The Ancient Macedonian Language

[Epirot]

Hi everybody,

I recall an underlined linguistic passage where the etymology of term 'Macedonia' was matched up with a Sanskrit word 'mahata'. If I am not mistaken it was brought up by TrueMacedonian, but I've not been able to find it so far...

If anyone has any idea about the passage I am speaking of, please share it here?!

Thnx

[Soldier of Macedon]

Epirot, follow the link below:

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum/showthread.php?t=601&highlight=sanskrit

[Epirot]

Epirot, follow the link below:

http://www.macedoniantruth.org/forum...light=sanskrit

Thank you very much, SoM!

This is what I was looking for! Actually, the etymological connection of 'Macedonia' with a Sanskrit word is mentioned by some renowned Yugoslav scholars, who uphold the view of non-Greek character of ancient Macedonian language. Henrik Baric (Croatian), M. Budimir (A serbian linguist) and R. Katicic (Croatian) made thorough studies on Macedonian; but their accounts aren't available in English.

[Soldier of Macedon]

The megalo-golemo and kade-deka examples show that re-arranged words generally have the same or similar meanings. If this is the rule, how would the antigonea-negotino example measure up? The name Antigonos, which I assume comes from anti (instead) and gonos (offspring), is given the so-called meanings 'comparable to his father' or 'worthy of his father' in Hellenic.

Here are some alternative suggestions for the placename of Negotino (there is also a 'Negotin' in Serbia):

1. The Romance/Latin name origin thesis, such as the merchant place (cf. Spanish<Latin "negocios"), and the fact that Negotin is in a region with the presence of a significant Vlach (Romanian) minority, just like its namesake Negotino in Macedonia.
2. There is also the Slavonic origin hypothesis: Proto-Slavonic "něga" means "care" and the suffix "-ota//-otina" means "the action undergone or carried out", thus rendering Negotin as "a place of retreat for healing", and the city historically being located secluded amidst marshes would support the Slavonic hypothesis.
3. "Negotin" may yet have been derived from Celtic words "neges" and "tin", meaning "The fortress of war".[3]

Negotin is first mentioned in 1530 as a settlement.

The almost identical spelling and pronounciation of the word may just be a coincidence, but they seem very close.

[DraganOfStip]

Don't know if any of this has been posted on this forum,but there's a website I accidentally came across while scrolling the net,it shares a vast material of books,publications and quotes in world history,called Livius (sure you've heard about it before).I searched it for Ancient Macedonia and some things I came across were very interesting for us Macedonians.I'll just quote some of the paragraphs I think are of out most importance,and for more details,go to http://www.livius.org/maa-mam/macedonia/macedonia.html

That the Macedonians spoke Greek, looks like an inevitable conclusion.
However, there is some room for doubt. To start with, there are also Macedonian names that have no Greek parallel (Arridaeus or Sabattaras). In the second place, in many semi-literate societies, there is a difference between the spoken and the written language. It would not be without parallel if a Macedonian, when he wanted to make an official statement, preferred decent Greek instead of his native tongue. (Cf. the altars of the goddess Nehalennia, which were all written in Latin, a language that was almost certainly not spoken by the people who erected them.)Thirdly, many historical sources are written in Greek, and it was a common practice among Greek historians to hellenize foreign names. For example, the name of the powerful first king of the Persian empire, Kuruš, ought to be transcribed as Kourous or Kouroux in Greek, but became Kyros, because this looks like a Greek word ("Mr. Almighty"). The name that is rendered as Alexandros, which has a perfect Greek etymology, may in fact represent something like Alaxandus, which is not Greek. A related argument that forces us to hesitate is that the Greeks nearly always converted the names of foreign deities. Supreme gods like Jupiter and Marduk are called "Zeus". So, the fact that Greek authors use Greek names for Macedonian people and deities does not prove very much about the Macedonian language.

For example, there is evidence that Greeks were unable to understand people who were makedonizein, "speaking Macedonian". The Macedonian king Alexander the Great was not understood by the Greeks when he shouted an order in his native tongue and the Greek commander Eumenes needed a translator to address the soldiers of the Macedonian phalanx. The Greek orators Thrasymachus of Chalcedon and Demosthenes of Athens called Macedonian kings like Archelaus and Philip II barbarians, which prima facie means that they did not speak Greek.

We do not even know whether the Macedonians spoke one language at all; many societies, now and then, have more than one language. All we have is a set of about 150 words that were recognized as Macedonian in Antiquity, many of which are derived from a Macedonian-to-Greek dictionary by a man named Amerias. These 150 words can be divided into two groups:
1)Words that have a counterpart in Greek. For example, the Macedonian title Nikatôr ("victor") is obviously the equivalent of Greek Nikêtêr. Usually, the Macedonian words are voiced and lack aspiration whereas Greek words are voiceless and aspirated: for example, Greek aithêr is the equivalent of Macedonian adê ("sky").
2)Words that do not resemble a Greek word: sarissa ("lance"), abagna ("rose"), peliganes ("senate"). It is certain that these words are Indo-European.

Greece needed the timber and cereals that Macedonia exported and Alexander needed support to control the mountain tribes. He tried to deny the increasing differences by calling himself philhellenos ("friend of the Greeks"), and claimed that his family descended from the Greek city of Argos (text), a claim that was recognized by the authorities at the Olympic Games. Still it must be noted that the title philhellenos itself implies that the nation that Alexander represented was not Greek (no Greek king needed to call himself "friend of the Greeks").

Archelaus also organized Olympic Games in Dion, at the foot of the holy mountain Olympus. This is interesting, because it suggests that -even though the king may have won a victory at the "real" Olympics- ordinary Macedonians were not allowed to compete in Olympia, and were, therefore, not recognized as Greeks. This is confirmed by the list of victors at Olympia. A substantial part of which survives and it mentions no ordinary Macedonians until the reign of Alexander the Great.

The Athenian orator Demosthenes, who hated Philip like the gates of hell, called him a barbarian and tried to win the Greeks for a united anti-Macedonian policy. He could not prevent Philip's capture of the important city of Olynthus (348), however, because other Greeks acquiesced in the rise of Macedonia. Not only was its king allowed a vote in the Amphictiony, but he was also permitted to compete at Olympia.

From their side, the Greeks finally opened the Olympic Games to all Macedonians, who were now fully recognized as Greeks. Again, this must have had much to do with politics, but on the other hand, it was hard to deny that the Macedonian kings had hellenized at least the elite of their country, which must have been bilingual and showed sincere interest in Greek culture. And it could not be denied that during the Asian war, Greek and Macedonian interests coincided. Accepting each other must have been uneasy, but was a simple recognition of facts.

Men like Alexander and his successors, who had received a Greek education and sometimes claimed to descend from legendary Greek heroes, were responsible for the expansion of Greek culture to the east. They accepted the Greeks as partners in rule

What in fact happened was the creation of a new type of Greekness. One was not only born as Greek, but could also become a Greek by accepting a Greek education. The Macedonians were the first ones to be assimilated, but Egyptians, Jews, and Babylonians followed, and later, Romans and Gauls were also accepted as "culture Greeks".

Probably, both the Slavonic Macedonians and the Greeks claim too much. As we have already seen above, there is no evidence that the ancient Macedonians spoke a language related to Slavonic Macedonian, and there is no evidence that the Macedonians were regarded as Greeks before the reign of Alexander the Great.

I think this is one of the best non-biased observation and analysis of Ancient Macedonia,it's people and language,even though some parts are irritating (like referring contemporary Macedonians as 'Slavonic Macedonians' and so on).The author of the article is a certain Jona Lendering.It would be better if this guy also cited his sources.

[Carlin]

I'm not sure where to put this info; admin can move the following into an appropriate thread if needed.

Source: LIVY, "Rome and the Mediterranean", BOOK XXXIX.24.

[Approx. year: 185 B.C. -- Macedonians transport a great number of Thracians into Macedonia]

- "...he was concerned to restore the population to its ancient level after the losses sustained in the disasters of war ... he had also transported a great number of Thracians into Macedonia."

- "There followed a recurrence of causes tending to renew his resentment against the Romans. The grievances of the Thessalian and the Perrhaebians about Philip's seizure of their cities, and the complaints of the envoys of King Eumenes about his violent occupation of Thracian towns and the transportation of Thracian population to Macedonia..."


A significant indication (proof) that Macedonian rulers themselves considered Thracians to be their kinsfolk. Macedonia sustained significant population losses during this time period - the solution was to settle Thracians (not Hellenes from the south).

[Carlin]

Bump.

1) The Ancient Macedonians and Their Language

Council for Research into South-Eastern Europe of the Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts

In fact the sparse linguistic material is extremely complex and heterogeneous. It is clear that among the glosses there are borrowings from Greek which in antique times was a language of great prestige; the Greek words, however, have been adapted according to a different, non-Greek phonetic system, [e.g.: Macedonian and "sky", Greek aither "air"; Mac. danos, Gk. thanatos "death"; Mac. keb(a)]le Gk. kephale "head", etc.] But at the same time there are among the glosses such words as are not found in Greek but have parallels in other Indo-European languages, [e.g.: aliza "a white layer under the bark of a tree", Slavonic e/oa xa; Mac. goda "innards", Gk. entera, Old Indian Sanskrit gudam "intestine"; Mac. pella "stone", Germ. Fels < + pel-sa, etc.] As proof of the cognation of the ancient Macedonians with the Greeks a photograph has been presented of the inscription from Vergina with Greek names. It should be mentioned that the majority of the names of Macedonians from the ancient period are those of members of the ruling dynasty or the aristocracy who consciously identified with the sphere of Hellenic culture so that it is in no way strange that the names of the majority of them are Greek. But alongside them are to be found Macedonian names which cannot be explained by means of Greek etymology.

With regard to their religion which, it is maintained, was the same as that of the Greeks, it should be borne in mind that the names of the divinities were translated into Greek in accordance with their functions, just as the names of the Greek divinities were altered by Roman authors writing in Latin: Jupiter in place of Zeus,-Minerva for Athena, Venus for Aphrodite, etc. From an analysis of the ancient Macedonian glosses it can be concluded that ancient Macedonian was an Indo-European language distinct from Greek. The well-known French Indo-European scholar A. Meje says that Greek is no closer to ancient Macedonian than is any other Indo-European language. In his classification of the Indo-European languages, J. Pokorny with complete justification puts Macedonian together with Phrygian in his Indo-European etymological dictionary.

(text provided courtesy of Angel Shopoff)

http://www.historyofmacedonia.org/AncientMacedonia/AncientMacedoniansandLanguage.html

2) Ancient writers regard the Macedonian language as a distinct linguistic idiom. Plutarch even ranks Cleopatra's Macedonian dialect alongside the speech of the Egyptians, Ethiopians, Troglodytes, Hebrews, Arabs, Syrians, Medes and Parthians.

[George S.]

carlin the language of homer i read that it could be pelasgian.What links are there with that as a lot of words from homer are similar to modern macedonian.

[DedoAleko]

izvor: Cambridge Ancient History. The Prehistory of the Balkans, the Middle East and the Aegean world 10th-8th Centurie

pdf

http://home.lu.lv/~harijs/Macibu%20materiali%20,teksti/Seno%20laiku%20Vesture%20Kemridzhas/Vol.%203.1.%20Balkans%20East%2010%20-%208.pdf

sorry if repost

[Amphipolis]

Derveni Papyrus

Graham Shipley
...despite ancient and modern controversies it seems clear that the Macedonians as a whole were Greek-speakers. While the elite naturally communicated with other elites in standard, probably Attic, the ordinary Macedonians appear to have spoken a dialect of Greek, albeit with load-words from Illyrian and thracian which gave ammunition to their denigrators[...] if proof needed of the sophistication of Macedonia at this time, one may bring forward the fragments of the earliest surviving Greek literary papyrus, a carbonized book-roll found in a tomb-group of c. 340-320 at Derveni near Thessaloniki. It preserves parts of a philosophical text on Presocratic and Orphic cosmology composed around 400, and surely had a religious significance for the man in whose funeral pyre it was placed. The Derveni roll provides evidence for a high level of culture among the aristocracy.
English historian, " The Greek World After Alexander", Routledge, p.111

The Derveni Papyrus is the only readable papyrus that has survived in Greece and the most ancient manuscript in Europe. Now it is a candidate for the UNESCO list of documented Heritage Monuments.

According to archaeologists, the Derveni papyrus was written around 340-320 B.C. and it is a copy of an older version written at the end of the 5th century B.C.

To enter the UNESCO list, the ancient manuscript should be exhibited in its totality. At the moment, not all sections of the papyrus are exhibited at the Archaelogical Museum of Thessaloniki. The International Council of Museums is discussing the exhibition of the full manuscript.

At the moment, only one panel out of nine is exhibited at the Thessaloniki museum. The nine panels hold a total of 266 fragments of the ancient papyrus. The papyrus was never exhibited in its totality as it was stored in the museum’s storage for preservation purposes. Last year, it was the first time the manuscript was exhibited as a whole for the 4th Biennale of Contemporary Art. It was found that the humidity and lighting conditions are good for its preservation, so its exhibition as a whole is feasible.

The papyrus is an ancient Greek manuscript that was found on January 15, 1962 in Derveni in Macedonia, northern Greece. It was found in the ashes atop of an ancient tomb, presumably that of a nobleman. Experts say that it survived because it was not affected by humidity as it was carbonized by the funeral pyre.

The text is a philosophical treatise that is an allegorical commentary on an Orphic poem about the birth of the gods. It was written by someone in the circle of the philosopher Anaxagoras in the second half of the 5th Century B.C. It “the most important new piece of evidence about Greek philosophy and religion to come to light since the Renaissance” (Janko 2005). It dates to around 340 BC, during the reign of Philip II of Macedon, making it Europe’s oldest surviving manuscript.

The text was published 44 years later after the extensive work of a group of philosophers led by A.L. Pierris and the use of multispectral imaging techniques.


About Derveni Papyrus also here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derveni_papyrus

[Philosopher]

Ah, our Slavic friend Borislav. He is a pure Slav -- certainly not a Hellene.

So let me get this straight. A payprus is found in a region historically outside of Greece (but bordering Greece) written in Greek and this proves what -- the Greekness of the ancient Macedonians?

Are you serious?

[Amphipolis]

Ah, our Slavic friend Borislav. He is a pure Slav -- certainly not a Hellene.

So let me get this straight. A payprus is found in a region historically outside of Greece (but bordering Greece) written in Greek and this proves what -- the Greekness of the ancient Macedonians?

Are you serious?

Borislav can not answer. He's banned.

I posted this story here after searching for a relevant thread. (Derveni papyrus is mentioned here). The Wikipedia link has a small reference to the language of the text describing it as a mix of dialects but I'm not sure what that means. It's also not clear if this is a copy of an older (known) text, or (probably) a commentary on it.

The full text can be found on-line. It is about 25 pages, many of them with fragments missing.

[Nikolaj]

Ah, our Slavic friend Borislav. He is a pure Slav -- certainly not a Hellene.

So let me get this straight. A payprus is found in a region historically outside of Greece (but bordering Greece) written in Greek and this proves what -- the Greekness of the ancient Macedonians?

Are you serious?

It doesn't prove the Greekness of the Macedonians, only a delusional moron would think so.

It is just another piece of literature from the Ancient period. Literature moves, the script/language it was written in has its own purpose, not to mention what is written on it is more important.

Amphipolis, could you please post a link? I assume it has translation?

[Amphipolis]

Amphipolis, could you please post a link? I assume it has translation?

A Translation of the Derveni Papyrus

Column 1

…each one…of the [?Eri]nyes…

Column 2

…Erinyes…of the Erinyes…they honour…are so[uls]…funeral libations in droplets…brings honour…for each something birdlike…fitted to the music…

Column 3

…daimon becomes to each…destroyed utterly…the daimones beneath…receive…and are called assistants of the gods…(they) are, like unjust men…and they are responsible…such as…initiate

Column 4

who (?alters) what lays... to give rather than that harms (verb) ... for [...] does not allow to obtain (?it) from chance. Is it not on account of these that the cosmos possesses order? In the same way, Heraclitus... the common... overturns what is private; he who speaking as someone telling holy discourses said:

The sun ... according to nature is a human foot in width, not transgressing its boundaries. If ... oversteps, the Erinyes, the guardians of Justice, will find it out.

... would make a transgression... of justice...

Column 5

... terrors ... consult an oracle... they consult an oracle... for them we go into the oracular shrine to inquire for oracular answers, whether it is right... the terrors of Hades, why do they disbelieve? Not understanding dreams, nor any of the facts, on the basis of what kind of warning would they believe? Overcome by fault and by pleasure as well, they neither learn, nor believe. Disbelief and lack of understanding [? are the same thing]. For if they neither understand, nor do they learn, [it is not possible that they believe] even when they see... disbelief... appears...

Column 6

... prayers and sacrifices appease the souls, and the enchanting song of the magi is able to remove the daimones when they impede. Impeding daimones are avenging souls. This is why the magi perform the sacrifice, as if they were paying a penalty. On the offerings they pour water and milk, from which they make the libations, too. They sacrifice innumerable and many-knobbed cakes, because the souls, too, are innumerable. Initiates make the preliminary sacrifice to the Eumenides, in the same way as the magi. For the Eumenides are souls. On account of these, he who is going to sacrifice to the gods, first birdlike... and the... (they) are... as many as...

Column 7

... hymn saying sound and lawful things. For ... by his poetry. For it is not possible to state what way the words are used and at the same time the text itself His poetry is something strange and riddling for people. But Orpheus did not intend to tell them captious riddles, but momentous things in riddles. Indeed, he is telling a holy discourse from the first and up to his last word. As he also makes clear in the well-chosen verse: for having ordered them to put doors to their ears he says that he is [? not legislating] for the many... [? but only for] those pure in hearing... according... in the next verse ...

Column 8

…has been made clear in this verse:

Who were born from Zeus the mighty king

And how he (sc. Zeus) begins, he makes clear in this:

And when Zeus took from his father the prophesied rule

And the strength in his hands and the glorious daimon

They ignore the fact that these words are transposed. They are to be taken as follows: ‘Zeus when he took the strength from his father and the glorious daimon.’ Since this is so he (sc. Orpheus) does not maintain that Zeus hears [from his father] but that he takes the strength [from him]. If it is taken the other way, [it would seem] that he [took it] contrary to the divine decrees... for seems to this... might be believed necessary... and knowing...

Column 9

being. He made the strength to belong to the strongest, just as a son belongs to the father. Those who do not understand the meaning of the things said think that Zeus takes the strength and the daimon from his father. Now, knowing that fire, [in as much as] it is mixed with the others, agitates the things that are and hinders them from getting set together because of fomenting, he removed it to an adequate distance, so that once it is removed, it does not hinder the things that are from coagulating. For whatever is kindled is dominated (sc. by fire), and when dominated, it mixes with the other things. But (as to the expression) that ‘he took in his hand,’ he gave a riddling meaning just like the other [...] knows firmest [...] strong, he said that Zeus [...] the daimon ... just as ... . strong.

Column 10

… and to say. For it is not possible to say without uttering; and he (sc. Orpheus) considered ‘to say’ and ‘to utter’ to be the same; and ‘to say’ and ‘to teach’ mean the same (or: have the same power): for it is not possible to teach without saying whatever is taught through discourses. Teaching is considered to reside in saying. Accordingly, ‘to teach’ was not distinguished from ‘to say’ on the one hand, and ‘to say’ from ‘to utter’ on the other, but ‘to utter’, ‘to say’ and ‘to teach’ mean the same. Thus nothing prevents ‘all-pronouncing’ and ‘teaching all things’ from being the same thing.

By saying that she is ‘nurse’, he (sc. Orpheus) expresses in riddling form mat whatever the sun dissolves by heating, the night unites by cooling... those things which the sun heated...

Column 11

... of Night. He says that she proclaims the oracle out of the innermost shrine (e)c a)|[du/toi]o), his view being that the depth of the night is ‘never setting’ (a1duton); for it does not set (du&nei) as the light does, but the sunlight overtakes it as it remains stationary. Now, ‘furnish/proclaim oracles’ (xrh~sai) and ‘assist’ mean the same. But one has to examine to what ‘assist’ and ‘furnish/proclaim oracles’ apply (as a name).

In the belief that this god proclaims oracles, they come inquiring what mey should do. After this he says:

[? She] proclaimed an oracle about all that was right to him to hear.

... he made clear that... the things that are...

Column 12

... and to take away (sc. his rule). And the next line goes like this:

so that he may rule on the lovely abode of snowcapped Olympus

Olympus and time are the same. Those who think that Olympus and the heaven are the same are entirely mistaken, for they do not know that the heaven cannot be longer rather than wider; but if someone were to call time long, he would not be wrong at all. And whenever he (sc. Orpheus) wanted to speak about heaven, he added the epithet ‘wide,’ whereas whenever (he wanted to talk) about Olympus, on the contrary, he never (added the epithet) ‘wide’, but ‘long.’ By saying that it is ‘snow-capped’, the power... snowy... snowy... white... bright... grey... and ...

Column 13

Zeus when he heard the prophecies from his father

For neither did he hear this time-- but it has been made clear in what sense he heard-- nor does Night command (this time). But he makes this clear by saying as follows:

He swallowed the phallus of [...], who sprang from the aither first.

Since in his whole poetry he speaks about facts enigmatically, one has to speak about each word in turn. Seeing that people consider that generation is dependent upon the genitalia, and that without the genitals there is no becoming, he used this (word), likening the sun to a phallus. For without the sun the things that are could not have become such ... things that are ... the sun everything ...

Column 14

[?he made] to leap the brightest and hottest having separated it from himself. He says that this Kronos was born from the sun to the earth because he became the cause through the sun that they were struck against each other. For this reason he says: ‘(He) who did a great deed.’ And after this:

Ouranos son of Night, who first of all ruled

Naming Mind that strikes (? the beings) against each other Kronos, he says that it did a great deed to Ouranos; for (he says that) he (sc. Ouranos) was deprived of his kingdom. He named Kronos himself from his action and the others too according to the same principle. For of all the things that are ... nature... that he got deprived of his kingdom... the things that are...

Column 15

... striking them against each other and, if he made the [su]n separate, (the result is that) the things which are stood apart from one another. For as the sun got separated and encircled, he coagulated and held fast both the things that are above and those which are below the sun. And in the next verse,

From him in turn Kronos, and then wise Zeus

he says that there has been this rule since he has been the king. But his rule gets the explanation that it is by striking the things that are against each other that he separated them into their current reconfiguration, not different (?ones) from different ones, but [...]. And the (expression) ‘and then wise Zeus’ makes it clear that (it is) not another one, but the same one. He indicates this:

Holding wisdom and royal honour over the blessed gods

Column 16

It has been made dear above [that] he called the sun a phallus. Since the beings that are now come to be from the already subsistent he says:

[with?] the phallus of the first-born king, onto which all

The immortals grew (or: clung fast), blessed gods and goddesses

And rivers and lovely springs and everything else

That had been born then; and he himself became solitary.

In these (verses) he indicates that the beings always subsisted, and the beings that are now come to be from (or: out of) subsisting things. And as to (the phrase): ‘and he himself became solitary’, by saying this, he makes dear that the Mind itself, being alone, is worth everything, as if the others were nothing. For it would not be possible for the subsisting things to be such without the Mind. And in the following verse after this he said that the Mind is worth everything:

Now he is king of all and will always be

... Mind and ...

Column 17

... it existed before it was named. Then it was named. For air existed even before the things that are now were set together and always will exist. For it was not born, but existed. And the reason why air received its name has been made clear above. But it was thought that it was born, because it got the name Zeus, just as if it did not exist previously. And he said that this will be ‘the last’, because it was named Zeus, and it will continue to be his name until the things that are now have got set together into the same form in which they were floating as they were before. And it is clear that they became such because of this, and having come to be, they are all in it... he indicates in the following words:

Zeus the head, Zeus the middle, and from Zeus all things have their being

Head... expressed in a riddling form... head... beginning (or: rule) comes about... setting together...

Column 18

... and those moving downwards. But speaking about [...] he means that the [? earth] and all the other things are in the air, it being breath. Now Orpheus named this breath Moira. But all other men according to the common usage say that Moira spun for them and that those things which the Moira has spun will be, on the one hand speaking correctly, but on the other hand not knowing either what Moira is or what spinning is. For Orpheus called wisdom Moira. This seemed to him to be the most suitable out of the names that all men have given. For before Zeus received his name, Moira was the wisdom of the god always and through everything. But since Zeus received his name, they think that he was born, even though he existed even before, but was not named. For this reason he says ‘Zeus was born first’, as he was first... then... men [? not understand]ing what is said (ta_ lego&mena) ... Zeus...

Column 19

... existing things have been called each single name by reason of what dominates (them); all things were called Zeus according to the same prin*ciple. For the air dominates all as far as it wishes. And when they say that the Moira spun they say that the wisdom of Zeus ordains how the things that are and the things that come to be and the things that are going to be must come to be and be and cease. And he likens him to a king (for this seemed to him the most fitting of all the names that are said) saying as follows:

Zeus the king, Zeus who rules all with the bright bolt

He said that he is king because many... one rule prevails and accomplishes all ... no one... to accomplish... ruler... is ruled (or: starts) ...

Column 20

... those men who, while performing the rites in the cities, have seen the holy things, I wonder less that they do not have knowledge. For it is not possible to hear and at the same time to understand (or: learn) what is being said (ta_ lego&mena). But all those who (hope to acquire knowledge?) from someone who makes craft of the holy rites deserve to be wondered at and pitied. Wondered at because, thinking that they will know before they perform the rites, they go away after having performed them before they have attained knowledge, without even asking further questions, as though they knew anything of what they have seen or heard or learned; and pitied because it is not enough for them to have spent their money in advance, but they also go off deprived even of their judgement. Hoping before performing the holy rites that they will attain knowledge, they go away after having performed them deprived of hope too. ... by his own... mother ... sister ...

Column 21

... nor the cold to the cold. By saying ‘by mating’, he (sc. Orpheus) makes dear that divided up into small (pieces) they were moving and mating in the air, and as they were mating, they all got put together with each other. They were mating until each came to its like. Aphrodite Ourania, and Zeus, and to aphrodise, and to mate, and Peitho, and Harmonia are given as name to the same god. A man mingling with a woman is said by common usage to aphrodise. For (this reason) as the things that are now got mixed with one another, (this god) has got the name Aphrodite. (It has got the name) Peitho, because the beings yielded to one another; and to yield and to persuade is the same. (It has got the name) Harmonia, because many of the beings got fitted to one another. For they existed even before, but were spoken of as ‘being born’ since they were separated out... to be separated out makes dear that... ruled so that they got separated out...

Column 22

So he (sc. Orpheus) named all things in the same way as finely as he could, knowing the nature of men, that not all of them have a similar nature nor do all want the same things. When they have the power, they say anything that occurs to each one’s heart, whatever they happen to want, never the same things, through greed (or: arrogance), sometimes also through lack of understanding. Earth (Ge), Mother (Meter), Rhea and Hera is the same (or: are one and the same). She/it was called Earth (Ge) by convention; Mother, because all things are born from her (or: from this one). Ge and Gaia according to each one’s dialect. And (she/it) was called Demeter as the Mother Earth (Ge Meter), one name from the two; for it was the same.

And it is said in the Hymns too: ‘Demeter Rhea Ge Meter Hestia Deio’. For (she/it) is also called Deio because she/it was torn (or: ravaged: e)dhiw&qh) in the mixing/sexual intercourse. He will make it clear when, according to the verses, she is born... And (she/it) is called Rhea because many and... animals were born... from her. Rhea and...

Column 23

This verse has been made misleading and it is unclear to the many, but to those who understand correctly it is clear that Okeanos is the air and air is Zeus. It is not the case that another Zeus contrived Zeus, but that the same one (contrived) for himself great strength. But those who do not understand think that Okeanos is a river because he (sc. Orpheus) added the epithet ‘broadly flowing’. But he indicates his meaning in current and customary expressions. For they say that the very powerful among men ‘flowed great’. And the next verse:

he placed in it the sinews of the silver-eddying Achelous

He does [not give] the name Achelous to water. [? The meaning of the phrase] that he placed in the sinews is that the ... appears in ... each ...

Column 24

... are equal measured from the centre, but those which are not round*-shaped cannot be of equal limbs. This (verse) makes it dear:

which shines for many articulate-speaking humans on the boundless earth.

Someone might think that this verse is said wrongly, namely that when she is at her utmost, the things that are show up more than before she is at her utmost. But he does not mean this (by saying that) she shows, for if he had meant this, he would not have said that she shows for many, but that for all at the same time, both for those who work the land, and for those who sail when they have to sail, and for the former the seasons. For if there were no moon, people could not have discovered the counting either of the seasons, or of the winds... and all the others...

Column 25

... and brightness. Those things out of which the moon is (composed) are the whitest of all, divided according to the same principle (or: measure), but they are not hot. And there are other things now in the air, floating far away from each other. But during the day they are invisible being dominated by the sun, whereas during the night it is visible that they exist. They are dominated because of their smallness. Each of them floats in necessity, so that they do not come together with one another; for otherwise all those which have the same characteristics as those out of which the sun was set together would come together in one mass. If the god had not wished that the things which are now should exist, he would not have made the sun. But he made it of such a sort and of such a size as is explained in the beginning of the account. Those (words) which come after these he puts before (as a screen) not wishing all men to understand. In this verse he indicates:

But once [? the heart] of Zeus devised all deeds

Column 26

... ‘[of?] mother’ because the Mind is the mother of the others; and ‘of his own (e(a~c)’ because she is good. He makes clear in these verses too that it means good:

Hermes Diaktoros son of Maia, giver of goods (e)a&|wn).

He makes it clear in these as well:

For two urns are placed on Zeus’ threshold,

Of gifts such as they give: of evils, and the other one of goods (e)a&|wn)
Those who do not understand the term think that it is ‘[of?] his own mother’. But if he had wished to show the god wishing to mingle in love of his own (e(autou~) mother, it would have been possible for him by altering some letters to say of his own (e(oi=o) mother. For thus it would have become his own (e(autou), and he would be her son... her... clear that... both ... good...

[spitfire]

not to mention what is written on it is more important.

And that means what?