ἀνέκραγον
(Phryn. PS 5.21–2, Phryn. PS 52.1–2, Moer. α 131)

D. General commentary

Lexicographers from the imperial age to the Byzantine period demonstrate an interest in the aorist ἀνέκραγον (‘I cried out’) in terms of both its meaning and its admissibility (A.1, A.2, A.3, B.4), as well as its relationship with the cognate verb ἀνακραυγάζω (‘to scream aloud’; B.2, B.3). In view of Phrynichus’ numerous entries devoted to other verbs with the prefix ἀνα- (cf. below), this article will explore the possibility that the lexicographer’s discussion of ἀνέκραγον was also motivated by a more general interest in the semantics of the preverb ἀνα-.

The thematic aorist ἀνέκραγον (first attested in Hom. Od. 14.467, cf. B.1) is formed on the root κρᾰγ-/κρᾱγ- (which conveys the idea of shouting; cf. EDG 767–8; Willi 2018, 345; entry κεκραγμός, κραυγασμός, κράζω, κραυγάζω) with the addition of the prefixPrefixes ἀνα- (on the semantics of this prefix, see below). From Homer and up to the end of the classical period, the aorist stem alone is attested with such a prefix (e.g. Aristophanes 10x, Xenophon 13x, Demosthenes 3x) while the perfect stem ἀνακεκραγ- is found only in Post-classical Greek (with the exception of Hp. Epid. 7.1.25). In other words, the situation appears to differ from that of the non-prefixed root κρᾰγ-/κρᾱγ-, whose paradigm reveals a clear ancient opposition between the thematic aorist ἔκραγον and the stative perfect (with present meaning) κέκραγα (cf. entry κεκραγμός, κραυγασμός, κράζω, κραυγάζω). As far as the present tense is concerned, the non-prefixed κράζω first occurs in the 5th century BCE, whereas ἀνακράζω does not appear before the 2nd century CE. Of its approximate 400 total occurrences across the entire Greek literary corpus, almost all attestations of ἀνακράζω derive from religious texts (indeed, from the 6th century CE onwards, ἀνακράζω becomes part of the languageReligious language of hymnography and liturgy, cf. below). Koine Greek developed a sigmatic aorist ἀνέκραξα parallel to ἀνέκραγον (it is attested from the Septuagint onwards), but this form remains less common than the thematic aorist until the end of the imperial period (on the two aorists in late antiquity and the Byzantine period, see E.).

Given its frequent occurrences in canonical Attic authors (see above), both Phrynichus (A.2) and Moeris (A.3) identify the aorist ἀνέκραγον as ‘Attic’. We should note that more than 30 entries from Phrynichus’ PS (the count includes both the epitome and the fragments) have verbs with the prefix ἀν(α)- in the lemma. Therefore, it is worth exploring the possibility that Phrynichus favoured the preverb ἀν(α)- to some extent. Two of these 30 entries include an explicit definition of the verb as ‘Attic’, as in A.2. These are PS 32.1Phryn. PS 32.1: ἀναριχᾶσθαι· πάνυ Ἀττικὴ ἡ φωνή (‘ἀναριχᾶσθαι: The word is very Attic’; cf. entry ἀναρριχάομαι), and PS 50.12–3Phryn. PS 50.12–3: ἀναβιβᾶται· Ἀττικῶς πάνυ, τὸ ἀναβιβάσεται (‘ἀναβιβᾶται: Very Attic. [It means] ‘(s)he will make go up’. Here, however, the adverb Ἀττικῶς may simply refer to the verb’s future form). Moreover, in PS 12.4–8Phryn. PS 12.4–8, Phrynichus promotes ἀναψαθάλλωἀναψαθάλλω ‘to touch up, to work up’ (which occurs only here and in Hsch. α 4687) although the comic playwrights Hermippus (fr. 70) and Plato (fr. 60), whom he quotes in the entry, used the simple verb. Similarly, in Phryn. PS fr. *211Phryn. PS fr. *211 the otherwise unattested verb ἀνασεμνύνωἀνασεμνύνω is labelled as πολιτικώτερον καὶ ὑψηλότερον (‘more urbane and solemn’) than ἀποσεμνύνω (‘to glorify’), which is found in Aristophanes (2x) and Plato (1x). In view of these entries, we may speculate that Phrynichus held the preverb ἀν(α)- in high esteem, but several differences should be highlighted in this respect, given that prefixes such as ἀν(α)- may carry very different meanings depending on the verbs to which they attach (for a list of examples, see Bortone 2010, 120). More specifically, in the case of PS 32.1–4 re. ἀναριχᾶσθαι and PS 50.12–3 re. ἀναβιβᾶται, the prefix ἀν(α)- has a clear spatial meaning, indicating an upward motion (‘to climb upwards’, ‘to put [someone] up’). This is the original meaning of ἀνά, as both preposition and preverb, but the preposition ἀνά is already very rare in the classical period (cf. Bortone 2010, 162), and verbs with the prefix ἀν(α)- in the spatial meaning ‘were doubtless obsolescent and felt as poetic’ (Cooper 1998, 1248). Phrynichus’ admission of these two verbs must thus rely on the authority of the classical authors in which they occurred. By contrast, ἀνακραγεῖν (A.2), ἀνασεμνύνειν (PS fr. *211), and ἀναψαθάλλειν (PS 12.4–8) imply two different, non-spatial meanings of ἀν(α)- (i.e. the kind of meanings that are more frequent in Post-classical Greek). The first two are linked to the notion of raising one’s voice (the upward motion is thus metaphorical), while the latter likely relies on the idea of repetition and/or insistence (‘to touch repeatedly’) that is observed in other verbs with ἀν(α)- (cf. Cooper 1998, 1249–50). In A.2, the admissibility of ἀνακραγεῖν is granted by its Attic pedigree (Phrynichus quotes Demosthenes, C.1, but the verb occurs in several canonical authors, see above), while the recommendation of the otherwise unattested ἀνασεμνύνω and ἀναψαθάλλω may possibly derive from the fact that verbs with the prefix ἀν(α)- were simply perceived by Phrynichus as ‘refined’ or particularly ‘Attic-sounding’. The proscription of ἀνατοιχέω in favour of διατοιχέω in the sense ‘to move to the other side of the ship’ in PS 62.1–3Phryn. PS 62.1–3 may initially appear to clash with the alleged Phrynichean preference for the preverb ἀν(α)-, but its rejection is understandable not only in light of the absence of canonical attestations but also because ἀνατοιχέωἀνατοιχέω retained the spatial meaning of ἀνα-, which had already fallen out of use during the Hellenistic period (cf. entry ἀνατοιχέω, διατοιχέω. For a general discussion of prefixed verbs in Phrynichus’ PS, see Monaco, forthcoming).

Phrynichus’ interest for the semantics of ἀν(α)- also emerges from another entry of the PS dedicated to ἀνακραγεῖν (i.e. A.1). Here, Phrynichus gives two different meanings for the verb – one that is more general, i.e. ‘to shout aloud’, and one that is more specific, i.e. ‘to practise shouting before a performance’, the latter implying the above-mentioned notion of repetition conveyed by ἀν(α)- (cf. above). It is interesting to note that, in fact, the meaning ‘to practice the voice’ is not attested for the root ἀνακραγ- in any of its tenses, while it is attested for the verb ἀναφωνέωἀναφωνέω, at least in Post-classical Greek (cf. Plu. De tuenda sanitate 130c.9). Regarding the ἀγών to which Phrynichus refers, this may indicate either a trial (the action of ‘practising the voice’ would thus be performed by an orator preparing for a speech in court) or a different type of competition involving the use of the voice (e.g. a singing competition or a competition of heralds; see Miller 2004, 84–5).

In all likelihood, A.1 and A.2 result from the dismembering of an originally unitary section of the PS that was dedicated to the aorist ἀνέκραγον, in which a passage from Demosthenes’ On the False Embassy (C.1) constituted the locus classicus (on this speech being by far the most cited in the PS and regarding how the material of the PS might have been organised and epitomised in the different stages of its transmission, see entry Phrynichus Atticista, Σοφιστικὴ προπαρασκευή (Praeparatio sophistica); Cavarzeran, forthcoming; Favi, forthcoming).

Moeris’ explanation of ἀνακραγεῖν (A.3) is not identical to Phrynichus’: while the latter (A.1, A.2) explains the verb as either πρὸ τοῦ ἀγῶνος ἀσκεῖν ἐπὶ τὸ βοᾶν τὴν φωνήν (‘to exercise the voice in shouting before a competition’) or simply ἀναβοῆσαι (‘to shout aloud’), Moeris gives a different synonym, i.e. ἀναφωνῆσαι (‘to call aloud’, ‘to speak up’). Such equivalence between ἀνακραγεῖν and ἀναφωνῆσαι has only a single parallel in the erudite tradition – namely, in Apollonius the Sophist’s Homeric Lexicon (B.1). We may not discount the possibility that, in A.3, Moeris in fact depends on Homeric scholarship rather than on Phrynichus (on the role of Homeric scholarship in Moeris’ lexicon, see entry Moeris, Ἀττικιστής).

The interest in ἀνέκραγον persists in late antique and Byzantine lexicography, as demonstrated by two entries – from the Synagoge (B.2) and Photius (B.3), respectively – which Alpers (1981) attributes to Orus’ Atticist lexicon (frr. B 15Orus fr. B 15 and B 20Orus fr. B 20). The aim of B.2 is clearly Atticist: the entry promotes the thematic aorist ἀνέκραγον against the sigmatic aorist of its post-classical synonymSynonyms ἀνακραυγάζω, which first occurs in Arrian (Epict. 2.19.15). B.3 also prescribes ἀνέκραγον, but its main focus is on the opposition between two forms of present meaning ‘to cry out’, i.e. ἀνακραυγάζω, which is discouraged, and ἀνακραγγάνω, which is, instead, prescribed (on this form, see below). The content of B.3 allows for further considerations. First, in stating ‘they say ἀνακραγγάνειν [...] and ἀνέκραγε’, B.3 appears to treat the present ἀνακραγγάνω and the aorist ἀνέκραγον as part of the same paradigm. This is noteworthy, in light of the fact that the non-prefixed root κραγ- was also part of a suppletive paradigm that was apparently created by Atticist scholars (aor. ἔκραγον, pf. κέκραγα, pres. κραυγάζω or βοάω; cf. entry κεκραγμός, κραυγασμός, κράζω, κραυγάζω). In other words, one may speculate that the suppletion observed for the simple root κραγ- was at some point extended to the prefixed ἀνακραγ- because – as was the case for κράζω – the present ἀνακράζω was not deemed to be good Attic (the latter is indeed attested only from the imperial period onwards, see above). In the case of κραγ-, the verbs recommended as presents in place of κράζω were, according to the Antiatticist (κ 8)Antiatt. κ 8, κραυγάζω or βοάω. While the latter is extremely common in Attic prose and poetry, the former has only one secure attestation in canonical authors (D. 54.7). Therefore, I have considered the possibility (cf. entry κεκραγμός, κραυγασμός, κράζω, κραυγάζω) that the text of Antiatt. κ 8 (κράζειν· οὐ{τω} δεῖ <ν> φασι λέγειν, ἀλλὰ κραυγάζειν ἢ βοᾶν, ‘κράζειν (‘to shriek’): They state that one should not say so, but κραυγάζειν (‘to scream’) or βοᾶν (‘to shout’)’) is corrupt and that the unnamed Atticist scholars quoted in the entry actually proscribed both κράζω and κραυγάζω and only recommended βοάω as a suppletive present to ἔκραγον/κέκραγα. If this were the case (and if a suppletive paradigm was indeed posited also for the root ἀνακραγ-), B.3 (οὐκ ἀνακραυγάζειν) may lend support to the notion that (ἀνα)κραυγάζω was not promoted (but rather was rejected) by Atticist lexicographers.

The present ἀνακραγγάνω prescribed in B.3 further complicates the picture. ἀνακραγγάνω is a deverbative from κραγ- of so-called ‘double nasal’ type (i.e. with nasal infix and nasal enlargement; on presents of this type, see, most recently, Jasanoff 2022 and the entry ἐρυγγάνω, ἤρυγον, ἐρεύγομαι, ἠρευξάμην): the present ἀνακραγγάνω is known only from this entry (B.3) and Hsch. α 4368. The prescription of ἀνακραγγάνω in B.3 is based on a Menandrean fragment (C.2) that actually attests to a differently prefixed form (but with the same meaning): i.e. ἐκκραγγάνωἐκκραγγάνω. Aside from Menander’s fragment in B.3, ἐκκραγγάνω occurs only in lexica (Phot. ε 385 = Su. ε 602, ex Σʹʹ, Phot. ε 414, [Zonar.] 673.9–10). Other lexicographical entries (Hsch. ε 256, Phot. ε 60 = Su. ε 120, ex Σʹʹ, [Zonar.] 608.24, Su. ε 121) attest instead to ἐγκραγγάνω (which is, however, wholly absent from the extant Greek literature) and gloss it with ἐμβοάω (‘to shout aloud’). The absence of literary evidence for ἀνακραγγάνω (and ἐγκραγγάνω) may, of course, be due to the loss of an ancient attestation. However, one may also suppose that ἀνακραγγάνω was used in non-literary language and was simply considered preferable to ἀνακραυγάζω, not only because of Menander’s ἐκκραγγάνω but also because, in late antiquity, ἀνακραυγάζω had become part of the lexicon of Christian liturgy and hymnography along with ἀνακράζω and the non-prefixed κράζω and κραυγάζω (cf. entry κεκραγμός, κραυγασμός, κράζω, κραυγάζω; all these verbs, of course, are drawn from the Scriptures, in which they may already be used also in the sense of ‘to chant’, cf. e.g. ἐκραύγαζον ‘they chanted’ in NT Ev.Io. 12.13). As we have already seen, Alpers identified B.3 as a fragment from Orus’ Atticist lexicon (fr. B 15). ἀνακραυγάζω and ἀνακράζω (as well as κραυγάζω and κράζω) appear to be well established as part of the Christian hymnographic lexicon as early as Romanus the Melodist (ἀνακραυγάζω 7x, ἀνακράζω 9x, κραυγάζω 101x, κράζω 176x), who dates to the first half of the 6th century – that is, not long after Orus, who was active in the 5th century (cf. Alpers 1981, 92 and entry Orus, Ἀττικῶν λέξεων συναγωγή; for an overview of Romanus, see Gador-Whyte 2018). Thus, assuming that the adoption of these verbs in Christian liturgy and hymnography had already begun before Romanus (i.e. in Orus’ age), it is conceivable that Orus rejected them, especially considering that he himself was pagan (see Alpers 1981, 94–5).

Thomas Magister (B.4) also devotes an entry to ἀνακραγεῖν, which clearly relies on Moeris (A.3) in its assertion that ἀνακραγεῖν is preferable to ἀναφωνῆσαι (on this lexicon’s sources, see entry Thomas Magister, ’Ονομάτων Ἀττικῶν ἐκλογή). Thomas, however, also recommends the form ἐγκραγεῖν (which is absent from earlier Atticist lexica) on the basis of its attestation in Synesius (he refers to Synes. Ep. 61.15 = C.3, but the verb is also in Ep. 79.39).

E. Byzantine and Modern Greek commentary

As mentioned above (D.), Koine Greek developed a sigmatic aorist ἀνέκραξα, which competed with the ancient thematic aorist ἀνέκραγον. While the sigmatic aorist is less attested in the imperial period than the thematic aorist, from the 5th century CE onwards and throughout the Byzantine period, the two forms occur with practically the same frequency. ἀνέκραγον is attested as late as the 19th century in archaising authors such as Neophytus Ducas (1x). The regular aorist of ανακράζω (‘to call [someone] aloud’) in Modern Greek is the sigmatic ανέκραξα.

F. Commentary on individual texts and occurrences

N/A