of the ol! Attic inscriptions an! the inscriptions an! the papyri to make this clear. The march of the Greek lan ua e has $een stea!ily forwar! on this Attic %ernacular $ase e%en to this present !ay.. In a sense# therefore# the $ecame another !ialect (Oolic# ;oric# Ionic# Attic# *. Cf. 1 retschmer# Die Entstehung der # pp. ,P3=. But the was far more than a
2 "ee Kretschmer, .in,., p. 41). :ieterich> <;as 6prach e$iet !er $il!et e$en ein Gan>es un! kann nur im Fusammenhan $etrachtet wer!en.= Bnters., p. 9Ai. 3 ?annaris, 'ist. !k. !r., 1897, p. 3 &. @n the superi rity & the 1ttic see 5ackernage,, ;ie 1ult. !er Ge enw.# Tl. I# A$t. 8, p. 299. :ickey :2%K.F, "., $ew P ints & Hiew & r the "tu#y & the !reek & the $. 6. 3Princet n 6he ,. /eA., @ct., 19)34. 4 /uther& r#, Fur Gesch. !es Atticismus# 9ahr$. f2r class. Phil.# suppl. 9iii, 1884, pp. 36), 399. " 1u# in says> 4Ce n0est point ar$itrairement Que les Ecri%ains recs ont employE tel ou tel !ialecte.5 Rt. sommaire !es ;ial. Grecs. )itt. , 1891, p. 4. 1 "im ns n, !k. !r., 1cci#ence, 19)3, p. 6. 'e has a g pp. 22126(. # #iscussi n & the #ia,ects,

2 /iemann an# ! e,Eer we,, say> <Suant au !ialecte attiQue# rTce au" ran!s Ecri%ains Qui l0illustrUrent# rTce V la prEpon!Erance politiQue et commerciale !0AthUnes# rTce aussi V son caractUre !e !ialecte intermE!iaire entre l0ionien et les !ialectes en a# il se rEpan!it !e $onne heure# hors !e son !omaine primitif# continua V s0Eten!re mWme aprUs la chute !e l0empire politiQue !0AthUnes et finit par em$rasser tout le mon!e sur le nom !e lan ue commune 3 4= 3Ph nLtiJue, p. 164. 1n# yet the c mm n pe p,e un#erst # ' mer a,s as ,ate as Men ph n. %&. Men ph n, % m. 3, (, !! "#$ !% &#'. %&. 0 ttich, :e "erm. Au,g. 1ttic., 1881. @n the <!r wth & the 1ttic :ia,ect= see /uther& r#, $ew Phrynichus, pp. 131. Kretschmer

!ialect. 1retschmer hol!s# it is fair to say# that the is 4eine merkw2r!i e @ischun %erschie!enster ;ialecte5 (op. cit.# p. :*. He puts all the !ialects into the meltin &pot in almost eQual proportions. -ilamowit>&@Xllen!orff consi!ers the Ionic as the chief influence in the # while -. 6chmi!t !enies all ;oric an! Ionic elements. 6chwy>er ri htly sees that the !ialectical influences %arie! in !ifferent places# thou h the %ernacular Attic was the common $ase. (b) 'ATE A' THE ATHER ;IA)ECT6. The triumph of the Attic was not complete# thou h in Ionia# at the en! of the thir! century B.C.# inscriptions in Attic are foun!# showin that in Asia @inor pure Ionic ha! a$out %anishe!. In the first century B.C. the Attic appears in inscriptions in BYotia# $ut as late as the secon! century A.;. Ionic inscriptions are foun! in Asia @inor. Ionic first went !own# followe! $y the Oolic. The ;oric ma!e a %ery stu$$orn resistance. It was only natural that the a ricultural communities shoul! hol! out lon est. 6ee Thum$# Hellen.# p. .< f. E%en to&!ay the Faconian patois of mo!ern Greek %ernacular has preser%e! the ol! )aconic ;oric 4whose $roa! a hol!s its roun! still in the speech of a race imper%ious to literature an! prou!ly conser%ati%e of a lan ua e that was always a$normal to an e"treme.5, It is not surprisin that the Northwest Greek# $ecause of the city lea ues# $ecame a kin! of AchZan&;orian . an! hel! on till almost the $e innin of the Christian era $efore it was mer e! into the of the whole GrZco&Roman worl!.3 There are un!ou$te!ly instances of the remains of the Northwest Greek an! of the other !ialects in the an! so in the N. T. The Ionic# so near to the Attic an! ha%in flourishe! o%er the coast of Asia @inor# woul! naturally ha%e consi!era$le influence on the Greek worl!&speech. The proof of this will appear in the !iscussion of the where remains of all the main !ialects are naturally foun!# especially in the %ernacular.7
K/.6"%'8./, P., ;ie Einl. in !ie Geschichte !er riech. 6prache 319)64. 777, ;ie Entstehun !er 3"itE. ;er. #. 5ien. 1ka#., 19))4. 777, ;ie riech. Gaseninschriften ihrer 6prache nach untersucht 318944. 5i,am witE+8N,,en# r&& 52018@526D+8O00.$:@/II, B. H@$, ;ie riech. )iteratur !es Altertums (;ie 1ult. !. Ge enw. , 19)7, 6,. 2, 1;t. Aiii, pp. 3238. 3. 1u&,. 19124. 777, H$er !ie Entstehun !er riech. 6chriftsprachen 3Gerf. !eutscher Phil. un! 6chulm. , 1879, pp. 36414. "chmi#t "%'82:6, 5., ;e 'la%ii 9osephi elocutione 318944. 1 8 u,t n, Pr ,., p. 32. 2 2;., p. 37. 3 /a#ermacher 3$. 6. !r., p. 14 puts it c,ear,y> <Es en2 t >u sa en# !aD !ie st?rksten Fusammenhan mit !em Attischen# in >weiter )inie mit !em Ionischen# %err?t. In !er ?ltesten Perio!e !es Hellenismus >ei t sich !ane$en erin er EinfluD an!erer ;ialekte# !es ;orischen un! Iolischen.= 4 <Il est V peine $esoin !e rEpEter Que ces caractUres s0effacent# V mesure Que l0on !escen! %ers l0Ure chrEtienne. 6ous l0influence sans cesse ran!issante !e l0atticisme# il s0Eta$lit une sorte

(c) PARTIA) 1AINE6. The stan!ar!i>in of the Attic is the real $asis. The was not a su!!en creation. There were quasi-koines $efore Ale"an!er0s !ay. These were 6tra$o0s alliance of Ionic&Attic# ;oric&Oolic (Thum$# Handb.# p. 7M*. It is therefore to $e remem$ere! that there were 4%arious forms of 5 $efore the which commence! with the conQuests of Ale"an!er (Buck# k. Dialects# pp. ,87P,:,*# as ;oric # Ionic # Attic # Northwest . Hy$ri! forms are not uncommon# such as the ;oric future with Attic as in #! (cf. Buck# p. ,:N*. There was $esi!es a re%i%al here an! there of local !ialects !urin the Roman times. (d) E''ECT6 A' A)ECAN;ER06 CA@PAIGN6. But for the conQuests of Ale"an!er there mi ht ha%e $een no in the sense of a worl!&speech. The other Greek koines were partial# this alone was a worl!&speech $ecause Ale"an!er unite! Greek an! Persian# east an! west# into one common worl!&empire. He respecte! the customs an! lan ua e of all the conQuere! nations# $ut it was ine%ita$le that the Greek shoul! $ecome the lingua !ranca of the worl! of Ale"an!er an! his successors. In a true sense Ale"an!er ma!e possi$le this new epoch in the history of the Greek ton ue. The time of Ale"an!er !i%i!es the Greek lan ua e into two perio!s. 4The first perio! is that of the separate life of the !ialects an! the secon! that of the speech&unity# the common speech or 5 (1retschmer# Die Entst. d. # p. ,*. (e) THE @ARCH TA-AR; /NIGER6A)I6@. The successors of Ale"an!er coul! not stop the march towar! uni%ersalism that ha! $e un. The success of the Roman Empire was $ut another proof of this tren! of history. The !ays of ancient nationalism were o%er an! the was $ut one e"pression of the lacial mo%ement. The time for the worl!&speech ha! come an! it was rea!y for use. III. The Spread of the . (a) A -AR);&6PEECH. -hat is calle! was a worl!&speech# not merely a eneral Greek ton ue amon the Greek tri$es as was true of the AchZan&;orian an! the Attic. It is not speculation to speak of the as a worl!&speech# for the inscriptions in the testify to its sprea! o%er Asia# E ypt# Greece# Italy# 6icily an! the isles of the sea# not to mention the papyri. @arseilles was a reat centre of Greek ci%ili>ation# an! e%en Cyrene# thou h not Cartha e# was Greci>e!., The was in such eneral use that the Roman 6enate an! imperial o%ernors ha! the !ecrees translate! into the worl!&lan ua e an! scattere! o%er the empire.. It is si nificant that the Greek speech $ecomes one instea! of many !ialects at the %ery time that the Roman rule sweeps o%er the worl!.3 The lan ua e sprea! $y Ale"an!er0s army o%er the Eastern worl! persiste!
!0uniformitE.= B isacJ, )es ;ial. ;or., 1891, p. 2)4. <6he !k. & the $. 6. is n t, h weAer, mere . 2n A ca;u,ary it is &un#amenta,,y 2 nic= 3? hn Burnet, /eA. & 6he ,. an# Phi,., 1ug., 19)6, p. 9(4. <Iun#amenta,,y= is rather str ng, ;ut "#%!, as am;assa# r, n t mere e9pe#iti n, ()* !, giAe s me c , ur t the statement. But what # es Pr &. Burnet mean ;y <mere =P Buck BB%K, %. :., 2ntr #ucti n t the "tu#y & the !reek :ia,ects 3191)4. 1 "ee %hurt n, 2n&,. & the 0MM Hers., 1861, p. 14. 2 Hiereck, 6ermo Graecus Quo 6enatus Popul. Rom. etc., 1888, p. 9i. 3 "ee 5i,am witE+8N,,en# r&&> 4In !emsel$en @omente# wo !ie c?sarische -eltmonarchie alle 6trXme hellenischer un! italischer 1ultur in einem Bette leitet# kommt !ie riechische 1unst auf allen Ge$ieten >u !er Erkenntnis# !aD ihre 1reise erf2llt sin!# !as ein>i e !as ihr

after the !i%ision of the kin !om an! penetrate! all parts of the Roman worl!# e%en Rome itself. Paul wrote to the church at Rome in Greek# an! @arcus Aurelius# the Roman Emperor# wrote his "editations (+ & ,%* in Greek. It was the lan ua e not only of letters# $ut of commerce an! e%ery&!ay life. A common lan ua e for all men may in!ee! $e only an i!eal norm# $ut 4the whole character of a common lan ua e may $e stren thene! $y the fact of its transference to an unQuestiona$ly forei n lin uistic area# as we may o$ser%e in the case of the Greek .5, The late )atin $ecame a for the -est as the ol! Ba$ylonian ha! $een for the East# this latter the first worl!&ton ue known to us.. Cenophon with the retreat of the Ten Thousan!3 was a forerunner of the . Both Cenophon an! Aristotle show the wi!er outlook of the literary Attic which uses Ionic wor!s %ery e"tensi%ely. There is now the 4GroD& Attisch.5 It alrea!y has )* -* ./!* 0# an! 1)* 23 an! 4/* 5!!!* /* !!* %. Alrea!y Thucy!i!es an! others ha! $orrowe! !! from the Ionic. It is an easy transition from the %ernacular Attic to the %ernacular after Ale"an!er0s time. (Cf. Thum$0s Handbuch# pp. 3=3P3<N# 4Entstehun !er .5* An the !e%elopment of the see further -ackerna el# Die #ultur der egen$art# Tl. I# A$t. <# p. 3N, ff.B @oulton# Prol.# ch. I# IIB @ayser# r. d. griech. Pap.# 1ap. I. But it was Ale"an!er who ma!e the later Attic the common lan ua e of the worl!# thou h certainly he ha! no such purpose in %iew. 'ortunately he ha! $een tau ht $y Aristotle# who himself stu!ie! in Athens an! knew the Attic of the time. 4He rapi!ly esta$lishe! Greek as the lingua !ranca of the empire# an! this it was which a%e the chief $on! of union to the many countries of ol! ci%ili>ations# which ha! hitherto $een
$lei$t# Nachahmun ist.5 H$er !ie Entst. !er riech. 6chriftspr.# A$han!l. !euts. Phil. , 1878, p. 4). 1 Pau,, Prin. & the 'ist. & 0ang., p. 496. "ee a,s Kaerst, !esch. #. he,,enist. Deita,t., 19)1, p. 42)> <;ie -eiterentwicklun !er Geschichte !es Altertums# so weit sie f2r unsere ei ene 1ultur entschei!en!e Be!eutun erlan t hat# $eruht auf einer fortschreiten!en Acci!entalisierun B auch !as im Ariente empor ekommene Christentum entfaltet sich nach !em -esten >u un! elan t hier >u seiner ei entlich welt eschichtlichen -irksamkeit .= 2 "chwyEer, ;ie -eltspr. etc., p. 7. 3 "ee 8aha&&y, Pr g. & 'e,,en. in 1,e9. .mp., p. 7G c&. a,s /uther& r# $ew Phrynichus, 1881, p. 16) &.G "chweiEer, Gr. !er per . Inschr., p. 16. 8 u,t n 3Pr ,., p. 314 p ints ut that the Aase+inscripti ns pr Ae the statement & the % nst. & 1thens, 11.3, that the 1thenians sp ke a ,anguage c mp un#e# & a,, !reek an# ;ar;arian t ngues ;esi#es. 5ackernage, 51%K./$1!.0, ?., ;as ;ehnun s eset> !er riech. K mp sita 318894. 777, ;ie hellenistische Gemeinsprache. 3;ie 1ult. !. Ge enwart, 6,. 2, 1;t. Aiii, 19)(, pp. 98 3)(4. 777, ;ie 6prache !es Plut. etc. 6ei,e 2, 22 3189(18964. 8ayser 81F"./, .., Grammatik !er riech. Papyri aus !er Ptolem?er>eit. )aut& un! -ortlehre 319)64.

isolate!. This unity of culture is the remarka$le thin in the history of the worl!.57 It was really an epoch in the worl!0s history when the $a$el of ton ues was hushe! in the won!erful lan ua e of Greece. The %ernaculars of the eastern Roman pro%inces remaine!# thou h the Greek was uni%ersalB so# when Paul came to )ystra# the people still spoke the )ycaonian speech of their fathers., The papyri an! the inscriptions pro%e $eyon! contro%ersy that the Greek ton ue was practically the same whether in E ypt# Herculaneum# Per amum or @a nesia. The Greeks were the school&teachers of the empire. Greek was tau ht in the rammar schools in the -est# $ut )atin was not tau ht in the East. (b) GERNAC/)AR AN; )ITERAR[. ,. %ernacular. The spoken lan ua e is ne%er i!entical with the literary style# thou h in the social intercourse of the $est e!ucate! people there is less !ifference than with the unculture!.. -e now know that the ol! Attic of Athens ha! a %ernacular an! a literary style that !iffere! consi!era$ly from each other.3 This !istinction e"ists from the %ery start with the # as is apparent in Per amum an! elsewhere.7 This %ernacular rows ri ht out of the %ernacular Attic normally an! naturally. 8 The colonists# merchants an! sol!iers who min le! all o%er Ale"an!er0s worl! !i! not carry literary Attic# $ut the lan ua e of social an! $usiness intercourse.: This %ernacular at first !iffere! little from the %ernacular Attic of 3NN B.C. an! always retaine! the $ulk of the oral Attic i!ioms. 4Gul ar !ialects $oth of the ancient an! mo!ern times shoul! $e e"pecte! to contain far more archaisms than inno%ations.5= The %ernacular is not a %ariation from the literary style# $ut the literary lan ua e is a !e%elopment from the %ernacular.< 6ee 6chmi!M for the relation $etween the literary an! the %ernacular . Hence if the %ernacular is the normal speech of the people# we must look to the inscriptions an! the papyri for the li%in i!iom of the common Greek or . The
4 8aha&&y, Pr g. & 'e,,en., etc., p. 4). 1 "chwyEer, 5e,tspr., p. 29. 2 "chweiEer, Gr. !er per . etc., p. 22. 3 "ee Kretschmer, ;ie riech. Gaseninschr. un! ihre 6pr., 1894G an# 8eisterhans, Gr. !er att. Inschr., 19)). %&. 0 ttich, :e "erm. Au,g. 1ttic., 1881. 4 "chweiEer, !r., p. 27. ( 6hum;, Griech. 6pr. im Feitalter etc., p. 2)8 &. 0 ttich in his :e "erm. Au,g. 1ttic. sh ws &r m the writings & 1rist phanes h w the 1ttic Aernacu,ar Aarie# in a num;er & p ints &r m the ,iterary sty,e, as in the &reJuent use & #iminutiAes, #esi#eratiAe Aer;s, metaph rs, etc. 6 "chweiEer, !r., p. 23. 7 !e,#art, 8 #. !k. 0ang. in its /e,a. t 1nc. !k., 187), p. 73. "ee a,s 6hum;, !riech. "pr. etc., p. 1), wh ca,,s <!ie weni er ein A$schluD als ! er Anfan einer neuen Entwicklun .= @n the ,#er !k. see 5ackernage,, ;ie 1ult. !er Ge enw.# Tl. I# A$t. 8, p. 3)) &. 8 :eissmann, 'e,,. !riech., 'auckCs /ea,encyc., p. 633. "chmi# "%'82:, 5., ;er Atticismus in seinen Haupt%ertretern. 7 B!e. 3188718974.

pure Attic as it was spoken in Athens is preser%e! only in the inscriptions., In the Roman Empire the %ernacular woul! $e un!erstoo! almost e%erywhere from 6pain to Pontus. 6ee IG for further remarks on the %ernacular . .. &iterar'. If the %ernacular was the natural !e%elopment of the %ernacular Attic# the literary was the normal e%olution of the literary Attic. Thum$ well says# 4-here there is no !e%elopment# there is no life.5. 4In style an! synta" the literary Common Greek !i%er es more wi!ely from the colloQuial.53 This is natural an! in harmony with the pre%ious remo%al of the literary Attic from the lan ua e of the people.7 The rowth of the literary was parallel with that of the popular an! was# of course# influence! $y it. The first prose monument of literary Attic known to us# accor!in to 6chwy>er# is the Constitution of Athens8 ($efore 7,3*# falsely ascri$e! to Cenophon. The forms of the literary are much like the Attic# as in Poly$ius# for instance# $ut the chief !ifference is in the %oca$ulary an! meanin of the same wor!s.: Poly$ius followe! the eneral literary spirit of his time# an! hence was rich in new wor!s# a$stract nouns# !enominati%e %er$s# new a!%er$s.= He an! 9osephus therefore use! Ionic wor!s foun! in Hero!otus an! Hippocrates# like 4!* #67# not $ecause they consciously imitate! these writers# $ut $ecause the # as shown $y papyri an! inscriptions# employe! them.< 'or the same reason )uke an! 9osephusM ha%e similar wor!s# not $ecause of use of one $y the other# $ut $ecause of common knowle! e of literary terms# )uke also usin many common me!ical terms natural to a physician of culture. -riters like Poly$ius aime! to write without pe!antry an! without %ul arism. In a true sense then the literary was a 4compromise $etween the %ernacular an! the literary Attic#5 $etween 4life an! school.5,N There is in!ee! no Chinese wall $etween the literary an! the %ernacular # $ut a constant inflow from the %ernacular to the written style as $etween prose an! poetry# thou h Farncke, insists on a thorou h& oin !istinction $etween them. The literary woul! not# of course#
9 1tticismus, B#. 2H, pp. (77734. 1 Aery imp rtant treatment & the wh ,e Juesti n is here giAen. 1 'irt, Han!$. !er riech. )aut& un! 'ormenl., 19)2, p. 41. 2 !riech. "pr., p. 2(1. 3 8 u,t n, Pr ,., p. 26. 4 ?annaris, 'ist. !k. !r., p. (. :eissmann 3$ew 0ight n the $. 6., 19)7, p. 3 &.4 sh ws that part & $ r#enCs criticism & Pau,Cs !k. is n thing ;ut the c ntrast ;etween ,iterary an# Aernacu,ar G c&. ;ie ant. 1unstpr. ( "chwyEer, ;ie -eltspr. !er Alt., p. 1(. "ee a,s %hrist, Gesch. !er riech. )it., p. 3)(. "ee ;ie pseu!o"enophontische 89/ :, A n .. Ka,inka, 1913. 6 "chweiEer, !r., p. 21. 7 %hrist, op. cit., p. (88. 8 6hum;, !riech. "pr. etc., p. 213. "ee a,s ! etEe,er, :e P ,y;. ., c., 1887, p. 1(. 9 6hum;, i;., p. 22( &. "ee a,s Krenke,, 9osephus un! )ukas, 1894, pp. 283 &&. 1) 6hum;, i;., p. 8.

use such !ialectical forms as ; #* ' #6)# etc.# common in the %ernacular .. But# as 1rum$acher3 well shows# no literary speech worthy of the name can ha%e an in!epen!ent !e%elopment apart from the %ernacular. Besi!es Poly$ius an! 9osephus# other writers in the literary were ;io!orus# Philo# Plutarch# thou h Plutarch in!ee! is almost an 4Anh?n er !es Atticismus57 an! 9osephus was rather self& conscious in his use of the literary style.8 The literary was still affecte! $y the fact that many of the writers were of 4un&Greek or half Greek !escent#5 Greek $ein an acQuire! ton ue.: But the point must not $e o%er!one# for the literary 4was written $y cosmopolitan scholars for rea!ers of the same sort#5 an! it !i! not make much !ifference 4whether a $ook was written at Ale"an!ria or Per amum.5= R a!ermacher< notes that# while in the ol!est Greek there was no artificiality e%en in the written prose# yet in the perio! of the all the literary prose shows 4eine 1unstsprache.5 He applies this rule to Poly$ius# to Philo# to the N. T.# to Epictetus. But certainly it !oes not hol! in the same manner for each of these. (c) THE ATTICI6TIC REACTIAN. Athens was no lon er the centre of Greek ci%ili>ation. That lory passe! to Ale"an!ria# to Per amum# to Antioch# to Ephesus# to Tarsus. But the reat creati%e epoch of Greek culture was past. Ale"an!ria# the chief seat of Greek learnin # was the home# not of poets# $ut of critics of style who foun! fault with Cenophon an! Aristotle# $ut coul! not pro!uce an (nabasis or a Rhetoric. The Atticists wrote# to $e sure# in the perio!# $ut their a>e was always $ackwar! to the pre& perio!. The rammarians (;ionysius# Phrynichus# @oeris* set up Thucy!i!es an! Plato as the stan!ar!s for pure Greek style# while Aratus an! Callimachus sou ht to re%i%e the style of Homer# an! )ucian an! Arrian, e%en imitate!
Darncke D1/$%K., .., ;ie Entstehun !er riech. )iteratursprachen 3189)4. 1 Darncke in !riech. "tu#., 'ermann 0ipsius, 1894, p. 121. 'e c nsi#ers the ' meric p etry a re&,ecti n & the sti,, ,#er hist rica, pr se an# the epic the ,#est ,iterary & rm. "ee his ;ie Entst. !er riech. )iteraturspr., 1896. %&. 5i,am witE+8N,,en# r&&, ;ie Entst. !er riech. 6chriftspr.# Gerhan!l. !. Phil., 1878, p. 36 &. 2 'atEi#akis, Einl. in !ie neu r. 6pr., p. 6. 3 ;as Pro$. !er neu r. 6chriftspr., 19)3, p. 6. 1 Aa,ua;,e treatment & this p int. 4 5eissen;erger, ;ie 6pr. Plut. %on Ch?ronea, 189(, pp. 3, 11. ( ? s., 1nt., M2H, i, 1. 6 "usemih,, Gesch. !er riech. )it. in !er Ale"an!rien>eit# ,. B!. , 1891, p. 2. 7 %r iset, 1n 1;r. 'ist. & !k. 0it., 19)4, p. 42(. /a#ermacher /1:./81%'./, 0., Neut. Grammatik. ;as Griechisch !es N. T. im Fusammenhan mit !er Golkssprache 319114. 8 $. 6. !r., p. 2. 1 1 sharp #istincti n as a ru,e must ;e ma#e ;etween the ,anguage & 1rrian an# .pict. 6he !k. & .pict. as rep rte# ;y 1rrian, his pupi,, is a g # representatiAe & the Aern. & an e#ucate# man. 1rrianCs intr #ucti n is Juite 1tticistic, ;ut he aims t repr #uce .pictetusC wn w r#s as &ar as p ssi;,e.

Hero!otus. -hen they wishe! to imitate the past# the pro$lem still remaine! which master to follow. The Ionic re%i%al ha! no reat %o ue# $ut the Attic re%i%al ha!. )ucian himself took to Attic. Athers of the Atticists were ;ionysius of Halicarnassus# ;io Chrysostom# Aristi!es# Hero!es Atticus# Olian# etc. 4They assume! that the limits of the Greek lan ua e ha! $een fore%er fi"e! !urin the Attic perio!.5. 6ome of the pe!antic !eclaimers of the time# like Polemon# were thou ht to put ;emosthenes to the $lush. These purists were oppose! to chan e in lan ua e an! sou ht to check the !eparture from the Attic i!iom. 4The purists of to&!ay are like the ol! Atticists to a hair.53 The Atticists were then archaic an! anachronistic. The mo%ement was rhetorical therefore an! not confine! either to Ale"an!ria or Per amum. The conflict $etween the (%ernacular an! literary* an! this Atticistic reaction affecte! $oth to some e"tent.7 This stru le $etween 4archaism an! life5 is ol! an! sur%i%es to&!ay.8 The Atticists were in fact out of harmony with their time#: an! not like ;ante# who chose the lan ua e of his people for his immortal poems. They ma!e the mistake of thinkin that $y imitation they coul! restore the ol! Attic style. 4The effort an! e"ample of these purists# too# thou h critici>e! at first# ra!ually $ecame a sort of moral !ictatorship# an! so has $een tacitly if not >ealously o$eye! $y all su$seQuent scri$es !own to the present time.5= As a result when one compares N. T. Greek#< one must $e careful to note whether it is with the $ook Greek (96 !* or the %ernacular (<=*. This artificial reactionary mo%ement# howe%er# ha! little effect upon the %ernacular as is witnesse! $y the spoken Greek of to&!ay. ConseQuently it is a ne li i$le Quantity in !irect influence upon the writers of the N. T., But the Atticists !i! ha%e a real influence upon the literary $oth as to wor!&formation. an! synta".3 -ith ;ionysius of Halicarnassus $eauty was the chief element of style# an! he hope! that the Attic re%i%al woul! !ri%e out the Asiatic influence.7 The whole mo%ement was a stron reaction a ainst what was terme! 4Asianism5 in the lan ua e.8 It is not surprisin therefore that the later ecclesiastical literary Greek was lar ely un!er the influence of the Atticists.
2 " ph c,es, 0e9., p. 6. 1thenQus 1(. 2 sai#> > 6 ?!* (@ ? + )6=/ /6%6. 3 6hum;, !riech. "pr. etc., p. 18). @n 1tticism in the see 5ackernage,, ;ie 1ult. !er Ge enw.# Tl. I# A$t. 8, p. 3)9. 4 $ r#en, ;ie riech. 1unstpr. $is Au .# B!. 2, 1898, p. 1(). ( 6hum;, i;., p. 8. 6 2;., p. 2(2 &. 7 ?annaris, 'ist. !k. !r., p. 7. 8 8 u,t n, Pr ,., p. 26. 6he #icti n & 1rist phanes is interesting as a specimen & Aarieties & speech & the time. %&. ' pe, 6he 0ang. & Par #yG a "tu#y in the :icti n & 1rist phanes 319)64. /a#ermacher 3$. 6. !k., p. 34 h ,#s that we must eAen n te the <$ar$arisches Griechisch= & writers ,ike ? hn Phi, p n s an# Pr c, s. 1 "chmi#, ;er Atticismus etc.# B!. 2H, p. (78. 2 2;., p. 6)6 &. 3 6rNger, ;er 6prach e$. in !er pseu!olon . 6chr.# ,<MM# Tl. 2, p. 61.

4Now there was $ut one rammar\ Attic. It was Attic rammar that e%ery freeman# whether hi hly or poorly e!ucate!# ha! learne!.5: 4This purist conspiracy5 9annaris calls it. The main thin with the Atticists was to ha%e somethin as ol! as Athens. 6tra$o sai! the style of ;io!orus was properly 4antiQue.5= IV. The Characteristics of the Vernacular . (a) GERNAC/)AR ATTIC THE BA6E. Ane must not feel that the %ernacular Greek is unworthy of stu!y. 4The fact is that# !urin the $est !ays of Greece# the reat teacher of Greek was the common people.5< There was no %iolent $reak $etween the %ernacular Attic an! the %ernacular # $ut the one flowe! into the other as a li%in stream.M If the rei n of the separate! !ialects was o%er# the power of the one eneral Greek speech ha! +ust $e un on the heels of Ale"an!er0s %ictories. The $attle of ChZronea $roke the spirit of the ol! Attic culture in!ee!# $ut the Athenians athere! up the treasures of the past# while Ale"an!er opene! the floo!& ates for the chan e in the lan ua e an! for its sprea! o%er the worl!., 4-hat# howe%er# was loss to stan!ar! Attic was ain to the ecumenical ton ue. The lan ua e in which Hellenism e"presse! itself was eminently practical# $etter fitte! for life than for the schools. Anly a cosmopolitan speech coul! comport with Hellenistic cosmopolitanism. Grammar was simplifie!# e"ceptions !ecrease! or enerali>e!# fle"ions !roppe! or harmoni>e!# construction of sentences ma!e easier5 (An us# Prince. Rev.# 9an.# ,M,N# p. 83*. The $e innin of the !e%elopment of the %ernacular is not perfectly clear# for we see rather the complete! pro!uct.. But it is in the later Attic that lies $ehin! the . The optati%e was ne%er common in
4 "chmi#, i;., B#. 2, pp. 17, 2(. "ee B#. 2H, pp. (77734, & r Aery Aa,ua;,e summary & this wh ,e su;Kect. ( $ r#en, ;ie riech. 1unstpr.# ,<M<. ,. B!., p. 149. " B,ass ca,,s it 4 leich>eiti e atticistische Reaction e en !ie asianische Bere!samkeit.5 ;ie riech. Bere!samkeit etc. %on Ale". $is Au ., 186(, p. 77. 6 ?annaris, op. cit., p. 11. "ee a,s IritE, ;ie Briefe !es Bischofs 6ynesius %on 1yrene. Ein Beitr. >ur Gesch. !es Att. im 7. un! 8. 9ahrh., 1898. 7 "tra; , 13. 4, 9. 8 " ph c,es, 0e9. & / m. an# ByE. Peri #, p. 11. 9 :eissmann, ;ie sprachl. Erforsch. etc., p. 11. /uther& r# 3$ew Phryn., p. 24 says that <the #e;ase# & rms an# mi9e# A ca;u,ary & the c mm n #ia,ect w u,# haAe struck the c ntemp raries & 1rist phanes an# P,at as ,itt,e ;etter than Karg n & the "cythian p ,icemen.= @n the & rm & the see 5ackernage,, Ku,t. etc., 6,. 2, 1;t. 8, p. 3)(. 1 %hrist, Gesch. !er riech. )it., 19)(, p. ()9 &. I r <the 1ttic gr un#+character & the = see 8ayser, Gr. !er riech. Pap. 319)6, p. 14. 1ngus 1$!B", "., 8 #ern 8eth #s in $ew 6estament Phi, , gy 3'arAar# 6he ,. /eA., @ct., 19)94. 777, 6he , the 0anguage & the $ew 6estament 3Princ. 6he ,. /eA., ?an., 191)4. 2 Kai;e,, 6til un! Te"t !er 89/ , p. 37.

the %ernacular Attic an! is a %anishin Quantity in the . The !isappearance of the !ual was alrea!y comin on an! so was the limite! use of the superlati%e# ./! instea! of ./# an! .!9/! instea! of .!9/* )* !!* 0#* instea! of #%6* 4! an! not 6.3 But while the Attic forms the roun!&form7 of the it must not $e for otten that the was resultant of the %arious forces an! must $e +u! e! $y its own stan!ar!s.8 There is not complete unanimity of opinion concernin the character of the %ernacular . 6teinthal: in!ee! calle! it merely a le%elle! an! !e$ase! Attic# while -ilamowit>= !escri$e! it as more properly an Ionic popular i!iom. 1retschmer< now (wron ly# I think* conten!s that the Northwest Greek# Ionic an! BYotian ha! more influence on the than the Attic. The truth seems to $e the position of Thum$#M that the %ernacular is the result of the min lin with all !ialects upon the late Attic %ernacular as the $ase. As $etween the ;oric A an! the Ionic the %ernacular follows the Attic usa e# an! this fact alone is !ecisi%e., ; ieterich. in!ee! sums up se%eral points as $elon in to the 4Attic 5 such as %er$s in ./ instea! of .# in ./! instea! of ./ in contract imperfects# !isuse of the temporal an! the sylla$ic au ment in composition# !isuse of re!uplication# . instea! of . in acc. sin . of a!+s. in .* . instea! of . in en. sin . of thir! !eclension# . instea! of . in proper names# !isuse of the Attic !eclension# . for . in accusati%e plural# % as relati%e pronoun# B as possessi%e pronoun. But clearly $y 4Attic 5 he means the resultant Attic# not the Attic as !istinct from the other !ialects.
3 B,ass, !r. & $. 6. !k., p. 3. .Aen in the ,iterary the #ua, is near,y g ne, as in P ,y;ius an# :i # rus "icu,usG c&. "chmi#t, ;e ;uali Graec. et Emor. et Re%i%., 1893, pp. 22, 2(. 4 !Ntt. !e,.+1nE., 189(, p. 3) &.G 'atEi#akis, Einl. in !ie neu r. Gr., p. 168 &.G Krum;acher, ByE. 0it., p. 789. ( 4;ie Erforschun !er hat lan e enu unter !em Gesichtswinkel !es L1lassicismus0 estan!en.5 Thum$# Griech. 6pr. etc., p. 1). "teintha, "6.2$6'10, '., Geschichte !er 6prachwiss. $ei !en Griech. un! RXmern. .. Aufl. 3189)18914. 777, 2ntr #ucti n t the Psych , gy an# "cience & 0anguage 319))4. 6 Gesch. !er 6prachw., 22, p. 37 &. 7 Gerhan!l. !er 3.. phil. Gersamml., p. 4). 8 -ochenschr. f2r klass. Philol., 1899, p. 3G ;ie Entst. !er , 19)). 9 Op. cit., pp. (31)1, 2)2 &. 1 8 u,t n, Pr ,., p. 33 &. :ieterich :2.6./2%', K., /ntersuchun en >ur Geschichte !er 6prache %on !er hellen. Feit $is >um 1). ?ahrh. n. %hr. 318984. 2 /nters. >ur Gesch. !. riech. 6pr., 1898, p. 2(8 &.

Besi!es the ortho raphy is Attic (cf. B/# not C* an! the $ulk of the inflections an! con+u ations likewise# as can $e seen $y comparison with the Attic inscriptions.3 6chla eter7 sums the mutter up\ 4The Attic foun!ation of the is to& !ay enerally a!mitte!.5 (b) THE ATHER ;IA)ECT6 IN THE . But 1retschmer8 is clearly wron in sayin that the is neither Attic nor !ecaye! Attic# $ut a mi"ture of the !ialects. He compares the mi"ture of !ialects in the to that of the hi h# mi!!le an! low German. The Attic itself is a out of Ionic# Oolic an! ;oric. The mi"e! character of the %ernacular is ma!e plain $y 6chwei>er: an! ;ieterich.= )he *onic shows its influence in the presence of forms like &* !#6* &'* .* 9D 4 (cf. vetus*# E!=* F=/* 55=/* F6!=* .G* .GB a$sence of the rou h $reathin (psilosis or !e&aspiration# Oolic also*B !roppin of in %er$s like +H 93 IF3J* =!!6* #6!!/ for #6/ (Attic also*# etc. Ionic wor!s like K%79 (Hero!.* instea! of Attic 6K%79 occur. Cony$eare an! 6tock (+el. !ro, &--# p. 7<* su est that Homer was use! as a te"t&$ook in Ale"an!ria an! so cause! Ionisms like !#6 in the . The sprea! of the Ionic o%er the East was to $e e"pecte!. In Ale"an!er0s army many of the Greek !ialects were represente!.< In the E yptian army of the Ptolemies nearly all the !ialects were spoken.M The Ionians were# $esi!es# part of the Greeks who settle! in Ale"an!ria. , Besi!es# e%en after the triumph of the Attic in Greece the Ionic ha! continue! to $e spoken in lar e parts of Asia @inor. The Ionic influence appears in Per amum also. The mi"in of the Attic with forei n# $efore all with Ionic# elements# has lai! the foun!ation for the .. )he .olic makes a poor showin # $ut can $e trace! especially in Per amum# where 6chwei>er consi!ers it one of the elements of the
3 8eisterhans, Gr. !er Att. Inschr. "ch,ageter "%'01!.6./, ?., ;er -ortschat> !. auDerhal$ Attikas efun!enen Inschriften 319124. 777, Fur )aut& un! 'ormenlehre !. auD. Att. ef. attischen Inschr. 319)84. 4 ;er -ortsch. !er auDerhal$ Attikas efun!enen att. Inschr. , 1912. ( -ochenschr. f2r klass. Phil., 1899, p. 9Aii. 6 Gr. !er per . Inschr., p. 2)1 &. 7 /nters. >ur Gesch. etc., p. 2(9 &. % ny;eare an# "t ck %@$FB.1/. an# "6@%K, "e,ecti ns &r m the 0MM. 1 !rammatica, 2ntr #ucti n 319)(4. 8 1rrian, 22, 2). (. 9 8yer, ;as Heerwesen !er Ptolem?er un! RXmer in I ypten , 19)). 1 '. 1nE, 6u$si!ia a! co noscen!um Graec. 6erm. %ul . etc., 1894, p. 386. 8ayser, !r., pp. 924, &in#s numer us 2 nic pecu,iarities in the Pt ,emaic pap. &ar m re than R ,ic an# : ric. 'e cites ./!* F6* 4!/* 4* %6=/* ))) L/* #69* =!!6* 4#/, etc. @n the 2 nic an# ther n n+1ttic e,ements in the see 5ackernage,, Ku,t., p. 3)6 &.

lan ua e with a lar e in+ection of the Ionic.3 Oolic has the for in proper names an! forms in . BYotian&Oolic uses the en!in .!# as BF!# so common in the )CC. @oulton7 points out that this en!in is %ery rare in the papyri an! is foun! chiefly in the )CC. He calls BYotian&Oolic also 4the monophthon i>in of the !iphthon s.5 In the Attic an! the Ionic the open soun! of pre%aile!# while in the BYotian the close!. In the the two pronunciations e"iste! to ether till the close! triumphe!. Psilosis is also Ionic. )he Doric appears in forms like % I3J* % I3J* #L/ I#=L/J* 2!# M* %* % #* "=/6* 5 I65JB an! in the pronunciation perhaps 5* )* ha! the ;oric softer soun! as in the mo!ern Greek %ernacular. But# as @oulton8 ar ues# the %ernacular comes to us now only in the written form# an! that was un!ou$te!ly chiefly Attic. )he (rcadian !ialect possi$ly contri$utes "7=/# since it has "73!9# $ut this form occurs in ;oric an! Ionic also.: Cf. also the chan e of en!er % ()uke* an! $ # (Paul*. )he /orth$est reek contri$ute! forms like "6F%* ; =)* ? (1 cf. @essenian an! )es$ian also*# N63 (like Ionic*# BF! (cf. BYotian*# =. The accusati%e plural in . is %ery common in the papyri# an! some N. T. @66. i%e =!!6 for =!!6.= The AchZan&;orian ha! resiste! in Northwest Greece the inroa!s of the common Greek for a century or so. )he "acedonian reek# spoken $y many of Ale"an!er0s sol!iers# naturally ha! %ery sli ht influence on the . -e know nothin of the ol! @ace!onian Greek. Poly$ius, says that the Illyrians nee!e! an interpreter for @ace!onian. 6tur>. in!ee! i%es a list of @ace!onian wor!s foun! in the # as O!#* 6!* #65* P . But he also inclu!es "))=/] The @ace!onians apparently use! 5 instea! of 7 as 5##* Q9 as * !Q5 as !=696. Plutarch3 speaks of Ale"an!er an! his sol!iers speakin to each other
2 Kai;e,, 6til un! Te"t etc., p. 37. 3 !r. #. perg. 2nschr., p. 2)2. 4 Pr ,., p. 33. 6he cauti n & Psichari 3Essais !e Gr. Hist. NEo& rQ.# .Ume E!., 1889, p. c9,i94 is t ;e n te#, that the Aernacu,ar is n t necessari,y #ia,ectica,, ;ut <!estinEe au peuple et %enait !u peuple.= %&. n R ,ic e,ements, 8ayser, !r., p. 9. 'e cites % in the pap.G R% is a,s R ,ic. ( Pr ,., p. 34. 6 8 u,t n, i;., p. 38, n. 3. I r : ric e,ements in the pap. see 8ayser, !r., p. ( &. 7 5. '., 2ntr. t the !k. $. 6., 1pp., p. 1(). 1 P ,y;ius, 28. 8, 9. 2 ;e ;ial. Ale"an. etc., 1786, p. (6 &.G see a,s ;e ;ial. @ace!onica et Ale"an., 18)8, pp. 37, 42G 8aittaire, Graecae )in . ;ial. 6tur>ii, 18)7, p. 184G " ph c,es, 0e9. & / m. an# ByE. Peri #, p. 3. "chweiEer, Gr. !er per . Inschr., p. 27, sees Aery ,itt,e in the 8ace# nian in&,uence. 3 2, (92 B, 694 %. Kenne#y 3" urces & $. 6. !k., p. 174 says> <2n any case, the 8ace# nian type & !reek, whether r n t it is a#missi;,e t ca,, it a specia, dialect, was s &ar rem Ae# &r m r#inary 1ttic as t make it certain that the ,atter n 8ace# nian ,ips must s n an# ineAita;,y su&&er th r ugh+g ing m #i&icati n.=

S!. 'or full !iscussion of the @ace!onian !ialect see A. Hoffmann# ;ie @ake!onen# ihre 6prache un! Golkstum# ,MN:# pp. .3.P.88. (c) NAN&;IA)ECTICA) CHANGE6. It is not always possi$le to separate the %arious peculiarities of the into !ialectical influences. 4-here @ace!onian# 6partan# BYotian# Athenian an! Thessalian were messmates a was ine%ita$le. Pronounce! !ialecticisms which woul! ren!er unintelli i$le or lu!icrous to others were !roppe!5 (see An us# Prince. )heol. Rev.# 9an.# ,M,N# p. :=*. The common $loo! itself went on chan in . It was a li%in whole an! not a mere artificial min lin of %arious elements. There is less !ifference in the synta" of the an! that of the earlier Greek than in the forms# thou h the ra!ual !isappearance of the optati%e# use of C an! finite %er$ in the non&final sense rather than the infiniti%e or e%en T# the ra!ual !isuse of the future part. may $e mentione!. It was in the finer sha!es of thou ht that a common %ernacular woul! fail to hol! its own. 4Any lan ua e which aspires to $e a Weltsprache (worl!& lan ua e*# as the Germans say# must sacrifice much of its !elicacy# its sha!es of meanin # e"presse! $y many synonyms an! particles an! tenses# which the forei ner in his hurry an! without contact with nati%es cannot $e e"pecte! to master.57 (d) NE- -AR;6# NE- 'AR@6 AR NE- @EANING6 TA A); -AR;6. Naturally most chan e is foun! either in new wor!s or in new meanin s in ol! wor!s# +ust as our En lish !ictionaries must ha%e new an! enlar e! e!itions e%ery ten years or so. This rowth in the %oca$ulary is ine%ita$le unless the life of a people stops. A thir!&century inscription in Thera# for instance# shows !)/) use! of a reli ious meetin # #6 (not the Attic =* for stran er# "#%! an! F! in their ol! senses like those Americanisms which preser%e Eli>a$ethan En lish (4fall5 for 4autumn#5 for instance*., Here are some further e"amples. It is har! to $e sure that all of these are wor!s that arose in the # for we cannot mark off a !efinite line of clea%a e. -e mention ")#* U)%* U)%* O9!* "9=!* "6#!#* "* "66* "96/#6!* "6* "%/ (an! many %er$s in .%/* .L/* .L/*# ")/* 5#! (many wor!s in .*# 5#!%*
' &&mann '@II81$$, @., ;as Pr?sens !er in!o . Grun!sprache 318894. 777, ;ie riechischen ;ialekte, 2222 3189118984. 777, ;ie @ake!onen# ihre 6prache un! ihr Golkstum 319)64. 777, Geschichte !. riech. 6prache 319114. 4 8aha&&y, "urAey & !k. %iAi,iEati n, p. 22). %&. !e,#art, 8 #. !k. 0ang. in its /e,a. t 1nc. !k., p. 73, & r #iscussi n & <the ,eAe,,ing ten#ency c mm n t a,, ,anguages.= 1 'icks, "t. Pau, an# 'e,,en., in "tu#. Bi;,. et .cc,., 1896, p. (. 8ayser 3!r. #. griech. Pap., pp. 243(4 giAes an interesting ,ist & w r#s that were chie&,y <p etica,= in the c,assic ,iterature, ;ut are c mm n in the papyri. 6he p ets &ten use the Aernacu,ar. " me & these w r#s are "=/6* 5563!/* =!* +* 2!!/* 26=#* 2#=/* 2#!/* 9#/* !=/* "* %#* Spe p,e, =6* N#* &6* #6* #6!7//* ! /* !=)* !/* V%. $ew & rms are giAen t ,# w r#s as #/ &r m &#/, etc. /amsay 3see 6he 2n#epen#ent, 1913, p. 3764 &in#s 25 / 3c&. % ,. 2>184 use# in the technica, sense & entering in n the part & initiates in the sanctuary & 1p ,, s at %,ar s in an inscripti n there.

5#!* )6)6=/ (cf. also !/*# !* 6* 6!* 2! * 2=/* 26L/* 9%* 9%#!* )* F=/* 65* 9 /* &!#%* E696L/* EW6* "W3* #6%!6* P7* !5 * 3* X9!* V##%* 77* Y# etc. )et these ser%e merely as e"amples. 'or others see the lists in ;eissmann0s 0ible +tudies1 &ight !ro, the (ncient East# @oulton an! @illi an0s 4)e"ical Notes on the Papyri5 (Expositor# ,MN<J*# -iner&6chmie!el (p. ..*# Thayer0s &exicon# (p. :M, f.*# Rutherfor!0s /e$ Phr'nichus# an! the in!ices to the papyri collections. Ane of the pressin nee!s is a le"icon of the papyri an! then of the as a whole. @any of these wor!s were alrea!y in the literary # thou h they pro$a$ly came from the %ernacular.. 6ome ol! wor!s recei%e! sli htly new forms# like "9 Lcurse0 ("9 Lofferin 0*# "#! I"#J* "#!! I"#%!!J* "66/ I"6%/J* 5!!! I5!J* )=! I)=9J* %/ I /J* F IFJ* !9#! I!9!J* %79 I6%79J* 9! I92!J* & I& %!J* E!% ITJ* E#! ITWJ* #F I# J* #676 I#676! J* PL/ IP/# cf. 5#L/* 5#/J* !/ I4!J* ' I'J* (an! many !iminuti%es in . which lose their force*# #6 (an! many !iminuti%es in .6*# 7! I7!J# etc. -or!s (ol! an! new* recei%e new meanin s# as "/ (Lrecline at ta$le0*. Cf. also "##/* "* "=)/ (Lspeak a ainst0*# "#69Z (passi%e not mi!!le# Lto answer0*# % (Le%il spirit#0 L!emon0*# + (Lhouse&top0*# 26// (L$e 0*# (F6!=/ (Lthank0*# 2#!=/ (Lwrite a letter0*# EW6 (Lfish0*# EW3 (Lwa es0*# #6=/ (Lentreat0*# #66! (Lconfi!ence0*# #6!# (L!istract0*# # / (Lchastise0*# #+ (Lcorpse0*# !)6/ (Lcompare0*# !F (Lschool0*# 79/ (Lcome0*# F6L/ (Lnourish0*# F6L/ (L$e calle!0*., This is all perfectly
8 u,t n an# 8i,,igan 8@B06@$ an# 82002!1$, 0e9ica, $ tes &r m the Papyri 36he .9p s., 19)874. 777, 6he H ca;u,ary & the $. 6. 2,,ustrate# &r m the Papyri an# ther $ n+0iterary " urces. Part 2 319144, 22, 222. 5iner+"chmie#e, 52$./+"%'82.:.0, 5inerCs Grammatik !es neutest. 6prachi!ioms. <. Aufl. 3189474. 6hayer 6'1F./, ?. '., !,ish 0e9ic n & the $. 6. 318874. 777, 0anguage & the $. 6. 3'astingsC :. B., 19))4. /uther& r# /B6'./I@/:, 5. !., 1 %hapter in the 'ist ry & 1nn tati n 319)(4. 777, 6he $ew Phrynichus 318814. 2 "ee 5.+"ch., p. 19, n. 8. 1 "ch,ageter 35 rtsch. etc., pp. (9624 giAes a g in the . # ,ist & w r#s with an ther meaning

natural. Anly we are to remem$er that the !ifference $etween the %oca$ulary an! the Attic literature is not the true stan!ar!. The %ernacular must $e compare! with the Attic %ernacular as seen in the inscriptions an! to a lar e e"tent in a writer like Aristophanes an! the comic poets. @any wor!s common in Aristophanes# ta$oo to the reat Attic writers# reappear in the . They were in the %ernacular all the time.. @oulton3 remarks that the %ernacular chan e! %ery little from the first century A.;. to the thir!. 4The papyri show throu hout the marks of a real lan ua e of !aily life# unspoilt $y the $lun!erin $ookishness which makes the later !ocuments so irritatin .5 It is +ust in the first century A.;. that the comes to its full lory as a worl!& lan ua e. 4The fact remains that in the perio! which a%e $irth to Christianity there was an international lan ua e5 (;eissmann# &ight !ro, the (ncient East# p. 8M*. It is not claime! that all the points as to the ori in of the are now clear. 6ee Hesselin # De koine en de oude dialekten van riechenland (,MN:*. But enou h is known to i%e an intelli i$le i!ea of this lan ua e that has playe! so reat a part in the history of man. (e) PRAGINCIA) IN')/ENCE6. 'or all practical purposes the Greek !ialects were fuse! into one common ton ue lar ely as a result of Ale"an!er0s conQuests. The Germanic !ialects ha%e one farther an! farther apart (German# ;utch# 6we!ish# Norwe ian# ;anish# En lish*# for no reat conQueror has arisen to $in! them into one. The lan ua e follows the history of the people. But the unification of the Greek was finally so ra!ical that 4the ol! !ialects to&!ay are mer e! into the eneral mass# the mo!ern folk&lan ua e is only a continuation of the unite!# Hellenistic# common speech.5, 6o completely !i! Ale"an!er !o his work that the $alance of culture !efinitely shifte! from Athens to the East# to Per amum# to Tarsus# to Antioch# to Ale"an!ria.. This 4union of oriental an! occi!ental was attempte! in e%ery city of -estern Asia. That is the most remarka$le an! interestin feature of Hellenistic history in the GrZco& Asiatic kin !oms an! cities.53 Prof. Ramsay a!!s\ 4In Tarsus the Greek Qualities an! powers were use! an! ui!e! $y a society which was# on the whole# more Asiatic in character.5 There were thus non&Greek influences which also entere! into the common Greek life an! lan ua e in %arious parts of the empire. Cf. 1. Holl# 4;as 'ortle$en !er Golkssprachen in nachchristlicher Feit5 (Her,es# ,MN<# 73# p. .7N*. These non&Greek
2 %&. Kenne#y, " ur. & $. 6. !k., pp. 7) &., 147. 3 %,. Tuar., 1pri,, 19)8, p. 137. 'esse,ing '."".02$!, :. %., ;e 1oine en !e ou!e !ialekten %an Griechenlan! 319)64. 1 Kretschmer, Einl. in !ie Gesch. etc., p. 417. 2 ?annaris, 'ist. !k. !r., p. 6. 6he mu,titu#in us m #. !k. patois i,,ustrate the . 3 5. 8. /amsay, 6arsus, .9p., 8ar., 19)6, p. 261. /amsay /18"1F, 5. 8., %ities an# Bish prics & Phrygia. 2 A ,s. 3189(, 18974. 777, "t. Pau, the 6raAe,,er 318964. ' ,, '@00, K., ;as 'ortle$en !er Golkssprachen in nachchristlicher Feit 3'ermes, 19)8, 43, pp. 243 &&.4. 'ermes Hermes, Feitschrift f2r klassische Philolo ie.

influences were especially noticea$le in Per amum# Tarsus an! Ale"an!ria# thou h percepti$le at other points also. But in the case of Phry ia lon $efore Ale"an!er0s conQuest there ha! $een !irect contact with the Arca!ian an! the Oolic !ialects throu h immi ration.7 The Greek inscriptions in the Hellenistic time were first in the ol! !ialect of Phry ia# then li!in into the # then finally the pure .8 Hence the won an easy %ictory in Per amum# $ut the !oor for Phry ian influence was also wi!e open. Thus# thou h the rests on the foun!ation of the Greek !ialects# some non& Greek elements were intermin le!.: ;ieterich= in!ee! i%es a special list of peculiarities that $elon to the of Asia @inor# as# for instance# . instea! of . in the accus. sin . of 3! !ecl.# proper names in G* for [!* [! for T* 0 for &# use of 9=/ rather than future tense. In the case of Tarsus 4a few traces of the ;oric !ialect may perhaps ha%e lin ere!5 in the # as Ramsay su ests (Expositor# ,MN:# p. 3,*# who also thinks that %6 for /%6 in Ac. ,M\38 in ; may thus $e e"plaine!. But no har! an! fast !istinction can $e !rawn# as . for . as accusati%e appears in E ypt also# e. . in 9)=6. Is it proper to speak of an Ale"an!rian !ialect^ Blass, says so# a reein with -iner&6chmie!el. ( 8M6=/ *. This is the ol! %iew# $ut we can har!ly i%e the name !ialect to the E yptian Greek. 1enne!y3 says\ 4In all pro$a$ility the lan ua e of the E yptian capital ha! no more ri ht to $e calle! a
4 "chweiEer, Gr. !er per . Inschr., pp. 1( &&. ( 2;., p. 2(. 6 Bruns, ;ie att. Bestre$un en in !er riech. )it., 1896, p. 12, says> <6tatt ihrer (classische attische 6prache* re iert ein emeines 1e$swei$# !as aus ir en! einer phry ischen 6pelunke stammtJ!as ist !er hellenistische 6til=U 1 s,ight e9aggerati n. %&. Brugmann, Herg,. !r., p. 9. 7 /ntersuch. >ur Gesch. etc., pp. 2(8 &&. 6he speech & 1sia 8in r has in#ee# c, se a&&inity with that & Pau, an# 0uke an# with a,, the $. 6. writers. %&. 6hieme, ;ie Inschr. %on @a n. am @?an!er un! !as N. T., 19)6. 1 !r. & $. 6. !k., 19)(, p. 3 n te. 2 Gr. !es neut. 6prachi!., V 3. 1, n. 4. Kenne#y K.$$.:F, '. 1. 1., /ecent /esearch in the 0anguage & the $. 6. 36he .9p s. 6., 9ii, 19)14. 777, " urces & $. 6. !reek 3189(4. 777, "t Pau, an# the 8ystery /e,igi ns 319134. 3 " ur. & $. 6. !k., 189(, p. 23. 2renQus 38inucius Pacatus4 an# :emetrius 29i n wr te treatises n <the #ia,ect & 1,e9an#ria= 3"wete, 2ntr. t the @. 6. in !k., p. 2894. But they pr ;a;,y #i# n t un#erstan# that the Aernacu,ar , which #i&&ere# &r m the ,iterary , was internati na, 36hackeray, !r. & the @. 6. in !k., A ,. 2, p. 194. <2t is certain that many & rms & this ,ater ,anguage were specia,,y characteristic & 1,e9an#ria= 3i;.4.

!ialect than the %ernacular of any other reat centre of population.5 6chwei>er7 likewise refuses to consi!er the Ale"an!rian as a !ialect. ;ieterich8 a ain i%es a list of E yptian peculiarities such as X instea! of X* . instea! of . in nominati%es of thir! !eclension# a!+ecti%es in . instea! of .* 2! for !* 9' for -!# imperfect an! aorist in .* 1 for ?# !isuse of au ment in simple %er$s# in!icati%e instea! of the su$+uncti%e. @ayser ( r. d. griech. Pap.# pp. 38P7N* i%es a list of 4E yptian wor!s5 foun! in the Ptolemaic papyri. They are wor!s of the soil# like ##6 itself. But Thum$: shows that the ma+ority of the so&calle! Ale"an!rian peculiarities were eneral in the like 19!* \F* )=)* @]6# etc. 4There was in!ee! a certain unwiel!iness an! capriciousness a$out their lan ua e# which !isplays itself especially in harsh an! fantastic wor!&composition.5 As e"amples of their wor!s may $e mentione! /L%* #6!))67* 796/#'# etc. It is to $e o$ser%e! also that the was not the %ernacular of all the peoples when it was spoken as a secon!ary lan ua e. In Palestine# for instance# Aramaic was the usual lan ua e of the people who coul! also# most of them# speak Greek. @oulton0s parallel of the %ariations in mo!ern En lish is not therefore true# unless you inclu!e also peoples like the -elsh# 6cotch# Irish# etc. But as a whole the %ernacular was a sin le lan ua e with only natural %ariations like that in the En lish of %arious parts of the /nite! 6tates or En lan!., Thum$ perhaps makes too much of a point out of the use of 2% rather than in Asia @inor in its $earin on the authorship of the Gospel of 9ohn where it occurs 7, times# once only in 3 9o. an! Re%. (37 times elsewhere in the N. T.*# thou h it is interestin to note# as he !oes# that the infiniti%e is still use! in Pontus. But there were non&Greek influences here an! there o%er the empire as Thum$. well shows. Thum$3 in!ee! hol!s that 4the Ale"an!rian popular speech is only one mem$er of a reat speech&!e%elopment.5
4 Gr. !er per . Inschr., p. 27. ( /nters. >ur Gesch. etc., pp. 2(8 &&. 6 ;ie riech. 6pr. etc., p. 168 &&. "ee a,s 1nE, "u;s. a# c gn s. !raec. "erm. Au,g. etc., 1891, p. 262. 4Nec Quae Apostoli!es homo !octus Ale"an!rinus nuperrime protulit omnes cali ines propulsa%erunt. Certe nemo +am e"istet Qui cum 6tur>io @ace!onicam !ialectum i$i Quaerat# se! altera e parte neminem puto +u!icare illam Quae %ul o appellatur !ialectum Ale"an!rinam solis %in!ican!am esse Ale"an!rinis.5 Cf. 6usemihl# )it. !er Ale"an!riner>eit . 1 "ir ? nathan 5i,,iams, an .ng. saAant, is Ju te# in the 0 uisAi,,e % urier+? urna, 38ay 9, 19)64 as saying> <2 haAe & un# in the city & 0 uisAi,,e a pr nunciati n an# a use & terms which is nearer, t my min#, t 1##is n an# the .ng,ish c,assicists than anything which the c unties & .ng,an#, the pr Ainces & 1ustra,ia, r the m rs & "c t,an# can &&er.= 'e a##e# that the purest .ng,ish kn wn t him is sp ken in .#in;urgh an# 0 uisAi,,e. 6hese tw cities, & r ge graphica, reas ns, are n t pr Aincia,. 2 !riech. "pr. etc., pp. 1)2161G Theol. )iteratur>eit., 19)3, p. 421G c&. a,s 8 u,t n, Pr ,. p. 4). 8 u,t n sets Aer against 2% the &act that ? hnCs ! spe, uses B rather than the in&initiAe s &ten. 8uch & the & rce & such an argument Aanishes a,s un#er the pers na, eJuati n. 3 !riech. "pr. etc., p. 171. %&. a,s Dahn, Einleitun in !as N. T., 2, 38.

(!) THE PER6ANA) ES/ATIAN . In the %ernacular # as in the literary lan ua e# many %ariations are !ue to !ifferences in e!ucation an! personal i!iosyncrasies. 4The colloQuial lan ua e in its turn went off into %arious sha!es of !istinction accor!in to the refinement of the speaker5 (;eissmann# &ight !ro, the (ncient East# p. 8M*. The inscriptions on the whole i%e us a more formal speech# sometimes official !ecrees# while the papyri furnish a much wi!er %ariety. 4The papyri show us the !ialect of Greek E ypt in many forms#Jthe lan ua e of the Go%ernment official# of the e!ucate! pri%ate person# of the !wellers in the temples# of the peasantry in the %illa es.57 -e ha%e numerous e"amples of the papyri throu h $oth the Ptolemaic an! the Roman rule in E ypt. All sorts of men from the farm to the palace are here foun! writin all sorts of !ocuments# a will or a receipt# a lo%e&letter or a !un# a memoran!um or a census report# a pri%ate letter or a pu$lic epistle. 4Pri%ate letters are our most %alua$le sourcesB an! they are all the $etter for the immense !ifferences that $etray themsel%es in the e!ucation of the writers. The well&worn epistolary formulZ show %ariety mostly in their spellin B an! their %alue for the stu!ent lies primarily in their remarka$le resem$lances to the con%entional phraseolo y which e%en the N. T. letter&writers were content to use.5, ;eissmann. has insiste! on a sharp !istinction $etween letters an! epistles# the letter $ein pri%ate an! instinct with life# the epistles $ein written for the pu$lic eye# an open letter# a literary letter. This is a +ust !istinction. A real letter that has $ecome literature is !ifferent from an epistle written as literature. In the papyri therefore we fin! all ra!es of culture an! of illiteracy# as one woul! to&!ay if one rumma e! in the ru$$ish&heaps of our reat cities. Ane nee! not $e surprise! at seein $ 6/* $ 9=!# an! e%en worse $lun!ers. As a sample 9annaris3 i%es "M/9 V#6+ )6 &3/# for "M/9 V#D (+ )6 &%/. Part of these are crass errors# part are !ue to i!entity of soun!s in pronunciation# as an! /* an! *

4 Keny n, e9t. A ,. & 'ast. :. B., art. Papyri, p. 3((;. "ee a,s i#., Pa,Q g. & the !k. Pap., 1899. 1 8 u,t n, Pr ,., p. 27 &. 2 B. "., 19)1, pp. 3(9. <6he #istincti n h ,#s g #, eAen i& we cann t g a,, the way with :eissmann in pr n uncing a,, the Pau,ine writings W,ettersC rather than W.pist,es.C= !. 8i,,igan, !k. Pap., p. 999i. 3 'ist. !k. !r., p. 7. Tu te# &r m !riech. Brk., Ber,in, 132, ;e, nging t year 289 1.:.

an! . -itkowski7 properly insists that we take note of the man an! the character of work in each case. It is o$%ious that $y the papyri an! the inscriptions we ain a truer picture of the situation. As a specimen of the %ernacular of E ypt this letter of the school&$oy Theon to his father has keen interest (see A. P. ,,M*. It $elon s to the secon! century A.;. an! has a $oy0s mistakes as well as a $oy0s spirit. The writin is uncial.
^=/ ^=/ _ #6 F6. + 2#!` ( "#=F= D 2K ! & #%` N ( 9= "#= K D 2! & 8M6 ( )6W/ ! 2K #! a + !* a X)=/ !# 0` @ 49b & 8M6* ( 5/ F'6 #6 c!d a # F6/ ! #%` 9=b "#= cd # )cd` 6 0# 86K Fe T "!' f O66 (%. + @ 2#!` +6 4#Wcd ) "6` ## + 2c'd # g =6h 5D T 4#!` #$ #=W &cd * #6+ !` #=Wb ( 7K )/* ( #/f . 26+!9= ! aFIJ. i5 j.

An the other si!e\ "#% ^=/ c"d#$ ^/G X+. illi an ( reek Pap'ri# p. """ii* a!mits that there may $e now a temptation 4to e"a erate the si nificance of the papyri.5 But surely his $ook has a won!erful human# not to say lin uistic# interest. Take this e"tract from a letter of Hilarion to his wife Alis
5itk wski 526K@5"K2, "6., Epistulae pri%atae raecae 319)64. 777, Pro!romus rammaticae papyrorum raecarum aetatis )a i!arum 318974. 4 6he papyri c ntain 4e"empla e" %ita !eprompta# cum sermo scriptorum ut solutae ita poeticae orationis nullo mo!o %eram no$is ima inem sermonis illius aetatis prae$eat. Etenim sermo# Quem apu! auctores hellinisticos !eprehen!imus# arti# non %itae# !e$etur.5 -itkowski Pro!r. r. pap. Graec.# etc., 1898, p. 197. 'e urges that in case & Aariati ns in & rms r synta9 ne must inJuire 4utrum a$ alia Qua !ialecto petita sit an in Ae ypto nata# utrum a$ homine Graeco an $ar$aro formata.5 I$., p. 198. 'e thinks it is necessary that we haAe 4li$rum !e sermone papyrorum# li$rum !e sermone titulorum# li$rum !e sermone auctorum poeticae et pe!estris orationis illius aetatis# li$rum !e !ialecto @ace!onica tractantem.5 I$. 8i,,igan 82002!1$, !., 6he !reek Papyri with "pecia, /e&erence t their Ha,ue & r $. 6. "tu#y 319124. 777, 6he $. 6. : cuments 319134.

(P. A"y. =77 B.C. ,*\ kl ##+ =b* 2l ? O6!* O7* 2l ? 9* 45. (g) RR6/@R. To all intents an! purposes the %ernacular is the later %ernacular Attic with normal !e%elopment un!er historical en%ironment create! $y Ale"an!er0s conQuests. An this $ase then were !eposite! %arie! influences from the other !ialects# $ut not enou h to chan e the essential Attic character of the lan ua e. There is one e%erywhere (cf. Thum$# riech. +pr.# p. .NN*. The literary was homo eneous# while the %ernacular was practically so in spite of local %ariations (cf. An us# )he Koin: 4The )an ua e of the N. T.#5 Prince. )heol. Rev.# 9an.# ,M,N# p. =< f.*. In remote !istricts the lan ua e woul! $e ;oric&coloure! or Ionic&coloure!. Phonetics and 2rthograph'. It is in pronunciation that the most serious !ifferences appear in the (@oulton# Prol.# p. 8*. -e !o not know certainly how the ancient Attic was pronounce!# thou h we can appro"imate it. The mo!ern Greek %ernacular pronunciation is known. The stan!s alon the path of pro ress# precisely where it is har! to tell. But we know enou h not to insist too stron ly on 4hair&splittin !ifferences hin in on forms which for the scri$e of our uncials ha! i!entical %alue phonetically# e. . * * b* * _ in feet# or Q5 (An us# op. cit.# p. =M*. Besi!es itacisms the &monophthon i>in is to $e notice! an! the eQuali>in of an! /. The Attic is !! e"cept in a few instances (like 2/* 6/*. The ten!ency is towar! !easpiration e"cept in a few cases where the re%erse is true as a result of analo y (or a lost !i amma*. Cf. 27D #. Elision is not so common as in the Attic# $ut assimilation is carrie! still further (cf. 2=!e*. There is less care for rhythm in eneral# an! the %aria$le final consonants an! appear constantly $efore consonants. The use of .. for .. in forms like #' an! ' pro$a$ly comes $y analo y. (9 an! 9 are the common forms till ,NN B.C. when ( an! $e in to re ain their ascen!ency. %ocabular'. The wor!s from the town&life (the sta e# the market&place* come to the front. The %oca$ulary of Aristophanes is in point. There was an increase in the num$er of !iminuti%e forms. The was not a%erse to forei n elements if they were useful. Cenophon is a oo! illustration of the preparation for the . Cf. Ra!ermacher# /. ). r.# p. <. Word-3or,ation. There is the natural !roppin of some ol! suffi"es an! the coinin of new suffi"es# some of which appear in the mo!ern Greek %ernacular. The num$er of compoun! wor!s $y +u"taposition is reatly increase!# like #6K76=/* F6%K )67. In particular two prepositions in compoun!s are freQuent# like !KK 5. New meanin s are i%en to ol! wor!s. (ccidence. In su$stanti%es the Ionic .6# not .6# is common# $rin in nouns in . 6 into harmony with other nouns of the first !eclension (Thackeray# r. o! the 2. ). in k.# p. ..*. The Attic secon! !eclension !isappears. 6ome feminine nouns in .
1,e9an#er 10.M1$:./, 5. ?., Participia, Periphrases in 1ttic @rat rs 31m. ?. Ph., 2H, pp. 2913)94. 6hackeray 6'1%K./1F, '. "6., 1 !rammar & the @. 6. in !reek. H ,. 2, 2ntr #ucti n, @rth graphy an# 1cci#ence 319)94. 777, /e,ati n & "t. Pau, t % ntemp rary 6h ught 319))4.

$ecome masculine. The thir! !eclension is occasionally assimilate! to the first in forms like * 9)=6. Contraction is a$sent sometimes in forms like E6=/. Both F6 an! F6 occur. A!+ecti%es ha%e forms like "!7Z* #6 in!eclina$le# #G for # (cf. =)*# ! for '. The !ual# in fact# has !isappeare! in all inflections an! con+u ations. Pronouns show the !isappearance of the !ual forms like 6 an! #%6` i is use! sometimes like T!# an! m 2 is more freQuent than m O a$out A.;. ,. Analo y plays a $i part in the lan ua e# an! this is proof of life. In the %er$ there is a eneral ten!ency towar! simplification# the two con+u ations $len!in into one ( %er$s oin *. New presents like "#=/* E#/# are forme!. There is confusion in the use of ./ an! .=/ %er$s. -e fin! )* )3!/. The increase of the use of first aorist forms like 4!F (cf. 0# an! 0# in the ol!er Greek*. This first aorist termination appears e%en in the imperfect as in 0F. The use of .! IBF!* 4!F!J for . in the thir! plural is occasionally noticea$le. The form . I=/J for .A! may $e !ue to analo y of this same first aorist. There is freQuent a$sence of the sylla$ic au ment in the past perfect# while in compoun! %er$s it is sometimes !ou$le! like "#=!!. The temporal au ment is often a$sent# especially with !iphthon s. -e ha%e ./! rather than ./* .!9/! rather than . !9/. +'ntax. There is in eneral an a$sence of many Attic refinements. 6implicity is much more in e%i!ence. This is seen in the shorter sentences an! the paratactic constructions rather than the more comple" hypotactic i!ioms. The sparin use of particles is noticea$le. There is no effort at rhetorical em$ellishment. -hat is calle! 4Asianism5 is the $om$astic rhetoric of the artificial orators. Atticism aims to repro!uce the classic i!iom. The %ernacular is utterly free from this %ice of Asianism an! Atticism. Thackeray (op. cit.# p. .3* notes that 4in the $reach of the rules of concor! is seen the wi!est !e%iation from classical ortho!o"y.5 This %aries a reat !eal in !ifferent writers as the papyri amply testify. The no,inativus pendens is much in e%i!ence. The %ariations in case# en!er an! num$er of su$stanti%es# a!+ecti%es an! %er$s are freQuent l ! !. The neuter plural is use! with either a sin ular or plural %er$. The comparati%e !oes !uty often for the superlati%e a!+ecti%e. The superlati%e form usually has the elati%e sense. :6+ is common (as sometimes in ol!er Greek* when only two are compare!. ,+ occurs for all three persons. The accusati%e is re ainin its ol! ascen!ency. There is an increase in the use of the accusati%es with %er$s an! much free!om in the use of transiti%e an! intransiti%e %er$s. The rowth in the use of prepositions is %ery marke! $oth with nouns an! in composition# thou h some of the ol! prepositions are !isappearin . 'ew prepositions occur with more than two cases. Phrases like 5=#/ "#% show a !eparture from the ol! i!iom. New a!%er$ial an! prepositional phrases are comin into use. The cases with prepositions are chan in . The instrumental use of 2 is common. The optati%e is !isappearin . The future participle is less freQuent. The infiniti%e (outsi!e of * 2 _* & % an! the inf.* is rece!in $efore C# which is e"ten!in its use %ery reatly. There is a wi!er use of [. E%erywhere it is the lan ua e of life an! not of the $ooks. The N. T. use of e"pressions like & $ T* # once cite! as He$raisms# is fin!in illustration in the papyri (cf. ;eissmann# &ight# etc.# p. ,.3 f.*. S $e ins to encroach on (# especially with infiniti%es an! participles. The periphrastic con+u ation is freQuently employe!. The non&final use of C is Quite marke!. ;irect !iscourse is more freQuent than in!irect. Clearness is more !esire! than ele ance. It is the lan ua e of nature# not of the schools. V. The Adaptability of the to the Roman World. It is worth while to make this point for the $enefit of those who may won!er why the literary Attic coul! not ha%e

retaine! its supremacy in the GrZco&Roman worl!. That was impossi$le. The %ery %ictory of the Greek spirit ma!e necessary a mo!ern common !ialect. Colonial an! forei n influences were ine%ita$le an! the ol! classical culture coul! not $e assimilate! $y the 9ews an! Persians# 6yrians# Romans# Ethiopians. 4In this way a Panhellenic Greek spran up# which# while always preser%in all its main features of Attic rammar an! %oca$ulary# a!opte! many colonial an! forei n elements an! moreo%er $e an to procee! in a more analytical spirit an! on a simplifie! rammar.5, The ol! literary Attic coul! not ha%e hel! its own a ainst the )atin# for the Romans lamente! that they were Helleni>e! $y the Greeks after conQuerin them.. 6penserian En lish woul! $e an affectation to&!ay. The tremen!ous %itality of the Greek is seen precisely in its power to a!+ust itself to new con!itions e%en to the present time. The failure of the )atin to !o this not only ma!e it i%e way $efore the Greek# $ut# after )atin $ecame the speech of the -estern worl! !urin the By>antine perio!# the %ernacular )atin $roke up into %arious separate ton ues# the mo!ern Romance lan ua es. The conclusion is irresisti$le therefore that the possesse! won!erful a!apta$ility to the manifol! nee!s of the Roman worl!.3 It was the international lan ua e. Nor must one think that it was an i norant a e. -hat we call the 4;ark A es5 came lon afterwar!s. 4)et me further insist that this ci%ili>ation was so perfect that# as far as it reache!# men were more culti%ate! in the strict sense than they e%er ha%e $een since. -e ha%e !isco%ere! new forces in natureB we ha%e ma!e new in%entionsB $ut we ha%e chan e! in no way the metho!s of thinkin lai! !own $y the GreeksKThe Hellenistic worl! was more culti%ate! in ar ument than we are nowa!ays.5, @oulton. cannot refrain from callin attention to the remarka$le fact that the new reli ion that was to master the worl! $e an its career at the %ery time when the @e!iterranean worl! ha! one ruler an! one lan ua e. An the whole it was the $est lan ua e possi$le for the GrZco&Roman worl! of the first century A.;.

1 ?annaris, 'ist. !k. !r., p. 6. 2 %&. "harp, .pictetus an# the $. 6. 319144, & r use&u, c mparis n & ,anguage an# th ught & .pictetus an# the $. 6. 3 0a& sca#e, Infl. !u )at. sur le Grec, pp. 831(8, in Bi$lioth. !e l0Rcole !es hautes Et., 1892. 1 8aha&&y, Pr g. & 'e,,en. in 1,e9. .mp., 19)(, p. 137. 'e a##s 3p. 1114> <6he w rk & 1,e9an#ria was a permanent e#ucati n t the wh ,e !reek+speaking w r,#G an# we kn w that in #ue time Pergamum ;egan t # simi,ar w rk.= 2 Pr ,., p. 6. "ee a,s Bree#, Prep. & the 5 r,# & r %hr., 19)4, ch. 2M, 6he 'e,,eniEing & the $ati ns, an# ch. M2, 6he Bni&icati n & the 5 r,#. ?annaris 3op. cit., p. 84 in#ee# puts the 0MM, $. 6. an# many pap. int <the 0eAantine gr up= & the ,iterary ,anguage, ;ut this is a wr ng assignment & r ; th the 0MM an# the $. 6.