On the Classification of Ancient Greek Toponyms (based on the Material of Ancient Toponyms of the Cilician Plain)

Lin'ko Alla Vasil'evna Senior teacher, Institute of Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University 123242, Russia, Moscow, Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya str., 3, p. 1 lira1792@mail.ru

Both in domestic and foreign historiography, one can find many works devoted to the issues of ancient toponymy. However, as a rule, these studies concern the problems of etymologization of individual groups of ancient toponyms or individual toponyms, the etymology of which goes back to the local pre-Greek languages of the studied regions, and related issues of pre-Greek substratum. The number of special studies devoted to the analysis of ancient Greek toponyms as a system in terms of their morphological structure and lexico-semantic features is extremely small. One of the central and generalizing works in this field can be called the 2008 doctoral dissertation of A. I. Solopov "Greek-Latin geographical nomenclature: its external and internal structure", which is the first systematic philological analysis of Latin and ancient Greek toponymy as a whole ^[1]. The study reflects the hierarchical nature of the Greco-Roman geographical nomenclature of the imperial period and is largely determined by this hierarchy. In foreign linguistics, important observations about the word-formation models of ancient Greek toponyms of earlier periods and their semantic features were made in separate articles: it should be mentioned, first of all, M. Doria's article on Mycenaean toponyms of Pylos ^[8], E. Risch's article devoted to the study of word-formation types of ancient Greek toponyms ^[14], and a general review by T. Lindner ^[11]. Currently, for researchers of ancient toponymy, it is obvious that there is a need to create a generalizing classification of ancient Greek toponyms, reflecting in a diachronic aspect the main word-formation toponymic models of the ancient Greek language and their features.Some information about ancient Greek toponymy from the point of view of its structure is contained in classical works on ancient Greek word formation.

The first attempt to create a general semantic classification of ancient Greek toponyms was made by L. Grasberger in 1888 in the book "Studies on Greek Toponymy" ^[9]. Grasberger divides ancient Greek toponyms with a relatively transparent etymology into four main semantic groups, depending on the semantics of the generating base. He identifies the following types of toponyms:

• 1. Geographical names formed by similarity in shape and outline (with human and animal body parts, with inanimate objects);
• 2. Geographical names formed from the properties of the terrain (elevation, lowland, physical and optical aspects);
• 3. Geographical names formed from the names of plants (flora) and from the peculiarities of the culture of the area (flora and hydrographic conditions, from anthroponyms);
• 4. Geographical names formed from numbers and abstract concepts (from numerical terms, from abstract concepts).

So, already in Grasberger, "natural" and "cultural" toponyms are opposed to each other. Grasberger's idea was further developed in the article "Aspetti della toponomastica micenea delle tavolette in lineare B di Pilo", written in 1961 by M. Doria ^[8]. Doria distinguishes two onomasiological types of composites and juxtaposites^[1]: primary toponyms-composites named after the features of the area (for example, , literally 'dog heads'), and secondary toponyms-composites named in accordance with administrative requirements, i.e. "artificially" created ( 'Little Chersonese' in difference from ‘Greater Chersonesos’).

The most general classification of all ancient Greek toponyms was compiled by Ernst Riesch in the 1965 article "Ein Gang durch die Geschichte der griechischen Ortsnamen" ^[14]. Rich examines the main periods of ancient Greek history and identifies four word-formation types of toponyms characteristic of each of the historical periods. The table presented in the article reflects the distribution of word-formation types of toponyms by different epochs. According to Rish's classification, the earliest type of toponymic formation characteristic of the Mycenaean period of the Greek language are toponyms formed from appellatives and from adjectives. For the first half of the first millennium BC, in addition to the above, theophoric toponyms are characteristic – geographical names formed from the names of the gods. Since the V century BC, binomial toponyms have become productive, first of all, toponyms-juxtaposites (syntagmas), as well as toponyms-composites (compound words). After Alexander the Great, geographical names derived from the personal names of rulers and ending in - (according to the type ) became a popular word-formation model in toponymy, which became widespread in the Hellenistic era. In the imperial period, the former type of toponyms-composites, consisting mainly of the name or nickname of the ruler (governor) and the topoformant - ‘city’, returns again.

Table 1. Word-formation types of ancient Greek toponyms according to E. Risch's classification ^{[14, 205]}.

To determine to what extent the classification proposed by E. Risch turns out to be universal in describing the external and internal structure of ancient Greek toponyms, it seems relevant to test its effectiveness on the toponymic material of a separate region of the ancient Greek world. From this point of view, a corpus of ancient toponyms of the Cilician Plain ( ‘Cilicia plain’) was collected – a lowland plain in the south of modern Turkey, one of the Asia Minor regions (the total sample size was 70 geographical names). The main sources of our information about the ancient toponymy of Plain Cilicia are, first of all, written literary sources – data from classical, as well as late Greek and Byzantine authors. In addition, important information is provided by epigraphy and numismatics data (Cilician cities appear in the legends of Greek coins since the V century BC)^[2]. Since the studied toponymic material is characterized by linguistic heterogeneity, geographical names of ancient Greek and Latin origin with a relatively transparent etymology (25 ancient Greek and 5 Latin toponyms) were selected from the corpus of Cilician toponyms. For each toponym, the centuries of fixation and all attestations recorded in the sources available to us (ancient Greek and Latin) were indicated. Toponyms were investigated for etymology, semantics and morphological structure.Ancient Greek:

Greek. (V century BC, I-III, VI, XII-XIII centuries), (II century); Lat. Anchiale (I century.) < Greek. 'seaside, located by the sea’

Greek. (I-III centuries), (IV-III centuries BC, II-III centuries); Lat. Aegeae (I V., VI.), Ayacium (XIII century), Layas, Layacium (XIII century) < Greek. (pl. from ‘goat’) = ‘waves, whitecaps’ + ‘sea’

Greek. (III century), (VI century); Lat. Al e (I century) < Greek. ? (in pl) 'saltworks’ Greek. (VIII century BC, V-IV century BC, I century BC, III century, VI century, XII century) < Greek.

Table 2. Word-formation types of toponyms of the Cilician plain according to E. Rish's classification [14, 205].

In Cilician toponymy, the pluralization model should be singled out separately as a way of forming toponyms from appellatives, as well as as a result of rethinking existing foreign-language names and designating them as pluralis (secondary pluralization). Ancient Greek toponymy as a whole is characterized by pluralization (both primary and secondary) as one of the ways of toponymization of the word: ‘Aby’, ‘Athens’, ‘Egi’, ‘Egospotami (potamonym)’, ‘Emily’, ‘Gaul’, ‘Delphi’, ‘Eleuthers’, ‘Thespians’, 'Thebes’, ‘Kepy’, ‘Cleones’, ‘Kremny’, ‘Leontines’, ‘Mycenae’, ‘Olmii (cape)’, / ‘Pagi/Pegi’, ‘Patras’, ‘Plataea’, ‘Sardis’, ‘Syracuse’, ‘Fera', ‘Philippi'. Among the Cilician place names as pluralis decorated placenames / ‘EGI’, / ‘gala’, ‘Ally’, Baiae ‘Bailly’, ‘Issy’, ‘Sols’ and port ‘Rohmas’. Moreover, it is likely that the foreign-language toponyms and , as well as, possibly, Baiae, are the result of secondary pluralization.

From the presented table it can be seen that most of the attestations of Cilician toponyms belong to the Hellenistic-Roman time. This explains the presence among the toponyms of a large number of toponyms-composites and toponyms-juxtaposites, formed from the names of the rulers of the Hellenistic and Roman states. Among simple toponyms with a relatively transparent etymology, the main part consists of names formed from appellatives, as well as substantive adjectives. However, it should be noted that in both the Hellenistic and Roman periods, such "natural" toponyms, as Grasberger calls them, are a minority. The Greco-Roman geographical nomenclature in these epochs undergoes unification within the framework of the general Hellenization of the Seleucid state, of which Plain Cilicia was a part in the IV–I centuries BC, and, later, in the process of Romanization of the Roman provinces.

^[1] The term juxtaposite denotes a complex word with several bases formed by adding words or word forms, for example, maiden-beauty, firebird, Moscow River. In relation to ancient Greek toponyms, juxtaposites are understood to be verbose toponyms (syntagmas) of two types: a) Gen. + Nom. (ti-mi-to a-ke-e ‘valley of Themis') and b) adjective + noun (V ‘new city').^[2] The main corpus of ancient Greek (TLG) and Latin (PHI) texts covering the chronological framework from the VIII century were used in the work.

 BC to XV century AD, i.e. from the time of life Homer before the fall of Constantinople. In addition, the cases of ancient epigraphic inscriptions and collections of ancient coins were used. See, for example, [2-7, 10, 12-13, 15-20].