{"history":[],"article":{"id":"22801e5a-ad5b-4cab-ab87-bb7e93b43414","title":"Messapic language","slug":"messapic-language","content":":::summary\n**Name:** Messapic \n**Altname:** Messapian \n**Region:** [Apulian](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia) region of [Italy](https://bliptext.com/articles/italy) \n**Era:** attested 6th to 2nd century BC \n**Ref:** linglist \n**Familycolor:** Indo-European \n**Fam 2:** (?) [Albanoid](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) \n**Script:** [Messapic alphabet](https://bliptext.com/articles/messapic-language) \n**Map:** Iron Age Italy.svg \n**Mapcaption:** Ethnolinguistic map of Italy in the [Iron Age](https://bliptext.com/articles/iron-age), before the [Roman expansion and conquest of Italy](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-conquest-of-italy) \n**Iso 3:** cms \n**Linglist:** cms \n**Glotto:** mess1244 \n**Glottorefname:** Messapic \n**Ethnicity:** [Iapygians](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians) \n:::\n\n# \n**Messapic** (also known as **Messapian**; or as **[Iapygian](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians)**) is an extinct [Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-languages) [Paleo-Balkanic language](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) of the southeastern [Italian Peninsula](https://bliptext.com/articles/italian-peninsula), once spoken in [Salento](https://bliptext.com/articles/salento) by the **[Iapygian](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians)** peoples of the region: the Calabri and Salentini (known collectively as the **Messapian**s), the [Peucetians](https://bliptext.com/articles/peucetians) and the [Daunians](https://bliptext.com/articles/daunians).\nMessapic was the pre-[Roman](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic), non-[Italic](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages) language of [Apulia](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia).\nIt has been preserved in about 600 inscriptions written in an alphabet derived from a [Western Greek model](https://bliptext.com/articles/archaic-greek-alphabets) and dating from the mid-6th to at least the 2nd century BC, when it went extinct following the [Roman](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic) conquest of the region.\n\n# Name\nThe term 'Messapic' or 'Messapian' is traditionally used to refer to a group of languages spoken by the [Iapygians](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians), a \"relatively homogeneous linguistic community\" of non-[Italic](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages)-speaking tribes ([Messapians](https://bliptext.com/articles/messapii), [Peucetians](https://bliptext.com/articles/peucetians) and [Daunians](https://bliptext.com/articles/daunians)) dwelling in the region of [Apulia](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia) before the Roman conquest.\nHowever, some scholars have argued that the term '[Iapygian](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians) languages' should be preferred for referring to the group of languages spoken in Apulia, with the term 'Messapic' being reserved to the inscriptions found in the [Salento peninsula](https://bliptext.com/articles/salento), where the specific tribe of the Messapians had been living in the pre-Roman era.\nThe name Apulia itself derives from Iapygia after passing from Greek to Oscan to Latin and undergoing subsequent morphological shifts.\n\n# Classification\nMessapic was a non-[Italic](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages) and non-Greek [Indo-European language](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-languages) of [Balkan](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) origin.\nModern archeological and linguistic research and some ancient sources hold that the ancestors of the [Iapygians](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians) came to Southeastern Italy (present-day [Apulia](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia)) from the [Western Balkans](https://bliptext.com/articles/western-balkans) across the [Adriatic Sea](https://bliptext.com/articles/adriatic-sea) during the early first millennium BC.\n\n## Paleo-Balkanic\nMessapic forms part of the [Paleo-Balkan languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages).\nBased upon lexical similarities with the [Illyrian languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-languages), some scholars contend that Messapic may have developed from a dialect of pre-Illyrian, meaning that it would have diverged substantially from the Illyrian language(s) spoken in the Balkans by the 5th century BC, while others considered it a direct dialect of Iron Age Illyrian.\nMessapic is today considered an independent language and not a dialect of Illyrian.\nAlthough the unclear interpretation of Messapic inscriptions cannot warrant the placement of Messapic in any specific Indo-European subfamily, some scholars place Illyrian and Messapic in the same branch.\n[Eric Hamp](https://bliptext.com/articles/eric-hamp) has grouped them under \"Messapo-Illyrian\", which is further grouped with Albanian under \"Adriatic Indo-European\".\nOther schemes group the three languages under \"General Illyrian\" and \"Western Paleo-Balkan\".\nA number of shared features between Messapic and [Proto-Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-albanian-language) may have emerged either as a result of linguistic contacts between Proto-Messapic and Pre-[Proto-Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-albanian-language) within the Balkan peninsula in prehistoric times, or of a closer relation as shown by the quality of the correspondences in the lexical area and shared innovations between Messapic and Albanian.\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) identify Messapic as the closest language to Albanian, with which it forms a common branch titled Illyric.\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) in agreement with recent bibliography identify [Greco-Phrygian](https://bliptext.com/articles/graeco-phrygian) as the IE branch closest to the Albanian-Messapic one.\nThese two branches form an areal grouping – which is often called \"Balkan IE\" – with Armenian.\n\n### Illyrian languages\nAlthough the [Illyrian languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-languages) – and to some extent Messapic itself – are too scarcely attested to allow for an extensive linguistic comparison, the Messapic language is generally regarded as related to, though distinct from, the [Illyrian languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-languages).\nThis theory is supported by a series of similar personal and place names from both sides of the [Adriatic Sea](https://bliptext.com/articles/adriatic-sea).\nProposed [cognates](https://bliptext.com/articles/cognate) in Illyrian and Messapic, respectively, include: '[Bardyl(l)is](https://bliptext.com/articles/bardylis)/Barzidihi', '[Teuta](https://bliptext.com/articles/teuta)/Teutā', 'Dazios/Dazes', 'Laidias/Ladi-', 'Platōr/Plator-', '[Iapydes](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapydes)/[Iapyges](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians)', 'Apulus/Apuli', '[Dalmata](https://bliptext.com/articles/dalmatae)/Dalmathus', 'Peucetioe/[Peucetii](https://bliptext.com/articles/peucetians)', 'Ana/Ana', 'Beuzas/Bozat', 'Thana/Thana', '[Dei-paturos](https://bliptext.com/articles/deipaturos)/[Da-matura](https://bliptext.com/articles/damatura)'.\n\n### Albanian\nThe linguistic data of [Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language) can be used to compensate for the lack of fundamental information on Illyrian, since Proto-[Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language) (the ancestor language of [Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language)) was likewise an Indo-European language certainly spoken in the Balkans in antiquity, and probably since at least the 7th century BC, as suggested by the presence of archaic loanwords from [Ancient Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-greek).\nA number of linguistic [cognates](https://bliptext.com/articles/cognate) with Albanian have been proposed, such as Messapic aran and Albanian arë (\"field\"), biliā and bijë (\"daughter\"), or menza- and mëz (\"[foal](https://bliptext.com/articles/foal)\").\nThe [toponomy](https://bliptext.com/articles/toponymy) points to a link between the two languages, as some towns in Apulia have no etymological forms outside Albanian linguistic sources.\nOther linguistic elements such as [particles](https://bliptext.com/articles/grammatical-particle), [prepositions](https://bliptext.com/articles/preposition), [suffixes](https://bliptext.com/articles/suffix), [lexicon](https://bliptext.com/articles/lexicon), but also [toponyms](https://bliptext.com/articles/toponym), [anthroponyms](https://bliptext.com/articles/anthroponym) and [theonyms](https://bliptext.com/articles/theonym) of the Messapic language find singular affinities with Albanian.\nSome [phonological](https://bliptext.com/articles/phonological) data can also be compared between the two languages, and it seems likely that Messapic belongs, like Albanian, to a specific subgroup of the Indo-European languages that shows distinct reflections of all the three [dorsal consonant](https://bliptext.com/articles/dorsal-consonant) rows.\nIn the [nominal](https://bliptext.com/articles/nominal-linguistics) context, both Messapic and Albanian continue, in the masculine terms in -o-, the Indo-European ending *-osyo (Messapic -aihi, Albanian -i / -u).\nRegarding the verbal system, both Messapic and Albanian have formally and semantically preserved the two Indo-European [subjunctive](https://bliptext.com/articles/subjunctive) and [optative](https://bliptext.com/articles/optative) moods.\nIf the reconstructions are correct, we can find, in the preterital system of Messapic, reflections of a formation in *-s- (which in other Indo-European languages are featured in the suffix of the sigmatic aorist), as in the 3rd sg.\nhipades/opades ('he dedicated' < *supo-dʰeh₁-s-t) and in the 3rd pl. stahan ('they placed' < *stah₂-s-n°t).\nIn Albanian, this formation was likewise featured in the category of aorists formed with the suffix -v-.\nHowever, except for the dorsal consonant rows, these similarities do not provide elements exclusively relating Messapic and Albanian, and only a few [morphological](https://bliptext.com/articles/morphology-linguistics) data are comparable.\n\n# History\nThe development of a distinct [Iapygian](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians) culture in southeastern Italy is widely considered to be the result of a confluence of local Apulian material cultures with Balkanic traditions following the cross-[Adriatic](https://bliptext.com/articles/adriatic-sea) migrations of proto-Messapic speakers in the early first millennium BC.\nThe Iapygians most likely left the eastern coasts of the Adriatic for the [Italian Peninsula](https://bliptext.com/articles/italian-peninsula) from the 11th century BC onwards, merging with pre-existing [Italic](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-peoples) and [Mycenean](https://bliptext.com/articles/mycenean-civilisation) cultures and providing a decisive cultural and linguistic imprint.\nThroughout the second half of the 8th century, contacts between Messapians and Greeks must have been intense and continuous; they began to intensify after the foundation of [Taras](https://bliptext.com/articles/taranto) by [Spartan](https://bliptext.com/articles/sparta) colonists around the end of the century.\nDespite its geographical proximity with [Magna Graecia](https://bliptext.com/articles/magna-graecia), however, Iapygia was generally not encompassed in [Greek colonial](https://bliptext.com/articles/greek-colonies) territories, and with the exception of Taras, the inhabitants were evidently able to avoid other Greek colonies in the region.\nDuring the 6th century BC Messapia, and more marginally Peucetia, underwent Hellenizing cultural influences, mainly from the nearby Taras.\nThe use of writing systems was introduced during this period, with the acquisition of the Laconian-Tarantine alphabet and its progressive adaptation to the Messapic language.\nThe oldest known Messapic texts date to the 6th century–early 5th century BCE.\nThe relationship between Messapians and Tarantines deteriorated over time, resulting in a series of clashes between the two peoples from the beginning of the 5th century BC. After two victories of the Tarentines, the Iapygians inflicted a decisive defeat on them, causing the fall of the aristocratic government and the implementation of a democratic one in Taras.\nIt also froze relations between Greeks and the indigenous people for about half a century.\nOnly in the late-5th and 6th centuries did they re-establish relationships.\nThe second great Hellenizing wave occurred during the 4th century BC, this time also involving Daunia and marking the beginning of [Peucetian](https://bliptext.com/articles/peuceti) and [Daunian](https://bliptext.com/articles/dauni) epigraphic records, in a local variant of the Hellenistic alphabet that replaced the older Messapic script.\nAlong with Messapic, [Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-greek) and [Oscan](https://bliptext.com/articles/oscan-language) were spoken and written during the Romanization period all over [Apulia](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia), and bilingualism in [Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-greek) and Messapic was probably common in southern [Apulia](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia) at that time.\nBased upon the legends of the local currencies promoted by Rome, Messapic appears to have been written in the southern zone, Oscan in the northern area, while the central sector was a trilingual area where Messapic, Greek and Oscan co-existed in inscriptions.\nMessapic epigraphic records seem to have ended by the 2nd century BC. During the 1st century BCE, the language was replaced by Latin, which is the origin of the modern Italian Sallentine dialects of the region.\n# [Iapygian migrations in the early first millennium BC. | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f3/Illyrian///colonies///in///Italy///550///BC///%28English%29///%28simple///map%29.svg]\n# [Apulia et Calabria, cropped from \"Map of Ancient Italy, Southern Part\", by William R. Shepherd, 1911. | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5e/Apulia///Calabria///et///Lucania///-///Shepherd-c-030-031.jpg]\n\n# Phonology\nA characteristic feature of Messapic is the absence of the Indo-European phonological opposition between the vowels /u/ and /o/, the language featuring only an o/u [phoneme](https://bliptext.com/articles/phoneme).\nConsequently, the superfluous letter /u/ ([upsilon](https://bliptext.com/articles/upsilon)) was not taken over following the initial period of adaption of the [Western (\"red\") Greek alphabet](https://bliptext.com/articles/archaic-greek-alphabets).\nThe 'o/u' phoneme existed in opposition to an 'a/o' phoneme formed after the phonological distinction between *o and *a was abandoned.\nThe [Proto-Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european-language) (PIE) vowel /o/ regularly appears as /a/ in inscriptions (e.g., Venas < *Wenos; menza < *mendyo; tabarā < *to-bhorā).\nThe original PIE phonological opposition between ō and o is still perceptible in Messapic.\nThe [diphthong](https://bliptext.com/articles/diphthong) *ou, itself reflecting the merged [diphthong](https://bliptext.com/articles/diphthong)s *ou and eu, underwent [sound change](https://bliptext.com/articles/sound-change) to develop into ao, then into ō (e.g., *Toutor > Taotor > Θōtor).\nThe dental affricate or spirant written Θ is frequently used before the sounds ao- or o-, where it is most likely a replacement for the older letter.\nAnother special letter,, occurs almost exclusively in Archaic inscriptions from the 6th and 5th centuries BC. Multiple [palatalizations](https://bliptext.com/articles/palatalization-sound-change) have also taken place, as in '[Zis](https://bliptext.com/articles/zis-deity)' < *dyēs, 'Artorres' < *Artōryos, or 'Bla(t)θes' < *Blatyos (where '(t)θ' probably denoted a dental affricate or spirant /ts/ or /tš/).\nProto-Indo-European *s was rather clearly reflected in initial and intervocalic positions as Messapic h, with notable examples including klaohi and hipa, but note Venas with *s in final position.\nThe Proto-Indo-European [voiced aspirates](https://bliptext.com/articles/aspirated-consonant) *bh and *dh are certainly represented by the simple unaspirated voiced [obstruents](https://bliptext.com/articles/obstruent) /b/ and /d/ in Messapic (e.g., 'berain' < *bher-; '-des' < *dʰeh₁).\nOn the other hand, the outcomes of the Indo-European palatal, velar, and labiovelar stops remain unclear, with slender evidence.\n# [30x30px | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Messapic-trident2.svg]\n# [30x30px | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Messapic-trident1.svg]\n\n# Alphabet\nThe Messapic alphabet is an adaptation of the [Western (\"red\") Greek alphabets](https://bliptext.com/articles/archaic-greek-alphabets), specifically the [Laconian](https://bliptext.com/articles/laconia)-[Tarantinian](https://bliptext.com/articles/taranto) version.\nThe actual Messapic inscriptions are attested from the 6th century BC onward, while the [Peucetian](https://bliptext.com/articles/peucetians) and [Daunian](https://bliptext.com/articles/daunians) epigraphic record (written in a local variant of the Hellenistic alphabet rather than in the older Messapic script) only begins in the 4th century BC.\n\n## Messapic\nThe Greek letter Φ (/pʰ/) was not adopted, because it would have been superfluous for Messapic.\nWhile [zeta](https://bliptext.com/articles/zeta) \"normally\" represented the voiced counterpart to /s/, it may have been an affricate in some cases.\nThe value of Θ is unclear, but is clearly dental; it may be an affricate or a spirant.\nIn any case it appears to have arisen partly as the reflex of the segment *ty.\n\n## Apulian\nThe script used in northern Apulia was rather peculiar, and some consider it to be a distinct writing system named Apulian.\nA notable difference between the Apulian alphabet and the Laconian-Tarentinian Messapic alphabet was the use of Η (eta) for /ē/ rather than /h/.\n\n# Inscriptions\nThe Messapic language is a 'fragmentary language' (Trümmersprache), preserved only in about 600 inscriptions from the mid-6th up until the late-2nd century BC. Many of them consist of the personal names of the deceased engraved in burial sites (36% of the total), and only a few inscriptions have been definitely deciphered.\nSome longer texts are also available, including those recently found in the Grotta della Poesia ([Roca Vecchia](https://bliptext.com/articles/roca-archaeological-site)), although they have not been fully exploited by scholars yet.\nMost of the Messapic inscriptions are accessible in the Monumenta Linguae Messapicae (MLM), published in print in 2002.\n\n# Lexicon\n\n## Toponymy/Anthroponymy\n\n## Inherited\nOnly Messapic words regarded as 'inherited' from its precursor are hereunder listed, thus excluding loanwords from Greek, Latin or other languages.\n\n# Language contact\n\n## Italic\nSince its settlement, Messapic was in contact with the [Italic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages) of the region.\nIn the centuries before Roman annexation, the frontier between Messapic and [Oscan](https://bliptext.com/articles/oscan-language) ran through Frentania-[Irpinia](https://bliptext.com/articles/irpinia)-[Lucania](https://bliptext.com/articles/lucania)-Apulia.\nAn \"Oscanization\" and \"Samnitization\" process gradually took place which is attested in contemporary sources via the attestation of dual identities for settlements.\nIn these regions an Oscan/Lucanian population and a large Daunian element intermixed in different ways.\n[Larinum](https://bliptext.com/articles/larinum), a settlement which has produced a large body of Oscan onomastics is described as a \"Daunian city\" and [Horace](https://bliptext.com/articles/horace) who was from [Venusia](https://bliptext.com/articles/venusia) in the transboundary area between the Daunians and the Lucanians described himself as \"Lucanian or Apulian\".\nThe creation of Roman colonies in southern Italy after the early 4th century BCE had a great impact in the Latinization of the area.\nA small corpus of Messapic vocabulary did pass into Latin.\nThey include baltea from balta (swamp), deda (nurse), gandeia (sword), horeia (small fishing boat), mannus (pony/small horse) from manda.\nMessapic was an intermediary for the passing of several, mostly ancient Greek words, into Latin such as paro (small ship) from Greek paroon.\nThe Latin form of Odysseus, Ulixes might derive from a Messapic variant like the ethnonym Graeci which may have been used in its original form by Illyrians for their Greek neighbours in Epirus.\nA Messapic morphological intermediary has been proposed for Latin lancea (spear) and balaena (from Greek phallaina).\nIn literature, Horace and Ennius who came from the region are the only authors of Roman antiquity who have preserved the non-Italic word laama (swamp) which might be Messapic.\n# [Southern Samnium and northern Apulia were major regions of Iapygian-Italic linguistic contact | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Samnium.jpg]\n\n## Ancient Greek\nThe Messapic verbal form eipeigrave ('wrote, incised'; variant ipigrave) is a notable loanword from Greek (with the initial stem eipigra-, ipigra- deriving from epigrá-phō, ἐπιγράφω, 'inscribe, engrave'), and is probably related to the fact that the Messapic alphabet has been borrowed from an Archaic Greek script.\nOther Greek loanwords include argora-pandes ('coin officials', with the first part deriving from ἄργυρος), and names of deities like [Athana](https://bliptext.com/articles/athena) and perhaps Aprodita, however the latter name is considered to be a Messapic theonym of an [Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european-mythology) goddess.\nIt coincides with the [Proto-Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-albanian) *apro dītā 'come forth brightness of the day/dawn', which could be the original source of the Ancient Greek [Aphrodite](https://bliptext.com/articles/aphrodite), and which is preserved in the Albanian phrase [afro dita](https://bliptext.com/articles/afrodita) 'come forth the day/dawn', referring to the planet [Venus](https://bliptext.com/articles/venus), and also used to refer to [Prende](https://bliptext.com/articles/prende), the dawn goddess, goddess of love, beauty, fertility, health and protector of women, in the [Albanian pagan mythology](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-paganism), the equivalent of Ancient Greek [Aphrodite](https://bliptext.com/articles/aphrodite).\nThe origin of the Messapic goddess Damatura/Damatira is debated: scholars like [Vladimir I. Georgiev](https://bliptext.com/articles/vladimir-i-georgiev) (1937), [Eqrem Çabej](https://bliptext.com/articles/eqrem-abej), [Shaban Demiraj](https://bliptext.com/articles/shaban-demiraj) (1997), or [Martin L. West](https://bliptext.com/articles/martin-litchfield-west) (2007) have argued that she was an Illyrian goddess eventually borrowed into Greek as [Demeter](https://bliptext.com/articles/demeter), while others like [Paul Kretschmer](https://bliptext.com/articles/paul-kretschmer) (1939), [Robert S. P. Beekes](https://bliptext.com/articles/robert-s-p-beekes) (2009) and [Carlo De Simone](https://bliptext.com/articles/carlo-de-simone-linguist) (2017) have argued for the contrary.\nMore recently it is considered a Messapic theonym of an Indo-European goddess by Marchesini (2021).\n\n# Sources\n\n## Footnotes\n\n## Citations","current_revision":null,"created_by":"kACnuQmH5k9Nr5VNVEpVeg7XpvUmMctD","created_at":"2025-01-25T20:09:09.859Z","updated_at":"2025-01-25T20:09:09.859Z","search_vector":"'languag':2 'messap':1","search_content":" \n**Name:** Messapic \n**Altname:** Messapian \n**Region:** [Apulian](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia) region of [Italy](https://bliptext.com/articles/italy) \n**Era:** attested 6th to 2nd century BC \n**Ref:** linglist \n**Familycolor:** Indo-European \n**Fam 2:** (?) [Albanoid](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanoid) \n**Script:** [Messapic alphabet](https://bliptext.com/articles/messapic-language) \n**Map:** Iron Age Italy.svg \n**Mapcaption:** Ethnolinguistic map of Italy in the [Iron Age](https://bliptext.com/articles/iron-age), before the [Roman expansion and conquest of Italy](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-conquest-of-italy) \n**Iso 3:** cms \n**Linglist:** cms \n**Glotto:** mess1244 \n**Glottorefname:** Messapic \n**Ethnicity:** [Iapygians](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians) \n \n\n# \n**Messapic** (also known as **Messapian**; or as **[Iapygian](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians)**) is an extinct [Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-languages) [Paleo-Balkanic language](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) of the southeastern [Italian Peninsula](https://bliptext.com/articles/italian-peninsula), once spoken in [Salento](https://bliptext.com/articles/salento) by the **[Iapygian](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians)** peoples of the region: the Calabri and Salentini (known collectively as the **Messapian**s), the [Peucetians](https://bliptext.com/articles/peucetians) and the [Daunians](https://bliptext.com/articles/daunians).\nMessapic was the pre-[Roman](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic), non-[Italic](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages) language of [Apulia](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia).\nIt has been preserved in about 600 inscriptions written in an alphabet derived from a [Western Greek model](https://bliptext.com/articles/archaic-greek-alphabets) and dating from the mid-6th to at least the 2nd century BC, when it went extinct following the [Roman](https://bliptext.com/articles/roman-republic) conquest of the region.\n\n# Name\nThe term 'Messapic' or 'Messapian' is traditionally used to refer to a group of languages spoken by the [Iapygians](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians), a \"relatively homogeneous linguistic community\" of non-[Italic](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages)-speaking tribes ([Messapians](https://bliptext.com/articles/messapii), [Peucetians](https://bliptext.com/articles/peucetians) and [Daunians](https://bliptext.com/articles/daunians)) dwelling in the region of [Apulia](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia) before the Roman conquest.\nHowever, some scholars have argued that the term '[Iapygian](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians) languages' should be preferred for referring to the group of languages spoken in Apulia, with the term 'Messapic' being reserved to the inscriptions found in the [Salento peninsula](https://bliptext.com/articles/salento), where the specific tribe of the Messapians had been living in the pre-Roman era.\nThe name Apulia itself derives from Iapygia after passing from Greek to Oscan to Latin and undergoing subsequent morphological shifts.\n\n# Classification\nMessapic was a non-[Italic](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages) and non-Greek [Indo-European language](https://bliptext.com/articles/indo-european-languages) of [Balkan](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages) origin.\nModern archeological and linguistic research and some ancient sources hold that the ancestors of the [Iapygians](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians) came to Southeastern Italy (present-day [Apulia](https://bliptext.com/articles/apulia)) from the [Western Balkans](https://bliptext.com/articles/western-balkans) across the [Adriatic Sea](https://bliptext.com/articles/adriatic-sea) during the early first millennium BC.\n\n## Paleo-Balkanic\nMessapic forms part of the [Paleo-Balkan languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/paleo-balkan-languages).\nBased upon lexical similarities with the [Illyrian languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-languages), some scholars contend that Messapic may have developed from a dialect of pre-Illyrian, meaning that it would have diverged substantially from the Illyrian language(s) spoken in the Balkans by the 5th century BC, while others considered it a direct dialect of Iron Age Illyrian.\nMessapic is today considered an independent language and not a dialect of Illyrian.\nAlthough the unclear interpretation of Messapic inscriptions cannot warrant the placement of Messapic in any specific Indo-European subfamily, some scholars place Illyrian and Messapic in the same branch.\n[Eric Hamp](https://bliptext.com/articles/eric-hamp) has grouped them under \"Messapo-Illyrian\", which is further grouped with Albanian under \"Adriatic Indo-European\".\nOther schemes group the three languages under \"General Illyrian\" and \"Western Paleo-Balkan\".\nA number of shared features between Messapic and [Proto-Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-albanian-language) may have emerged either as a result of linguistic contacts between Proto-Messapic and Pre-[Proto-Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-albanian-language) within the Balkan peninsula in prehistoric times, or of a closer relation as shown by the quality of the correspondences in the lexical area and shared innovations between Messapic and Albanian.\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) identify Messapic as the closest language to Albanian, with which it forms a common branch titled Illyric.\nHyllested & Joseph (2022) in agreement with recent bibliography identify [Greco-Phrygian](https://bliptext.com/articles/graeco-phrygian) as the IE branch closest to the Albanian-Messapic one.\nThese two branches form an areal grouping – which is often called \"Balkan IE\" – with Armenian.\n\n### Illyrian languages\nAlthough the [Illyrian languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-languages) – and to some extent Messapic itself – are too scarcely attested to allow for an extensive linguistic comparison, the Messapic language is generally regarded as related to, though distinct from, the [Illyrian languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/illyrian-languages).\nThis theory is supported by a series of similar personal and place names from both sides of the [Adriatic Sea](https://bliptext.com/articles/adriatic-sea).\nProposed [cognates](https://bliptext.com/articles/cognate) in Illyrian and Messapic, respectively, include: '[Bardyl(l)is](https://bliptext.com/articles/bardylis)/Barzidihi', '[Teuta](https://bliptext.com/articles/teuta)/Teutā', 'Dazios/Dazes', 'Laidias/Ladi-', 'Platōr/Plator-', '[Iapydes](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapydes)/[Iapyges](https://bliptext.com/articles/iapygians)', 'Apulus/Apuli', '[Dalmata](https://bliptext.com/articles/dalmatae)/Dalmathus', 'Peucetioe/[Peucetii](https://bliptext.com/articles/peucetians)', 'Ana/Ana', 'Beuzas/Bozat', 'Thana/Thana', '[Dei-paturos](https://bliptext.com/articles/deipaturos)/[Da-matura](https://bliptext.com/articles/damatura)'.\n\n### Albanian\nThe linguistic data of [[Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language)](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language) can be used to compensate for the lack of fundamental information on Illyrian, since Proto-[[Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language)](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language) (the ancestor language of [[Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language)](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-language)) was likewise an Indo-European language certainly spoken in the Balkans in antiquity, and probably since at least the 7th century BC, as suggested by the presence of archaic loanwords from [Ancient Greek](https://bliptext.com/articles/ancient-greek).\nA number of linguistic [cognates](https://bliptext.com/articles/cognate) with Albanian have been proposed, such as Messapic aran and Albanian arë (\"field\"), biliā and bijë (\"daughter\"), or menza- and mëz (\"[foal](https://bliptext.com/articles/foal)\").\nThe [toponomy](https://bliptext.com/articles/toponymy) points to a link between the two languages, as some towns in Apulia have no etymological forms outside Albanian linguistic sources.\nOther linguistic elements such as [particles](https://bliptext.com/articles/grammatical-particle), [prepositions](https://bliptext.com/articles/preposition), [suffixes](https://bliptext.com/articles/suffix), [lexicon](https://bliptext.com/articles/lexicon), but also [toponyms](https://bliptext.com/articles/toponym), [anthroponyms](https://bliptext.com/articles/anthroponym) and [theonyms](https://bliptext.com/articles/theonym) of the Messapic language find singular affinities with Albanian.\nSome [phonological](https://bliptext.com/articles/phonological) data can also be compared between the two languages, and it seems likely that Messapic belongs, like Albanian, to a specific subgroup of the Indo-European languages that shows distinct reflections of all the three [dorsal consonant](https://bliptext.com/articles/dorsal-consonant) rows.\nIn the [nominal](https://bliptext.com/articles/nominal-linguistics) context, both Messapic and Albanian continue, in the masculine terms in -o-, the Indo-European ending *-osyo (Messapic -aihi, Albanian -i / -u).\nRegarding the verbal system, both Messapic and Albanian have formally and semantically preserved the two Indo-European [subjunctive](https://bliptext.com/articles/subjunctive) and [optative](https://bliptext.com/articles/optative) moods.\nIf the reconstructions are correct, we can find, in the preterital system of Messapic, reflections of a formation in *-s- (which in other Indo-European languages are featured in the suffix of the sigmatic aorist), as in the 3rd sg.\nhipades/opades ('he dedicated' Taotor > Θōtor).\nThe dental affricate or spirant written Θ is frequently used before the sounds ao- or o-, where it is most likely a replacement for the older letter.\nAnother special letter,, occurs almost exclusively in Archaic inscriptions from the 6th and 5th centuries BC. Multiple [palatalizations](https://bliptext.com/articles/palatalization-sound-change) have also taken place, as in '[Zis](https://bliptext.com/articles/zis-deity)' < *dyēs, 'Artorres' < *Artōryos, or 'Bla(t)θes' < *Blatyos (where '(t)θ' probably denoted a dental affricate or spirant /ts/ or /tš/).\nProto-Indo-European *s was rather clearly reflected in initial and intervocalic positions as Messapic h, with notable examples including klaohi and hipa, but note Venas with *s in final position.\nThe Proto-Indo-European [voiced aspirates](https://bliptext.com/articles/aspirated-consonant) *bh and *dh are certainly represented by the simple unaspirated voiced [obstruents](https://bliptext.com/articles/obstruent) /b/ and /d/ in Messapic (e.g., 'berain' < *bher-; '-des' < *dʰeh₁).\nOn the other hand, the outcomes of the Indo-European palatal, velar, and labiovelar stops remain unclear, with slender evidence.\n# [30x30px | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Messapic-trident2.svg]\n# [30x30px | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Messapic-trident1.svg]\n\n# Alphabet\nThe Messapic alphabet is an adaptation of the [Western (\"red\") Greek alphabets](https://bliptext.com/articles/archaic-greek-alphabets), specifically the [Laconian](https://bliptext.com/articles/laconia)-[Tarantinian](https://bliptext.com/articles/taranto) version.\nThe actual Messapic inscriptions are attested from the 6th century BC onward, while the [Peucetian](https://bliptext.com/articles/peucetians) and [Daunian](https://bliptext.com/articles/daunians) epigraphic record (written in a local variant of the Hellenistic alphabet rather than in the older Messapic script) only begins in the 4th century BC.\n\n## Messapic\nThe Greek letter Φ (/pʰ/) was not adopted, because it would have been superfluous for Messapic.\nWhile [zeta](https://bliptext.com/articles/zeta) \"normally\" represented the voiced counterpart to /s/, it may have been an affricate in some cases.\nThe value of Θ is unclear, but is clearly dental; it may be an affricate or a spirant.\nIn any case it appears to have arisen partly as the reflex of the segment *ty.\n\n## Apulian\nThe script used in northern Apulia was rather peculiar, and some consider it to be a distinct writing system named Apulian.\nA notable difference between the Apulian alphabet and the Laconian-Tarentinian Messapic alphabet was the use of Η (eta) for /ē/ rather than /h/.\n\n# Inscriptions\nThe Messapic language is a 'fragmentary language' (Trümmersprache), preserved only in about 600 inscriptions from the mid-6th up until the late-2nd century BC. Many of them consist of the personal names of the deceased engraved in burial sites (36% of the total), and only a few inscriptions have been definitely deciphered.\nSome longer texts are also available, including those recently found in the Grotta della Poesia ([Roca Vecchia](https://bliptext.com/articles/roca-archaeological-site)), although they have not been fully exploited by scholars yet.\nMost of the Messapic inscriptions are accessible in the Monumenta Linguae Messapicae (MLM), published in print in 2002.\n\n# Lexicon\n\n## Toponymy/Anthroponymy\n\n## Inherited\nOnly Messapic words regarded as 'inherited' from its precursor are hereunder listed, thus excluding loanwords from Greek, Latin or other languages.\n\n# Language contact\n\n## Italic\nSince its settlement, Messapic was in contact with the [Italic languages](https://bliptext.com/articles/italic-languages) of the region.\nIn the centuries before Roman annexation, the frontier between Messapic and [Oscan](https://bliptext.com/articles/oscan-language) ran through Frentania-[Irpinia](https://bliptext.com/articles/irpinia)-[Lucania](https://bliptext.com/articles/lucania)-Apulia.\nAn \"Oscanization\" and \"Samnitization\" process gradually took place which is attested in contemporary sources via the attestation of dual identities for settlements.\nIn these regions an Oscan/Lucanian population and a large Daunian element intermixed in different ways.\n[Larinum](https://bliptext.com/articles/larinum), a settlement which has produced a large body of Oscan onomastics is described as a \"Daunian city\" and [Horace](https://bliptext.com/articles/horace) who was from [Venusia](https://bliptext.com/articles/venusia) in the transboundary area between the Daunians and the Lucanians described himself as \"Lucanian or Apulian\".\nThe creation of Roman colonies in southern Italy after the early 4th century BCE had a great impact in the Latinization of the area.\nA small corpus of Messapic vocabulary did pass into Latin.\nThey include baltea from balta (swamp), deda (nurse), gandeia (sword), horeia (small fishing boat), mannus (pony/small horse) from manda.\nMessapic was an intermediary for the passing of several, mostly ancient Greek words, into Latin such as paro (small ship) from Greek paroon.\nThe Latin form of Odysseus, Ulixes might derive from a Messapic variant like the ethnonym Graeci which may have been used in its original form by Illyrians for their Greek neighbours in Epirus.\nA Messapic morphological intermediary has been proposed for Latin lancea (spear) and balaena (from Greek phallaina).\nIn literature, Horace and Ennius who came from the region are the only authors of Roman antiquity who have preserved the non-Italic word laama (swamp) which might be Messapic.\n# [Southern Samnium and northern Apulia were major regions of Iapygian-Italic linguistic contact | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b9/Samnium.jpg]\n\n## Ancient Greek\nThe Messapic verbal form eipeigrave ('wrote, incised'; variant ipigrave) is a notable loanword from Greek (with the initial stem eipigra-, ipigra- deriving from epigrá-phō, ἐπιγράφω, 'inscribe, engrave'), and is probably related to the fact that the Messapic alphabet has been borrowed from an Archaic Greek script.\nOther Greek loanwords include argora-pandes ('coin officials', with the first part deriving from ἄργυρος), and names of deities like [Athana](https://bliptext.com/articles/athena) and perhaps Aprodita, however the latter name is considered to be a Messapic theonym of an [Indo-European](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-indo-european-mythology) goddess.\nIt coincides with the [Proto-Albanian](https://bliptext.com/articles/proto-albanian) *apro dītā 'come forth brightness of the day/dawn', which could be the original source of the Ancient Greek [Aphrodite](https://bliptext.com/articles/aphrodite), and which is preserved in the Albanian phrase [afro dita](https://bliptext.com/articles/afrodita) 'come forth the day/dawn', referring to the planet [Venus](https://bliptext.com/articles/venus), and also used to refer to [Prende](https://bliptext.com/articles/prende), the dawn goddess, goddess of love, beauty, fertility, health and protector of women, in the [Albanian pagan mythology](https://bliptext.com/articles/albanian-paganism), the equivalent of Ancient Greek [Aphrodite](https://bliptext.com/articles/aphrodite).\nThe origin of the Messapic goddess Damatura/Damatira is debated: scholars like [Vladimir I. Georgiev](https://bliptext.com/articles/vladimir-i-georgiev) (1937), [Eqrem Çabej](https://bliptext.com/articles/eqrem-abej), [Shaban Demiraj](https://bliptext.com/articles/shaban-demiraj) (1997), or [Martin L. West](https://bliptext.com/articles/martin-litchfield-west) (2007) have argued that she was an Illyrian goddess eventually borrowed into Greek as [Demeter](https://bliptext.com/articles/demeter), while others like [Paul Kretschmer](https://bliptext.com/articles/paul-kretschmer) (1939), [Robert S. P. Beekes](https://bliptext.com/articles/robert-s-p-beekes) (2009) and [Carlo De Simone](https://bliptext.com/articles/carlo-de-simone-linguist) (2017) have argued for the contrary.\nMore recently it is considered a Messapic theonym of an Indo-European goddess by Marchesini (2021).\n\n# Sources\n\n## Footnotes\n\n## Citations","revisionCount":0},"hasMore":false,"nextCursor":null}