Indigenous Names in Heraclea Pontica

The most informative sources for personal names at Heraclea Pontica are the stamps engraved on the neck of amphoras manufactured in the workshops of this city and the external inscriptions mentioning Heracleots abroad, whereas the local epigraphic crop is rather poor. The name-stock is predominantly Greek, with a quite marked Megarian stamp. Although the evidence for the non-Greek onomastic stock is scarce, it is possible to identify some Iranian, Bithynian, Paphlagonian and Phrygian names, as well as some Lallnamen, which the author tries to classify and to comment on. Among the bearers of non-Greek names there is no person of high standing. It is surprising that there are only a few Bithynian and Paphlagonian names. Therefore, nothing that might individualise the name-stock of the Mariandynian hinterland is to be found.

Resources for Naming: Problematic Names of Asia Minor

Among the Asiatic Greeks almost every Greek word could be used to form a personal name. Resources for naming include plant names, place names and theophoric names. This chapter analyses a group of names which are interesting because of their formation, meaning or origin (Ármalos, Dókkalos, Drábōn, Dōkeús, Heiamenós, Iddoúas and Kallóas, Kambalâs, Kápparis, Koíēs, Naódōros, Tónnios, Chrýsōros, Chrysēnios). The richness and colour of these onomastics, as shown in this small sample of names, has been a source of misinterpretations by scholars used to different naming styles.

Naming Practices in Second- and First-Millennium Western Anatolia

This chapter provides a systematic survey of naming practices in the Indo-European languages of Western Anatolia in the second and first millennia, showing that essentially all types known from elsewhere in Indogermania are attested: Lallwörter, theophorics, determinative compounds of various kinds, and possessive compounds (bahuvrihis). Only Kurznamen and hypocoristica are surprisingly rare. The extent to which the above types reflect inherited usages is not addressed, but it is argued that the form of some Satznamen strongly suggests that they were initially formed on Hurrian (less probably Akkadian) models and then further adapted and extended. It is more tentatively suggested that the Apollodotos type of compound with past participle as second member, attested only in first-millennium south-eastern Anatolia, is based on Greek models.

Anatolian Anthroponymy after Louis Robert … and Some Others

Until the 1960s, two works of Johannes Sundwall were the unique repertories of the onomastics of Asia Minor. In 1963 appeared Noms indigènes de l’Asie Mineure gréco-romaine of Louis Robert, an indictment of the methods of Sundwall and invitation to rigorous philology, a turning point. For survivals from the second millennium, P.H.J. Houwink ten Cate, E. Laroche and L. Zgusta brought decisive complements. In the Roman period there occurs a ‘koinéfication’ of the name-stock of Asia Minor, with an overwhelming majority of Greek names and strong percentage of Latin. The only differences from region to region are the degree of resistance and the content of the indigenous element. Stress is laid on the need for a sociological and anthropological approach, which situates the name in society and so explains its origin and functioning: Hellenistic Pamphylia is taken as an example.

Introduction

This essay indicates the interest of the subject, and the themes that run through the volume: the predominant place of Anatolia within the evidence for Greek naming in the Roman period; the great virtues of Louis Robert’s Noms indigènes dans l’Asie Mineure gréco-romaine, and its limitations; the huge potential of names as a historical source in a multi-ethnic environment, and the complications created by interaction between different naming traditions; the psychology of naming, as revealed by the exceptionally rich Anatolian material; historical changes within specific regions and, during the Roman empire, throughout Anatolia, but also certain continuities from the now observable naming patterns of the second millennium; the need for an approach which rigorously respects regional and chronological differences and is also sociologically alert.

Second Thoughts on Second Names in Aphrodisias

When Aphrodisian inscriptions contain long sequences of names in the genitive (e.g. Μ(άρκου) Αὐρ(ηλίου) Ζηνοβίου τετράκις τοῦ Ζηνοβίου τοῦ Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἐπαφροδείτου) it is not clear to whom we should attribute the last name as a ‘second name’ (agnomen). A comprehensive study of the available material reveals the existence of a rule: the name of an individual (man or woman) is followed by the father’s name without article, then by the names of further ancestors (with article), and finally by the second name without article. Some names hitherto interpreted as patronymics are in fact second names. ‘Second names’ were common personal names transmitted within the same family by family tradition, and possibly commemorated ancestors.

Imperial Asia Minor:Economic Prosperity and Names

This paper deals with names in Anatolia which allude to various material goods of exceptional quality and/or rarity such as precious stones, aromatics, incense, etc., a large group of ‘exotics’ amongst them being imported from India, South Arabia and East Africa. The names’ occurrence shows a striking concentration in the imperial period; one might say that many were not deeply rooted in Greek onomastic tradition but attest to a recent fashion promoted and enhanced by the flourishing in particular of the Red Sea trade. The main attraction of such names may have consisted in their vague allusion to luxury, as is also regularly depicted on tombstones even in villages by symbols such as jewellery boxes, unguent jars, oil and perfume bottles, cases and chests.

Simple Names in Ionia

The most significant work written so far about Greek onomastics in Asia Minor (Louis Robert’s Noms indigènes de l’Asie Mineure) mainly demonstrates the excessively ‘indigenist’ interpretation of personal names. The question of non-Greek names has dominated studies in this field. The aim of this paper is to explain the use and the nature of Greek simple names in Ionia. The first part deals with general questions, such as the origin of simple names and the role of baby-talk in their formation, their relationship with nicknames and second names, their evolution and how they can contribute to a better knowledge of Ionic colloquial language. The second part is a commentary on thirty-nine typical or significant Ionic names: Akkês, Alpalê, Bábōn, Bállaros, Bastâs, Bátalos, Bátion, Baûs, Billâs, Bisthâs, Bíttaros, Bóa, Botâs, Boutalînos, Boutâs, Gellías, Grŷttos, Kíllos, Kírōn, Kollybâs, Konníōn, Kôkos, Kōlōtēs, Minníōn, Mitýlos, Myschês, Mytâs, Nánnichos, Nóssos, Pátaikos, Pósthōn, Sálaros, Sannâs, Smórdos, Sýrphax, Phíttalos, Phórys, Chorēgíōn, Psychâs.

Histoire par les noms in Ancient Galatia

For the two centuries following the Galatian occupation of central Anatolia after 278 BC, only a few nearly exclusively Celtic names of tribal or mercenary leaders have been transmitted. In the first century BC, the first examples of Anatolian names re-emerge in our evidence, and a few Greco-Macedonian ones alongside them. By the beginning of the second century AD, Roman names prevailed among Galatian aristocrats. This study also looks at the Phrygian and Celtic traditions that were sometimes hidden behind Greek or Roman façades: the extent of such complex naming practices reveals the compatibility of embracing Hellenism or Romanness with an awareness of the Galatian or Phrygian cultural heritage still in the second century. Such local peculiarities faded away in the third century with the universal extension of the Roman franchise and the spread of Christian names.

From Aphrodisias to Alexandria with Agroitas and Agreophon(via Hippoukome, Kalynda and Kaunos)

The focus of this chapter is on names that are not epichoric in a linguistic sense (for they are Greek), but have been emphatically said to be ‘of a region’. The cultural implications and justifications of such a statement are investigated for two names: Agroitas and Agreophon, said to be characteristic of the ‘Caro-Lycian border region’ (Kaunos, Kalyndos and the Indos river). Multiple instances of both occur in a long list of names from Hippoukome, high up in the Indos valley. The underlying assumption is that both have associations with hunting and wild nature and have roots in the Anatolian ‘tuf religieux’: the timeless religious substructures of the Lycian–Pisidian interior. The article questions this picturesque and superficially persuasive association on linguistic, cultural and statistical grounds.