Linguistic Society of America

The Messapic Klaohizis Formula

Author(s): Ruth Moore Bechtel
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Language, Vol. 13, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1937), pp. 177-185
Published by: Linguistic Society of America
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/409125 .
Accessed: 26/01/2013 04:42
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Linguistic Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE MESSAPIC KLAOHIZIS FORMULA

RUTH MOORE BECHTEL

The words klaohizis (or klaohi) veinas (or venas) den0avanoccur in two
inscriptions, namely 371 and 436 b,i in what seems to be an opening
formula; while 474 opens with a partial version of the same, the reading
of which is doubtful and will be considered later in some detail. Unfortunately, all three inscriptions in which this formula occurs have been
lost or destroyed, so that it is attested only in transcription. But since
these transcriptions are the work of different copyists, and since the
three words of the formula have been preserved in several independent
sources, it seems to me, as to others, that they may be regarded as trustworthy authorities. The authenticity of these inscriptions has often
been impugned, but at the date at which the transcriptions were made,
knowledge of Messapic was hardly sufficiently advanced for them to
have been forged-they are far too convincing as Messapic.
The full formula occurs in 371 and 436 b; in 474 a 1 we find only
klaohizis denO-n, with a lacuna which some scholars fill in with -avaso as to give denGavan. Klohizis by itself occurs in 476 and 515. In
371 the actual reading is not klaohizis, but klaohi, and I can see no
reason, as I shall later explain, for altering the reading.
First of all we must settle a very fundamental point-whether klohizis
should be regarded as a noun or a verb. In order to do so, it is necessary
to examine the word carefully in every context in which it occurs.
Ribezzo regards it as a noun with the meaning 'princeps', but such
tautology as we get from his version of 371,2 'Noster princeps regnans
dux', seems very unusual in official documents, which are generally terse
and concise. In 476 klohizis odatis ozar and 515 klohizis avilos Gotorridas
ana aprodita apaogrebis it might equally well be regarded as either.
When we come to 474, Ribezzo's attempt at translating the word as a
noun, 'I1 sovrano imperante alla citth',3 seems very awkward. In 548
1 The references for the Messapic words and forms are, unless otherwise specified, to the edition of the Messapic inscriptions by Whatmough, in Prae-Italic
Dialects of Italy, 2.268 ff.
2 La
lingua degli antichi Messapii 85.
3 Ibid. 86.
177

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

178

RUTH MOORE BECHTEL

he has to resort to a personification, 'La Sovranita civica'.4 Nor does

there seem to be a parallel for such a nominal formation.
On the whole, it seems to me that we get a much better explanation of
all the inscriptions involved by following Torp in taking klohizis as a
verb.5 The base is presumably *qley-, which would become *klao-,
*kl- in Messapic.6 To this is added an -i- formant, an h to indicate
the hiatus, the sign of the sigmatic aorist (written z), the optative
element i, and s, the ending of the second singular. The form might
otherwise be regarded as an is aorist like the Sanskrit aniqur, avigat, and
possibly Latin vidisti.7 Krahe, in a recent discussion of the Basta
inscription (548),8 divides klohizis into two words klohi zis, which he
interprets as 'audi Iupiter', taking klohi (cf. also Deecke9) as the equivalent of Skt. 'rogi < IE kleu-si. But it seems to me that I have elsewhere"1brought forward sufficient evidence to prove that intervocalic s
was preserved in Messapic.
Veinas is explained by Ribezzo" as a formation based on IE yei-, cf.
Skt. vaydm, Goth. weis, with a meaning 'noster'. Torp explained it as a
possessive adjective 'suus', built up by adding the suffix -no- to the
locative *syei-,l a form comparable to Goth. meina, ]eina.'3 This
meaning would fit very well in the inscription of Basta. In this formula,
however, there is no construction for a possessive pronominal adjective.
I have two alternative suggestions to offer. On the one hand, we might
explain veinas as a pronoun of identity, semantically equivalent to
Gk. abr6sand Lat. ipse, built up by adding -no- to the locative *syei-.
For the formation we may compare also Alb. vete 'same' < *sye-ti,4
OIr. fein, fadein, Skt. svayam 'self', Arm. in-khn (kh- < *sY-). That the
base *sye might be expected to give rise to a reflexive meaning rather
than that of the pronoun of identity should not constitute an overwhelming objection to this view when we consider the state of affairs
existing in some of the Greek dialects. In Homer, in the West Greek
4

Ibid. 101.
6 IF 5.197.
6 See PID 2.601 ff.
7 Hirt, Indogermanische Grammatik 4.249.
8 IF 54.87.
9 RhM 40.142.

10 LANG. 11.129-139.
11 Ling. d. ant. Mess. 75.

IF 5.200.
Whatmough in HSCP 42.153.
14G. Meyer, BB 8.192; Alb. Wb. 468.
12

13 See

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

MESSAPICKLAOHIZISFORMULA

179

dialects, and in Arcadian, where we find the identity-pronoun abrbs

used as reflexive'5, we have a parallel for this close conne.tion between
the two ideas.
A second possibility involves the stem *sye/o which gave rise in the
locative singular feminine to Osc. svai, svaipis, Umbr. sve, svepis, and in
the accusative singular neuter to Hom., Delph., Cret., Lesb. 6r"s <
* FoarLs. This latter derivation, however, it must be admitted, is
not beyond question, as it is based chiefly on a Locrian form which is
considered doubtful by Bechtel."6 In the second half of veinas we might
recognize the old pronominal stem *eno-, found in Lith. ands, Skt. and-,
8YZea,Dor. rios
OCS onu, and Gk. KeZVoS< E + Ke-EVOS,ir,
< re-evos. Veinas, then, would come from *suei-enos, and would
be nominative singular masculine, equivalent in meaning to Osc.
svaipis, Gk. rTLS
'whosoever'.
For both these meanings it is necessary to prove that IE su- became yin Messapic. In itself the development is not at all unlikely. While
Latin sometimes retained the group *su- intact, e.g., suavis, sometimes
simplified it to s, e.g., serenus, cf. Skt. svdr-, certain of the Greek dialects
dropped the first element. It is quite reasonable to suppose that
Messapic, which shows many affinities with the western Greek dialects,
should show the same development of this consonant group. However,
it must be admitted that there is only one piece of direct evidence.
The form FTrerLOae
in 392 seems to contain a form equivalent to Gk. f
(Hom. and dial. inscc. Fe) and a sigmatic aorist rerwae. There is also
a group of Venetic words which may perhaps be taken into consideration. In the Venetic inscriptions we have ven.n.a tola.r. (169), ve.ine.s
(161), ve.noni.s (144), and in Latin sources Vennum CIL 5, p. 398, and
the gens Vennonia CIL 5.1.2876. My theory about these Venetic
words, which are apparently all proper names, is that they are based on
the same stem *sye-. It is interesting to note in this connection that
in Greek the pronoun of identity is a very productive element in the
formation of proper names. With Ven.n.a, Ve.noni.s compare AMrcov
IG 12.5.872, with Ve.ine.s Abr'as, Abrias Ditt. Syll. 241.205. In 169
tola.r., if not a verb, as suggested by E. F. Claflin,"7might be taken as a
second proper name cognate with Gk. roXul',IE *teld-, also used as an
element in the formation of proper names, cf. ToXaTosIG 9.2.6e.21.
"1 See Bechtel, Die Griechischen Dialekte 1.299; also von Blumenthal, Glotta
18.151-3.
16 Op. cit. 2.7, see also Buck, Greek Dialects 94.
" LANG. 12.23-34.

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

180

RUTH MOOREBECHTEL

For names ending in -ar, compare Messapic Lixidar, Dassinar, Tizaopar.

The word maxetlon which follows ven.n.a tola.r. in this inscription would
then denote the dedicatory offering, and might be derived from IE
*magh- (Walde-Pokorny 1.223), cf. gIxl, M&xolaL,,I&Xaapa,probably
with the meaning of the last, plus the common IE -tlo- formant seen in
Lat. p6c(u)lum, Skt. patram. The verb would then be omitted, but
this is by no means unusual in dedicatory formulae.
Peter Fishman, in his dissertation on the vocalism of Messapic,'"
maintains that i should not be restored to read veinas in 371. He prefers to read venas here as in 436, separating these forms from veinan in
the Basta inscription, for which he accepts Torp's explanation. Both
of my interpretations are possible even if this reading be accepted. It
would not be necessary to assume a locative *syei-, for the form might be
built up from the simple stem *see-. However, I am very dubious
about the advisability of separating these forms from veinan in the
inscription of Basta, and should prefer to consider venas erroneous.
In any case, it is rather futile to argue about the reading here, since
emendation in the case of an inscription which we no longer possess can
at best be highly conjectural.19
Den0avan was explained by Ribezzo as a participle with suffix *-Yent-,
Skt. -vant-, Gk. -FEvr-of the base *deme/o seen in Lat. dominus, with
loss of final -t as in Sanskrit. Ribezzo's explanation of the formation I
am inclined to accept, but do not agree with him in assigning it to that
base. I should prefer to connect it, like the form dentan 558.3 (=
to the
with the base *dhg-. It would then be a structure analogous vro-v),
-vant- participle in Sanskrit, which is a secondary derivative formed
from the passive participle by adding the possessive suffix -vant-. This
participle, which has the meaning and construction of a perfect active,
e.g., tat krtdvan'having done that', is chiefly used predicatively, without
copula expressed, and has the value of a personal verb form in past
time, e.g., m4 na kakcid drftavan 'no one has seen me'.20 One serious
objection to this explanation was pointed out to me by Professor
Franklin Edgerton, namely, that the -vant- participle, except for one
occurrence in the Atharvaveda (9.6.38), is found only in Classical
Sanskrit. It would seem, therefore, to be a later development, and
18 The Vocalism of
Messapic 10 (Harvard, 1934).
1' Mention should be made of Krahe's recent suggestion (IF 54.88 f.) that venas
like zis is a divinity = Lat. Venus. But Krahe stops short with this word and
takes no account of denOavanwhich follows it in both 371 and 436 b.
20 Whitney, Sanskrit Grammar 344; Brugmann, Gdr.2 1.381.

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

MESSAPIC KLAOHIZIS FORMULA

181

not an ancient IE inheritance. On the other hand, Brugmanns1 held

that the type kyrtavantgave rise to the frequent classical Sanskrit perfect
participle active during the Vedic period. Moreover, even if this point
be waived, I can see no reason why we could not assume a parallel
development of this structure in Messapic. Den0avan would be a
participle of this type from a nasal extension of the base *dhg-,of which
the perf. part. pass. would be *denta. As an example of the same base
with -ne/lo- suffix we may cite Arm. dnem 'I place'; other heavy monosyllabic bases with suffixed nasal element are *sta-, e.g., Goth. standan,
and *do(y), e.g., Lat. danunt (Plaut. Capt. 819, Pacuv. 207, Caecil. 176,
Naev. ap. Non. 97, CIL 1.2.1531.7 (150 B.C.). Danunt, cited as a
nasal present in Meillet-Ernout22 and by Sturtevant,23 is otherwise
variously explained as the result of dissimilation, <*dant-unt,24 or
analogy (situs : sinunt = datus : danunt).25 The fact that we have a
number of other similar forms-prodinunt, obinunt, redinunt, nequinont,
ferinunt, explenunt, solinunt, inserinuntur-seems to me to point to a
series of nasal presents existing in colloquial speech alongside of the
classical forms.
The base *dh&-,with its extensive cognates in Indo-European languages, developed many different shades of meaning. One of them,
found in both Latin facio and Greek rT16lqy,'consider, regard, hold of
importance', would be appropriate here, as we shall see when we proceed
to a translation of the phrase as a whole.
If we take veinas as an identity-pronoun, we may translate as follows:
'Hear! You yourself are concerned', i.e., 'This is your own concern',
an emphatic heading to attract the attention and interest of the passerby. In that case, veinan aran in the Basta inscription might be rendered 'the land itself', i.e., her landed property, exclusive of other
kinds. If, on the other hand, we take veinas as the indefinite relative,
we would translate 'Hear, whosoever is concerned'. With this meaning,
veinan aran in the Basta inscription might be rendered 'whatsoever
land', i.e., all the land she has. As we have seen, Sanskrit gives us a
perfect parallel for the syntax.
It remains now to see how this explanation works out with the inscriptions involved. No. 371 is the inscription of Monopoli, which is
21Gdr.2 2.1.463.
22Dict. Etym. 264, s.v. do.
23 LANG.

7.169 f.

24Brugmann, Gdr.2 3.2.633.

26

Sommer, Lateinische Laut- und Formenlehre, Kritische Erlauterungen 132.

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

182

RUTH MOOREBECHTEL

now known only from the very unsatisfactory printed copy of Nardelli,
published at Naples in 1773. The text has no doubt been much corrupted in transmission, but some corrections have been made which
seem unnecessary to me. For instance, why change klaohi to klaohizis?
Klaohi gives us a perfectly good 2 sg. pres. impv. (like Lat. audi).
Many obscure points have been cleared up through the labours of
Torp, Ribezzo, and Whatmough, and I offer here what might be termed
an eclectic rendering.
Valdes: nomen, nom. sg. masc., probably cognate with Lat. valeo,
Lith. valdza, Goth waldan < *Valdh-;either an epithet 'dux', or a proper
name, cf. Valerius, Pael. Valesus.
Taimakos: nomen, nom. sg. masc., with Gk. termination -os; almost
certainly a proper name, cf. Tarentine baqtaxos Head, Hist. Num.2
65, Aalcaxos Thuc. 3.20.

invinta: acc. sg. masc. of -nt-.extension, with prefix in- of *yei-,

*veid- 'infestum', cf. Skt. vtti, Lat. invitus, Gk. tIeat.
valdian: acc. sg. masc. of -/o- stem.
Kosinin: acc. sg. masc. of proper name in apposition with invinta
and valdian, with samprasarana as in Osc. Pacim, cf. perhaps Xaawv&
(note xxviii, PID 2.292); cf. Cosinius, CIL 9.1455, 1506, 1803, 1805.
invitati: dat.-loc. of a noun formed on the base *Mei-,with formant
-tdt- (as in Lat. veritas), 'bellum'.
Lixidar is probably a proper name, cf. Licinius CIL 9.422, 388, 245,
and Liconius CIL 9.1861, 1968, both of which are found in Messapic
territory; cf. also Licovius CIL 3.5625.26 It is probably genitive case
written in an abbreviated style, i.e., without the inflexional ending, for
which we have a parallel in 474 a 3, Dassinar for Dassinaris.
pahexita: Ribezzo suggested that this is equivalent to Gk. &IreXETO
with apocopated form of the preposition."
tooitinai: nomen, dat. sg. fem. of -ina- extension of the base *teut-,
'urbi'. Perhaps it is a mistake for *taot-inai, which is what we should
expect (*-ey- > Mess. -ao-, -5-).
hidita: 3 sg. mid. impf. or aor. with adv. prefix hi-, from IE Ohe/o-;
-di- perhaps represents the reduced grade of *dhei-. The diphthongal
form of the base *dhg- is attested by Skt. dheyam, dheyur, adhimahi,
adhdyi, Hitt. tiya-, tais 'he placed'.28
26

For other related names see Krahe, PN-Lex. 66, 67.

27
Ling. d. ant. Mess. 85.
28
Sturtevant, HG 96, 103.

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

MESSAPIC KLAOHIZIS FORMULA

183

Issinom: gen. plur. masc. Issa, a Dalmatian town, is mentioned by

Caesar (B.C. 3.9), of which this may be an ethnicon, with -in- extension.
aison: acc. sg. of stem in 5u-, like Gk. ippws,jilrpws; probably cognate
with Latin aes, aeris, Goth. aiz.
toatas: probably a mistake or misspelling of taotas, gen. sg. of consonant stem *teut- 'civitas'.
ioeinai: dat. sg. fem. of -d- stem, IE *ieu-,
cf. Umbr. ioues
*uyuen-, with oe
Lith.
Lat.
iuvenis
'militia',
'iuvenibus, militibus',
jatnas,
probably a mistake for ov, the two letters being very similar in the Messapic
alphabet (E, F).
'Hear ye, whoso is concerned. The chief Taimakos warded off the
enemy chief Cosinius, son of Lichidar, in warfare. He dedicated to the
city the spoils of the militia of the state of the Issini'.
Let us now examine No. 436. The inscription was discovered in 1847
at Carovigno, and was said to have been afterwards cut up and used as
building stone. There were in existence two copies of the inscription,
both made by Dr. Vincenzo Andriani of Carovigno. It appears to be a
civic document also. Ribezzo thought it had something to do with the
creation or selection of a civic body.
The first word after the introductory formula, ennan, Ribezzo explained as from either *edhna : Gk. f0vos,or *senia : Lat. senex, senium,
with the meaning 'senate or gerousia'.29 But as for the first suggestion,
Gk. 8Ovos
does not come from *edh-, but from *uedh-or *syedh-, and as
for the second, I have shown elsewhere30that initial s is preserved in
Messapic. A possible interpretation was suggested to me by the statement of Aristotle, Pol. 4.10.1329 b, that the inhabitants of south Italy
in general, and the Messapians in particular, were among the earliest
peoples to establish the custom of common meals: Kal r T
avirLa
Ka~raorT^oaLrpcrwvc. We might then derive enna from *ed-na, cf. Skt.
admah, Lith. edra, Gk. '6eaya.
totOebisappears to be dative plural of a noun *totfes < *totros,cf. Lat.
tuticus, Osc. touta 'civitas, urbs, populus'. I have elsewhere31distinguished two forms of the dative plural in Messapic-one ending in -bas,
for which we have one certain example, logetibasin 526,32 the other end29

Ling. d. ant. Mess. 103.

30oLANG. 11.129-39.

asIn a paper read before the Linguistic Society, December, 1936.

32

Laidehiabas in the same inscription has also been taken as a dative plural
(by Kretschmer, Glotta 12.276 ff.), but von Blumenthal's recent suggestion that
the inscription be divided as follows: Laidehi Abas logetibas'Laidii Abae manibus'
seems more satisfactory to me.

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

184

RUTH MOORE BECHTEL

ing in -bis, which is represented by two fairly well-attested forms,

vale~abis (442.5), and the form at present under discussion. As for the
medial e in this form, if that be considered a difficulty, it might easily
have been extended to the oblique cases from the nominative *totOes.
adazinnota: 3 sg. impf. mid., perhaps an extension and compound of
*d5, *d9-,with -innota equivalent to Gk. -Evvro.33
totor: nom. sg. masc. of noun formed on base *teut- by addition of
suffix -e/or referring either to some municipal official or to a civic body.
Next follows a list of people in different localities, each of whom was
responsible for the arrangements in his particular town or locality.
Borrahetis: a proper name serving as a cognomen to indicate either
place of origin, cf. Barra, Barium, or occupation, with the meaning
Et. Magn. 389.24, fvp&b0rv'o1Ko0Ev
'builder', cf. #abppLov
Hesych.Y
3
palanaindai: plur. mid. opt. serving as imperative from base *pel-,
cf. Gk. rdXXw,Lat. pello < *pel-no, Umbr. arpeltu 'appellito, admoveto'.
There seems to be anaptyxis between I and n, cf. Osc. teremniss. As
sporadic instances of this phenomenon in Messapic we may perhaps cite
Laparedonas : Dalm. Lapricius, kiritas : kritaboa, Aratames : artahiaihi.
Probably -nt- has become -nd- as in Oscan, although in Messapic there
is such frequent alternation of d and t that in some cases at least the
pronunciation of media and tenuis appears to have approximated very
closely.
We may translate somewhat as follows: 'Totor (civic body or official,
or perhaps even a proper name) established common meals, and for the
citizens at Azetium let Xlannatas Mareolles and at Uzentum Taimakos
Teinnatainnes of Barium make provision; at Tarentum not only (andaanda) Dazetius son of Hastorus and Zatetius son of Dazius, but also
Madius lettis son of Dazet, Dazet Hastorius Hanaius (either of the last
two might be regarded as the patronymic), Tea.. .Hesxeorris son of
Hestorius,35Blattius Zarius of Diria and Aiddetis of Uria.'
No. 474 was discovered in 1765 at Brindisi, and was preserved for a
time in the private collection of the Archbishop Annibale de Leo of
Brindisi. Mommsen published it for the first time in Ann. d. Istr. 20.72,
plate II (1848) from a copy which he saw in 1846. The original is
thought to have been destroyed during the French occupation of
Brindisi in the early part of the nineteenth century. A copy of the
insciiption is still preserved among the papers of Ortensio de Leo. It
"3Whatmough, PID 3.3.
34PID 3.10.
36 This new word division was suggested by Fishman 150.

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

MESSAPIC KLAOHIZIS FORMULA

185

seems to be a proclamation relating to the collection and disposal of

revenue, taxes or tribute. The translation owes much to the successive
labours of Torp31and Ribezzo,37 culminating in the revision of Whatmough, who offers a most convincing explanation of the entire inscription except for the opening formula.38 Both copies read klaohizis denO-n
v(a)sti. Ribezzo and Whatmough both supply -ava- in the lacuna, 'for
which', however, as the latter remarks, 'both (copies) A and O hardly
allow sufficient space'.39 Torp read denea vastin, in which denea =
OE0ro,3 plur. aor. mid. of base *dhU-. In the case of this inscription, it
seems better to supply only a, reading denlan vasti. Denlan would
then be identified with dentan in 558.3, and classified as a 3 plur. root
aorist of the base *dhe-,middle voice, and vasti would be dative-locative
singular with -ei > -i. The only part of our opening formula here,
then, is the first word klaohizis, which we find alone also in 476 and 515.
We may then translate 'They have decreed for the state'. Then follow
the instructions about the yearly payments by the separate vici, and a
list of names of individuals concerned in the collection. The reader is
referred to Whatmough's exposition for this part of the inscription.
There are, then, two versions of this conventional opening formulaa shorter one, containing simply the word klaohizis 'Hear ye!', found in
474 a, 476, 515.1, 548.1, and a longer form, with the three words klaohizis
veinas den0avan,-Hear, whosoever is concerned', ol 'Hear, you yourself
are concerned', found in 371 and 436.
36

IF 5.200.

37 Ling. d. ant. Mess. 86.

PID 2.574.
9 PID 2.358.

38

This content downloaded on Sat, 26 Jan 2013 04:42:11 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions