Smyth (5.a) states that “the ι ceased to be written about 100 B.C. The custom of writing ι under the line is as late as about the eleventh century.” I take him to mean that before 100 B.C. the ι in all diphthongs had been adscript but then disappeared after long α, η, and ω. I’m wondering how, then, in the 11th century, were those cases of long α, η, and ω re-cognized as (“improper”) diphthongs.
Most of the long diphthongs occur in dative singulars and certain verb forms. Grammarians/scholars knew about these even after they ceased to be pronounced and written in ordinary writing. Thus, there was a more or less continuous tradition of scholarship that preserved knowledge of the long diphthongs throughout the Byzantine period, and I believe that some carefully written manuscripts of ancient authors kept the iotas as adscripts down to the era when they began to be written as subscripts.
Sounds fascinating! Makes me wonder whether there is a good study on the development of philology in Byzantium…
You may find Nigel Guy Wilson’s Scholars of Byzantium interesting. It maps out the whole Byzantine scholarship, though, and not only philology.
Also this:
Focused primarily on philology, not just Byzantine or Greek scholarship, but also Latin.
This book provides essential information for anyone interested in ancient Greek and Latin texts.
Thanks a lot, will check them out!
I also found this one: https://books.google.com/books?id=hTZHbNmFfpsC&source=gbs_similarbooks
A pdf is available here:
I am wondering, though, how reliable this Robert H. Robins is, as he consistently misnames Theognostus “Theodosius” (let alone, claims that Michael Syncellus was a Patriarch of Jerusalem!)…
I hope that names and titles just aren’t his strong side.
I would hope that the line about Syncellus is copy-editing error. The original perhaps read that Michael Syncellus was Syncellus of the Patriarch in Jerusalem or was Syncellus in Jerusalem.
I don’t know the exact place that you are looking at, but both 4th century Theodosius and the 9th century Theognostus wrote a Canones, and I believe that Robins refers to the first.
I’m afraid that I’m going to have to remove the pdf link, since we don’t want Jeff to have to deal with a copyright notice.
Oh, good–my glitch, he means the 4th century one (of whom I did not know!); overall his study seems uniquely informative on the subject. My apologies for posting the link.
No worries about the link. I’m very impressed by your knowledge of Byzantine history. I had to look all of this up.
I had been working with Byzantine stuff for quite a while before taking a long break from all things Greek, and am now into the Classical period, mainly Plato, who was, actually, my “first love” but not read in the original.