greek lower case alphabet

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
daler
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:24 am

greek lower case alphabet

Post by daler »

Hi, New member here.
I was curious if anyone knew anything about the lower case greek alphabet. I can find very little info on it. All i know is that it was apparently started in the middle ages. One of my questions about it is , "Why?" it certainly doesn't seem easier to write than the capital letters. Also if it is a medieval invention, why are the texts we read that are supposed to be ancient printed in it? It seems kind of dishonest to me. I want to learn greek so i can read it the way it was written. Also, if the lower case letters were meant to make it easier to read/write, why weren't more latin letters used? i mean latin m and mu have the same value don't they? Or was the alphabet put together in the byzantine part of the old empire and they decidedly wanted to avoid latin letters at all cost?
These are just questions that i haven't seen anywhere and I was wondering if anybody had solid info or opinions on it?

Thanks,

Dale

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis »

For the "why" of writing systems you should go to either Archive.org or Google Books and do a search on "palaeography" — that'll bring up Thompson's Handbook of Greek and Latin Palaeography. Starting around page 150 he discusses the development of the minuscule (lower case) in non-papyrus manuscripts.

There are a lot of factors that go into how writing systems change, of which "easier" is possibly one of the least important. The technologies have a large impact, such as papyrus vs. parchment, scoll vs. codex, cost of material, etc.
Also if it is a medieval invention, why are the texts we read that are supposed to be ancient printed in it? It seems kind of dishonest to me. I want to learn greek so i can read it the way it was written.
Personally I think what the Greeks wrote is more important than exactly how they wrote it, or how writing changed over time. Even in our own language, most of us would be unhappy to have to read Chaucer or Shakespeare in the fonts they were originally typeset in. The words matter more than the shape of the serifs.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

daler
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 12:24 am

Post by daler »

I agree about the content being the most important, but I am still curious why there was just one step of transformation of the alphabet. Following your logic, we would have the Greek texts today in the Latin alphabet. I studied Old English at one time and am remarkably thankful that i didn't need to read the hand written text of that time even though the alphabet was 95% Latin. Just kind of curious about how these things settle out.

Dale

Arvid
Textkit Member
Posts: 163
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:06 am
Location: Seattle WA

Post by Arvid »

Actually, I think the lower-case letter forms are just the shapes the letters had assumed in the quill-on-parchment writing style of the Middle Ages (as opposed to the stylus-on-wax-tablet style of ancient times.) The Capital letters were revived later to start sentences (or paragraphs, in Greek) and use for chapter headings and the like. Basically the same thing happened with the Roman alphabet.

As for writing Greek with the Latin alphabet, that was never really a possibility. While the whole Mediterranean may have been part of the Roman Empire, and every educated Roman knew Greek, very very few people in the Eastern Empire ever learned Latin. I agree with Annis that its total unsuitability for writing Greek would probably have been the least important consideration, but the fact is it would never have entered anyone's mind.

If you check out Thompson, though, his Introduction to Greek and Latin Palaeography is more extensive and replaces the earlier Handbook.

annis
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 3399
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
Location: Madison, WI, USA
Contact:

Post by annis »

daler wrote:I agree about the content being the most important, but I am still curious why there was just one step of transformation of the alphabet.
Ooh, there wasn't one step, but lots and lots of little ones.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;

edonnelly
Administrator
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 2:47 am
Location: Music City, USA
Contact:

Post by edonnelly »

annis wrote: Personally I think what the Greeks wrote is more important than exactly how they wrote it,
I'm reminded of the story of the young aspiring author who, upon meeting Hemingway, asks him what kind of typewriter he uses.
The lists:
G'Oogle and the Internet Pharrchive - 1100 or so free Latin and Greek books.
DownLOEBables - Free books from the Loeb Classical Library

perispomenon
Textkit Fan
Posts: 256
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Mijdrecht
Contact:

Post by perispomenon »

Have a look at this for what the 'first edition' of the Iliad might have looked like.

I don't know about the validity of this effort however.

mingshey
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 1338
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 6:38 am
Location: Seoul
Contact:

Re: greek lower case alphabet

Post by mingshey »

daler wrote:One of my questions about it is , "Why?" it certainly doesn't seem easier to write than the capital letters.
Dale
I'm no expert in this matter. But as far as I have investigated this matter through the materials I could find online, the change of 'fonts' largely depended on the physical material they used for writing. A sharp nail on pot-shards, a reed pen on papyrus, a quill on parchment, or printer's die on paper, etc. They say the scribed in the medieval era had a need to copy tremendous amount of documents: some for the scholars, some for the powerful people, and periodically just for maintenace, etc. So they had to adopt a fast scribbling method for copying letters. And it was possible because they used soft quill tips and ink on a smooth parchment surface, instead of nail tips on a hard potshard surfaces. The letters started to take smooth, round, and connected forms. If you try to copy a greek text in all uppercase letters you'll find it quite cumbersome, and then look closely at the medieval manuscripts and try to follow the curves you could find that they tried (hard) to reduce the effort of writing. And later, bacause of its ascenders and descenders, and the generally round forms, the flowing letters exceeded in readibility and beauty the all-uppercase forms. So this way and that way these flowing forms took their own life.

This is not the whole story and maybe not quite true at all. But that's the general idea I have in mind for the birth of lowercase letters. I hope it helps. :wink:

Post Reply