Wilk ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 © 2010 Kevin W. Wilkinson Some Neologisms in the Epigrams of Palladas Kevin W. Wilkinson ALLADAS OF ALEXANDRIA can lay claim to being the last major writer of Greek scoptic epigram.1 This is a sub- genre that enjoyed its heyday during the reign of Nero, exerted an influence on Martial, and apparently fell out of fash- ion later in the second century. Unless we have been seriously misled by the vicissitudes of survival, this literary form then lay dormant until Palladas briefly resurrected it in late antiquity, at a time when the trend in Greek poetry was towards a highly technical style of epic verse.2 In comparison with the latter, scoptic epigram was less rigid in its meter, less elevated in its themes, and less ostentatiously literary in its language. While extremely artful at its best, it gives the impression of being casual, nearly “prosaic” or “non-literary.”3 It is this style that 1 G. Agosti, “Late Antique Iambics and Iambikè Idéa,” in A. Cavarzere, A. Aloni, and A. Barchiesi (eds.), Iambic Ideas: Essays on a Poetic Tradition from Archaic Greece to the Late Roman Empire (Lanham 2001) 219–255, at 234–237. 2 Associated especially with Nonnus of Panopolis, but developing already in the third century with the two Oppians, Quintus of Smyrna, and Triphi- odorus; see L. M. Cavero, Poems in Context: Greek Poetry in the Egyptian Thebaid, 200–600 AD (Berlin 2008) 106–107. 3 V. Longo, L’epigramma scoptico greco (Genoa 1967) 16–17; G. Nisbet, Greek Epigram in the Roman Empire: Martial’s Forgotten Rivals (Oxford 2003) 16 and passim. On Palladas see I. G. G. Calderini, “L’epigramma greco tardo- antico: tradizione e innovazione,” Vichiana N.S. 16 (1987) 103–134, at 124– 125: “Uomo di profonda cultura, ma costantemente rivolto alla realtà quotidiana, egli adotta uno stile promiscuo, nel quale toni schietti ed im- mediati, ottenuti mediante un linguaggio disadorno, non alieno da elementi popolareschi, convivono con modi ricercati ed eruditi.” P 296 SOME NEOLOGISMS IN THE EPIGRAMS OF PALLADAS ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 dominates in Palladas’ poetry, even in the epigrams that are not truly scoptic. And this is nowhere more evident than in his vocabulary, which can be strikingly non-poetic. Of particular interest, Palladas sometimes, and quite self- consciously, employed terms that were new and colloquial— words that had gained currency on the streets of a Greek city in late antiquity but that catch the eye in a literary context.4 This is a feature of his style that has not received due attention, per- haps because commentators have been laboring under a mis- apprehension of the poet’s dates. Traditionally located in the second half of the fourth century and first half of the fifth, Pal- ladas was in fact active during the sole reign of Constantine I (324–337).5 Indeed, he was probably rather advanced in years by that period.6 The revised dates for this poet provide a new vantage point from which to consider some of his lexical choices, especially a group of words that are attested for the first time during the opening quarter of the fourth century. One source of new colloquialisms in Palladas’ poetry is Latin vocabulary that had recently entered Greek parlance.7 There is 4 These are to be distinguished from words that were invented by later Greek poets according to established literary practice and in order to dem- onstrate their virtuosity. On this technique in Hellenistic epigram see E. Magnelli, “Meter and Diction: From Refinement to Mannerism,” in P. Bing and J. S. Bruss (eds.), Brill’s Companion to Hellenistic Epigram (Leiden 2007) 165–183, at 171–177. On Homeric-sounding neologisms in Nonnus and other late antique poets see Cavero, Poems in Context 154–161. In scoptic verse, it is not unusual to encounter made-up words that contain a joke. Palladas himself produced a number of these, e.g. ἀντιοχευόµενος (Anth.Pal. 11.284.2). 5 K. W. Wilkinson, “Palladas and the Age of Constantine,” JRS 99 (2009) 36–60. 6 Wilkinson, JRS 99 (2009) 49–51, where his birth is placed ca. 259 (plus or minus several years of course). 7 As opposed to transliterated Latin, which is a technique that Palladas employs in Anth.Pal. 10.44 (δόµινε φρϱάτερϱ, with a play on Latin domine and Greek δόµεναι). For a nearly complete list of Latin names and vocabulary in Palladas’ epigrams see A. Franke, De Pallada epigrammatographo (diss. Leipzig 1899) 83. KEVIN W. WILKINSON 297 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 some precedent for this in earlier scoptic verse. Nicarchus, for example, uses the newly coined ξέστης (cf. Lat. sextarius) in Anth. Pal. 11.73.6. It is a word, as Gideon Nisbet notes, that is “alien to any literary register, but immediately familiar from a large number of documents on papyrus.”8 And it begins to show up in the papyrological record precisely in the middle of the first century—that is, during Nicarchus’ lifetime. This may be compared with Palladas’ facetious linguistic commentary on κϰονδῖτον (cf. Lat. conditum), a kind of spiced wine sometimes used for medicinal purposes (Anth.Pal. 9.502):9 κϰονδίτου µοι δεῖ. τὸ δὲ κϰονδῖτον πόθεν ἔσχεν τοὔνοµα; τῆς φωνῆς ἐστι γὰρϱ ἀλλότρϱιον τῆς τῶν Ἑλλήνων· εἰ Ῥωµαϊκϰῶς δὲ κϰαλεῖται, αὐτὸς ἂν εἰδείης Ῥωµαϊκϰώτατος ὤν. σκϰεύασον οὖν µοι τοῦτο· τὸ γὰρϱ κϰατέχον µε νόσηµα τοῦ στοµάχου χρϱῄζει τοῦδε, λέγουσι, ποτοῦ. I need konditon. But where did the word konditon come from? For it is foreign to the Greek language. If it derives from Latin, you would know, since you are the Latin expert. Pre- pare it for me, then, because people tell me that my stomach ailment requires this drink. The poet’s mock surprise at the word and his feigned ignorance of its derivation (he gives himself away in line 5 with σκϰεύασον = condito) suggest that this was a new entry in vernacular Greek at the time of the epigram’s composition. And indeed, the first occurrence in Greek documentary papyri dates to A.D. 317– 323 (P.Ryl. IV 629.367). Palladas’ poem can hardly be more than two or three decades removed from this date, and it sup- plies what is very likely the first literary occurrence.10 8 Nisbet, Greek Epigram 89 n.21. 9 All quotations of the Anthology (except for one divergence, identified be- low) are taken from H. Beckby (ed.), Anthologia Graeca2 I–IV (1965–1968). All translations are my own. 10 Followed later in the fourth century by Orib. Coll.med. 5.33.8–9; cf. Cyranides 3.3 (probably fourth century). 298 SOME NEOLOGISMS IN THE EPIGRAMS OF PALLADAS ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 For both Nicarchus and Palladas, the occasional use of new and colloquial loanwords was a technique that helped to establish the casual style that was a hallmark of scoptic verse. Practitioners of this genre, however sophisticated, used the language and subject-matter of everyday life to craft a highly self-conscious literary persona—that of the trifler. But the fact that these words were borrowed from Latin may also be a nod to the cultural and political situation of Hellenes under Roman rule. This seems especially likely for Palladas’ epigram, in which the Ῥωµαϊκϰῶς and Ῥωµαϊκϰώτατος of consecutive lines are dripping with disdain. (Is it even the Latinism itself that has turned his stomach?)11 In the first half of the fourth century, κϰονδῖτον entered colloquial Greek and so became useful to Palladas for its linguistic register, but it also supplied the opportunity for an indirect commentary on the superiority of Hellenic culture and the unwelcome influence—indeed intru- sion—of all things Latin. A second example in Palladas’ oeuvre of a recently coined Latin loanword is φόλλις (cf. Lat. follis) in Anth.Pal. 9.528: Χρϱιστιανοὶ γεγαῶτες Ὀλύµπια δώµατ’ ἔχοντες ἐνθάδε ναιετάουσιν ἀπήµονες· οὐδὲ γὰρϱ αὐτοὺς χώνη φόλλιν ἄγουσα φερϱέσβιον ἐν πυρϱὶ θήσει. Having become Christian, the owners of Olympian palaces dwell here unharmed; for the melting-pot that produces the life-giving follis will not put them in the fire. I have argued elsewhere that these lines are best read against the historical backdrop of Constantine’s spoliation of the pagan temples ca. 330.12 According to our sources, most of the cult 11 For Greek attitudes towards the Latin language see B. Rochette, Le latin dans le monde grec: Recherches sur la diffusion de la langue et des lettres latines dans les provinces hellénophones de l’Empire romain (Brussels 1997), esp. 69–83. 12 JRS 99 (2009) 54–56. For Constantine’s spoliation of the temples see Euseb. VC 3.54, LC 8.2–4; Jer. Chron. a. 330; Julian Or. 7.22 (Bidez); Anon. De rebus bellicis 2.2; Lib. Or. 30.6, 37 (Förster); Socr. HE 1.16; Soz. HE 2.5; Zos. 5.24.6. KEVIN W. WILKINSON 299 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 statues seized by the government during this period were con- verted into coins, but some of the best bronzes were “rescued” from the fire and installed in the public spaces of Constan- tinople, the emperor’s new Christian capital in the East.13 Anth. Pal. 9.528 seems to pick up on these two possible fates: some brazen gods avoided the melting-pot by abandoning their cult and aligning themselves with the religion of the first Christian emperor. Here, however, I merely want to consider the significance of φόλλιν in the third line. Like κϰονδῖτον, this loanword entered the Greek language during Palladas’ lifetime. It is attested in papyri from the beginning of the fourth century,14 and Anth.Pal. 9.528 supplies one of the very first occurrences in literature.15 But setting that fact to one side, can we be certain of the word’s meaning in this case? Almost always in Greek, it designates a sum of money, which appears to fit the context here very well: the Olympian statues avoided, not merely being melted down, but being melted down by the government for coins. Whether we think that φόλλιν here designates a trifling amount or a larger sum is irrelevant for our comprehension of the epi- gram.16 The only other attested use of φόλλις in Greek is to 13 In general, on the display of former cult statues and other pagan arti- facts in Constantinople, see S. Bassett, “The Antiquities in the Hippodrome of Constantinople,” DOP 45 (1991) 87–96, and The Urban Image of Late Antique Constantinople (Cambridge 2004). 14 The earliest occurrences are in P.Panop.Beatty 2.302 (A.D. 300) and P.Cair.Isid. 126.8 (308/9). See R. S. Bagnall, Currency and Inflation in Fourth Century Egypt (Chico 1985) 17–18. 15 Perhaps preceded only by Euseb. HE 10.6.1. 16 The word has frequently been taken here to mean a single bronze coin of little value. Alan Cameron, “The Follis in Fourth-Century Egypt,” NC VII.4 (1964) 135–138, argued that this was the first such use of follis in an Egyptian source. More recently, others have been critical of this inter- pretation: M. Salamon, “Coinage and Money in the Epigrams of Palladas: A Few Remarks,” in S. Stabryla (ed.), Everyday Life and Literature in Antiquity (Classica Cracoviensia 1 [1995]) 91–101, at 93–95; H. White, “Notes on Pal- ladas,” Myrtia 13 (1998) 225–230, at 229–230; A. Pontani, “Ancora su 300 SOME NEOLOGISMS IN THE EPIGRAMS OF PALLADAS ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 refer to a tax (the collatio glebalis) that was introduced during the reign of Constantine I.17 This should probably not receive serious consideration as the primary referent of φόλλιν in Palla- das’ epigram, but it is certainly possible that it lurks in the background. The timing is suggestive, at any rate, and Con- stantine’s new taxes (like his confiscation of temple property) were seen by his detractors to be indicative of imperial greed and interference.18 An altogether different reading of the word has been pro- posed by some who suggest that the context might support the translation “bellows”—a definition of follis that is common in Latin but otherwise unattested in Greek.19 While the first asso- ciation to be formed by any fourth-century reader encounter- ing this word in a Greek context would surely be “money,” and perhaps secondarily the Constantinian tax, it is plausible that a reference to fire later in the line might have caused a bilingual reader to think additionally of bellows fanning the flames. The adjective φερϱέσβιον seems to support this layered reading of the noun. Heather White has suggested two ways in which this word might be taken with reference to a pair of bellows—as breathing life both into the statues and into the fire—but she is ___ Pallada, AP IX 528, ovvero il bilinguismo alla prova,” Incontri triestini di filologia classica 6 (2006/7) 175–210, esp. 194–197. Salamon’s judgment seems right to me: evidence for the value of the follis in the fourth century is scant and contradictory, and Palladas’ epigram does not provide any ad- ditional information, but this is no reason to think that he is not talking about money. 17 O. Seeck, RE 4 (1900) 365–367; A. H. M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire (Oxford 1964) I 110, 431, III 106–108. 18 The classic critique is Zos. 2.38 (drawn from Eunapius). On fourth- century criticism of Constantine’s fiscal policies see H.-U. Wiemer, “Li- banius on Constantine,” CQ N.S. 44 (1994) 511–524, at 519–520. 19 White, Myrtia 13 (1998) 229–230; Pontani, Incontri triestini 6 (2006/7) 187–196. This is the meaning suggested also in LSJ from the seventh edi- tion (1883) on, evidently under the influence of E. A. Sophocles’ Glossary of Later and Byzantine Greek. For a full account see Pontani 187 ff. KEVIN W. WILKINSON 301 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 not justified in rejecting its applicability to coinage.20 This ad- jective is most typically used of the earth, which produces life and sustains it, but it would be a characteristically Palladan twist to imply that it is rather money that allows for the possibility of βίος—that is, both “life” itself and “livelihood.”21 It seems quite likely (to this reader at any rate) that Palladas consciously built a measure of ambiguity into the line that would allow for multiple resonances of φόλλις/follis to be en- tertained simultaneously. It is possible, in fact, that the interference from Latin may go even further than this. On any assessment of the noun’s mean- ing, the participle ἄγουσα should strike the reader as an odd choice.22 This verb does not really mean to “produce,” which is what the epigram seems to require if φόλλιν is a reference to coins. And it is a curious image, too, if we prefer to think of taxes or of bellows. The sense is somewhat strained on any in- terpretation. But is it possible that this dearth of meaning—and especially in combination with a noun that is Latin in origin— would have caused an ancient reader to expand the frame of reference from ἄγω to include ago? The Latin cognate has a broader semantic range, including to “produce.” The layers of meaning seem to proliferate (and in interesting ways) if one reads the entire phrase bilingually. The general drift of lines 2–3 is clear enough without appeal to Latin: the “converted” statues have avoided the fate of being 20 White, Myrtia 13 (1998) 230. 21 Cf. Anth.Pal. 10.63.4, in which a rich man’s death is the end of his βίος (both “life” and “livelihood”), discussed by Salamon, Classica Cracoviensia 1 (1995) 95; Anth.Pal. 10.82.4 (τοῦ βίου τεθνηκϰότος), in which the noun may possess a dual sense, discussed by Alan Cameron, “Palladas and Christian Polemic,” JRS 55 (1965) 17–30, at 27; Anth.Pal. 9.175, in which Palladas complains of a loss of salary and worries that his βίος will end in poverty. 22 Cf. J. Reiske (ed.), Anthologiae Graecae a Constantino Cephala conditae libri tres (Leipzig 1754) 227 (of the notes): recognizing the difficulty, which he attrib- utes to the poet’s lack of skill, Reiske suggests that ἀνεῖσα would have been a better choice. 302 SOME NEOLOGISMS IN THE EPIGRAMS OF PALLADAS ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 melted down. It is much more difficult, however, to decide on any one reading of χώνη φόλλιν ἄγουσα φερϱέσβιον, and that may be precisely the point. The intrusion of Latin into Greek both muddies the waters and generates a richer complexity of potential associations. In addition to Latin loanwords, Palladas’ other source of newly minted vocabulary was Greek and Christian. Unlike most pagan men of letters, who either ignored Christianity altogether or at least tended to avoid Christian jargon, Palladas takes up the topic with some relish.23 This is evident already in Anth.Pal. 9.528, on the converted Olympians, which begins with the bold choice of Χρϱιστιανοί. While it was no longer novel in the early fourth century, this word is certainly non- classical and undeniably surprising from the hand of a pagan poet. It looks especially peculiar alongside the epic Ὀλύµπια δώµατ’ ἔχοντες. The hoary gods of myth—representatives of traditional Hellenic culture—have adopted a name and an identity that could not have been imagined by Homer. And they have done so in order to avoid conversion into the equally non-classical (indeed quite novel) φόλλιν of line 3.24 Palladas seems here to present Christianity and the Roman state as twin threats to the Hellenes’ way of life. And under Constantine, of course, this pair of destructive forces had become merely two sides of the same coin. On two other occasions, Palladas uses Christian words that were new in the early fourth century. One of these is µοναχός, 23 On the lengths to which authors (both pagan and Christian) might go to avoid Christian terminology, see Averil Cameron and Alan Cameron, “Christianity and Tradition in the Historiography of the Late Empire,” CQ N.S. 14 (1964) 316–328. 24 This technique of placing an epic phrase alongside colloquial language, in order to point up something absurd, is not uncommon in scoptic verse. Cf. esp. Lucillius’ epigram on a playwright who sold some statues of the gods to support himself (Anth.Pal. 11.189.5–6): οἱ δὲ θεοὶ πὰρϱ Ζηνὶ κϰαθή- µενοι ἐξεδύθησαν / εἰς βρϱαχὺ σιταρϱίου κϰέρϱµα κϰαὶ οἰναρϱίου (“And the gods that sit with Zeus were stripped to produce a little coin for a hunk of bread and a swig of wine”). KEVIN W. WILKINSON 303 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 which appears in Anth.Pal. 11.384. This was not exactly a neo- logism in late antiquity. It appears rarely in Greek literature from the time of Plato, almost exclusively in philosophical texts and more often than not in adverbial forms.25 In the papyri the adjective is used in a couple of technical senses: of contracts and the like, “executed in a single copy” or sometimes “top copy”; and of clothing, “made with a single cloth” or perhaps “single-layered.”26 In late antiquity, however, µοναχός came to be used widely as a substantive meaning “monk.”27 It is in this last, novel, and colloquial sense that Palladas employs the word (Anth.Pal. 11.384): εἰ µοναχοί, τί τοσοίδε; τοσοίδε δέ, πῶς πάλι µοῦνοι; ὦ πληθὺς µοναχῶν ψευσαµένη µονάδα. If solitaries [sc. monks], why so many? And if so many, how again alone? O crowd of solitaries that has given the lie to solitude! Long ago, on historical grounds, Johannes Reiske declared that this epigram could not predate the age of Theodosius I.28 His claim is simply false, especially in light of the fact that Palladas was a native of Egypt. The origins of Egyptian monasticism are shadowy but certainly belong in the third 25 A. Adam, “Grundbegriffe des Mönchtums in sprachlicher Sicht,” ZKG 65 (1953) 209–239, at 209–214; F. Morard, “Monachos, moine: histoire du terme grec jusqu’au 4e siècle,” FZPhTh 20 (1973) 332–411, at 336–340. 26 LSJ s.v. I.3 and Suppl.; Morard, FZPhTh 20 (1973) 341–346. 27 Some have posited a pre-history of this usage in a handful of obscure Jewish and Christian passages (from the biblical translations of Aquila and Symmachus and from two of the Nag Hammadi titles); e.g., Morard, FZPhTh 20 (1973) 347–354, 362–377, and “Encore quelques réflexions sur Monachos,” VigChr 34 (1980) 395–401. But cf. E. A. Judge, “The Earliest Use of Monachos for ‘Monk’ (P. Coll. Youtie 77) and the Origins of Monasticism,” JbAC 20 (1977) 72–89, at 75–77; M. Choat, “The Develop- ment and Usage of Terms for ‘Monk’ in Late Antique Egypt,” JbAC 45 (2002) 5–23, at 8. 28 Reiske, Anthologiae Graecae 254. 304 SOME NEOLOGISMS IN THE EPIGRAMS OF PALLADAS ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 century.29 Even before Constantine assumed control of the East (A.D. 324), there were already several monastic houses in Upper Egypt. And there is solid evidence that by the 330s the phenomenon had pervaded the whole of the Nile valley as well as the Delta.30 I do not know how many monks Palladas must have heard about for him to call them a πληθύς (though two already seem enough for the joke), and in any event we have no way of determining their numbers. On purely historical grounds, however, there is no objection to placing Anth.Pal. 11.384 in the first half of the fourth century. But what of the word µοναχός, which is the truly interesting feature of this poem? It may have been a popular term for a monk (or any type of Christian ascetic) in Egypt already during the earliest years of the fourth century.31 At any rate, the first extant occurrence of the word with the appropriate sense can be dated precisely to 6 June 324 (P.Col. VII 171.15). This is, curiously enough, in a legal petition composed by the non- Christian Aurelius Isidorus, who claims that Antoninus the deacon and Isaac the monk (µοναχός) rescued him from a beating. Evidently, by this date, the word was in common use in Egypt and fully intelligible outside of Christian circles. And it remained the most frequent title for monks in papyri of the fourth century.32 As for literature, the first occurrence may be in Eusebius’ Commentary on the Psalms, written in the 330s.33 This passage is not without ambiguity, and there is a lack of con- 29 For a summary of monasticism’s early growth in Egypt see D. J. Chitty, The Desert a City: An Introduction to the Study of Egyptian and Palestinian Monasti- cism under the Christian Empire (Oxford 1966) 1–45. 30 See, for example, the evidence for this period in Ath. V.Anton.; V. Pachom. Gr.; Pall. H.Laus.; H. I. Bell, Jews and Christians in Egypt (London 1924) 38–99 = P.Lond. VI 1913–1922. 31 The most current and judicious treatment is Choat, JbAC 45 (2002) 5– 23. 32 See the useful table compiled by Choat, JbAC 45 (2002) 9–10, and 8 n.23 correcting earlier opinions on the frequency of occurrence. 33 PG 23, 689B; for discussion see Judge, JbAC 20 (1977) 74–76. KEVIN W. WILKINSON 305 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 temporary Christian literature with which to compare it, but it is at least indisputable that the word shows up frequently with the relevant sense in the oeuvre of Athanasius (ca. 335–373). Palladas’ epigram must be on the leading edge of this linguistic development. The date of composition is perhaps unlikely to be much earlier than 324 (the date of P.Col. 171), and it cannot be much later than 350, when Palladas (if still alive) would have probably been in his nineties. This epigram, therefore, contains one of the very first literary references to Christian µοναχοί. Given what we now know about Palladas’ habit of taking up new terms, we should not be surprised at this fact. Indeed, as with Anth.Pal. 9.502 on κϰονδῖτον, this epigram is primarily about µοναχός as a linguistic innovation and only secondarily about the monks themselves. In both cases, the observations are sharper the closer they are in date to the introduction of these two words into vernacular Greek. Anth.Pal. 11.384 appears to be another instance in which Pal- ladas deploys a newly minted word to point up a destructive influence on Hellenic culture. This time, however, the culprit is not Latin and everything else associated with the Roman state, but rather Christianity with its muddled jargon and disregard for the social norms of the Greek polis. Even so, the epigram is not especially hostile.34 While it serves up a joke at the monks’ expense, it has little in common with the vituperations of men like Libanius and Eunapius.35 In response to some notorious outrages perpetrated by Christian monks on pagan sites in the last quarter of the fourth century, these fin-de-siècle Hellenes were shrill in their denunciations of the black-clad mob of gluttons and vandals. But for the equally conservative Palladas, several decades earlier, the monks seem to be merely one more 34 A fourth-century Christian monk could write virtually the same thing. Jer. Ep. 14.6 (ca. A.D. 376) interpretare vocabulum monachi, hoc est nomen tuum: quid facis in turba qui solus es? and 58.5 (A.D. 395) si cupis esse quod diceris, monachus, id est solus, quid facis in urbibus, quae utique non sunt solorum habitacula, sed multorum? 35 Lib. Or. 30.8; Eunap. VS 472. 306 SOME NEOLOGISMS IN THE EPIGRAMS OF PALLADAS ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 absurdity in an already absurd world, and perhaps one more symbol of a culture in decline. Palladas’ second use of a newly coined Christian word is the compound adjective φιλόχρϱιστος, which appears in Anth.Plan. 282: Ν ῖκϰαι πάρϱεσµεν, αἱ γελῶσαι παρϱθένοι, νίκϰας φέρϱουσαι τῇ φιλοχρϱίστῳ πόλει. ἔγρϱαψαν ἡµᾶς οἱ φιλοῦντες τὴν πόλιν πρϱέποντα νίκϰαις ἐντυποῦντες σχήµατα. Here we are, the Victories, the laughing maidens, bearing victories to the Christ-loving city. Those who love the city fashioned us, stamping figures appropriate to the victories. There is some debate about the authenticity of φιλοχρϱίστῳ in the second line. This is the reading of the Anthologia Planudea, our only manuscript witness to the epigram. Editors, however, have been shy about printing this adjective, most preferring φιλοχρϱήστῳ in its place.36 It is possible that this reading derives from an alternate manuscript tradition, of which there is now no trace, but this is very doubtful. The most thorough attempts to sort through the evidence have been undertaken in defense of Planudes’ testimony.37 These have dispelled some prevalent misconceptions about the word φιλόχρϱιστος, which was in reg- ular use in the fourth century and exceedingly more common than the alternative φιλόχρϱηστος.38 There is no good reason to 36 φιλοχρϱήστῳ appears in the error-riddled early editions of Anth.Plan., first in J. Lascaris (Florence 1494). It has been retained in all of the standard modern editions: F. Jacobs (Leipzig 1814); F. Dübner (Paris 1872); H. Beckby (Munich 1968), from whose text I diverge in this one instance; R. Aubreton (Paris 1980). 37 See esp. J. Irmscher, “Ἡ φιλόχρϱιστος πόλις �(zu Anthologia Graeca XVI 282),” TU 77 (1961) 323–330; Alan Cameron, “Palladas and the Nikai,” JHS 84 (1964) 54–62, at 54–56. See also P. Waltz, “Sur quelques épigrammes ‘protreptiques’ de l’Anthologie (livre X): notes critiques et exégétiques,” REG 59–60 (1946/7) 176–209, at 203. 38 As Alan Cameron (JHS 84 [1964] 55) remarks, LSJ s.v. φιλόχρϱιστος, which cites only two late inscriptions, is misleading. KEVIN W. WILKINSON 307 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 doubt, therefore, that Palladas composed an epigram about a “Christ-loving” city, which has been identified by commen- tators as either Constantinople or Alexandria.39 But more to the point for the present argument, the first indisputable occurrence is in a letter written by the bishops Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theognis of Nicaea in 327.40 This is also the precise period for the first occurrence of κϰονδῖτον (317–323) and µοναχός in the sense of “monk” (324). Palladas is once again using a freshly minted neologism, and once again it is Christian in origin. Unlike the three other epigrams that we have considered, there is no clear indication that Anth.Plan. 282 was intended to convey disdain. One can read it sarcastically if so inclined, and some commentators have.41 It is telling, however, that others have read it straight-forwardly and considered it proof of Palladas’ Christianity or at least of his nominal conversion.42 In 39 Constantinople: Reiske, Anthologiae Graecae 254; L. A. Stella, Cinque poeti dell’ Antologia Palatina (Bologna 1949) 381; T. A. Bonanno, “Pallada,” Orpheus 5 (1958) 119–150, at 122; Waltz, REG 59–60 (1946/7) 203; Irmscher, TU 77 (1961) 330. For a full treatment of the epigram, with an argument for Constantinople, see my forthcoming article in JRS 100 (2010). Alexandria: Franke, De Pallada 16–17; W. Zerwes, Palladas von Alexandrien: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der griechischen Epigrammdichtung (diss. Tübingen 1956) 325; Alan Cameron, JHS 84 (1964) 56–59; J. Irmscher, “Alexandria: die christus- liebende Stadt,” BSACopt 19 (1970) 115–122; R. Aubreton (ed.), Anthologie Grecque XIII (Paris 1980) 299. 40 H.-G. Opitz (ed.), Athanasius Werke III.1 Urkunden zur Geschichte des Ari- anischen Streites (Berlin 1934) 66, no. 31.5. A search of TLG reveals that the adjective appears several times in the longer recension of the epistles of Ignatius of Antioch, which contains many fourth-century interpolations, and once in a similarly spurious work attributed to the early-third-century Hippolytus. Eusebius of Caesarea never uses the word, but the fourth- century editor of his Vita Constantini uses it once in the title to Book 1 chapter 17: τοῦ αὐτοῦ [sc. Κωνσταντίνου] περϱὶ τῆς φιλοχρϱίστου πρϱοαιρϱέσεως. 41 Irmscher, TU 77 (1961) 329–330; Alan Cameron, JHS 84 (1964) 59– 62. 42 Waltz, REG 59–60 (1946/7) 200–203; R. Keydell, “Palladas und das Christentum,” BZ 50 (1957) 1–3, at 3. 308 SOME NEOLOGISMS IN THE EPIGRAMS OF PALLADAS ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 50 (2010) 295–308 the absence of any hint that it should be read against the grain, one can only guess at what the poet might have thought (al- ways a dangerous endeavor) about the potentially surprising fact that pagan Victories were celebrating in a “Christ-loving” city. I would imagine that he thought it absurd and is here simply playing his cards rather close to the vest, but this is only a guess. In any event, whatever Palladas’ private thoughts, his use of the novel φιλόχρϱιστος befits the novelty of the scene de- scribed. It is no accident that these neologisms are attested for the first time during the opening decades of the fourth century. Palladas had a grammarian’s ear for linguistic innovation and a scoptic poet’s license to experiment with the lower registers of the Greek language. He used these words pointedly, precisely because they were new and strange, and the epigrams in which they appear rely for their effect in part on the novelty of the terms employed.43 February, 2010 Beinecke Rare Book & Manuscript Library Yale University 121 Wall Street New Haven, CT 06511 kevin.wilkinson@yale.edu 43 I would like to thank the editor of this journal and the anonymous reader for their comments on an earlier draft. I also gratefully acknowledge the support of the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library of Yale University and the library’s director Frank Turner.