By: George C. Chryssis

The question whether the Greek alphabet is an invention of the Hellenes, or it is a modified import of the Phoenician alphabet, has long been debated by linguists, scholars and historians alike.

The web site writingsystems.com states that although Greek has traditionally been considered to be the mother of alphabets, the first to represent vowels as well as consonants, scholars are now divided on whether Greek was in fact the ancestor of all others or whether some [letters] came from Phoenician in other ways.

In addition, in the book The World of the Bible the author, Roberta Harris, writes that to the Greeks also belongs the credit for the invention of the vowel system& when the Greeks founded colonies in Italy, the alphabet was taken up by the peoples there& and has come down to us via the Romans&

This article is based on extensive (but, by no means exhaustive) research that the author has done on the subject, in an attempt to show that ancient, as well as recent evidence, point to a favorable conclusion that the alphabet is indeed a Hellenic invention, albeit its final form, as we know it today, is the result of refinement and iterations of Hellenic writing systems through millennia of usage in the Aegean basin and the Levant.

The alleged Phoenician invasion

Several ancient Greek writers credit various Hellenes as the inventors of the alphabet, i.e. Prometheus, Palamedes, Linus and others, with the exception of Herodotus, who in his History he mentions the following: Then those Phoenicians who had come with Cadmus, of whom were the Gephyrians, had lived in many other places, and imported in this land different teachings to the Greeks, and in addition letters (grammata), which, in my opinion, where unknown to the Greeks, initially those [letters] that they and all Phoenicians used; however, as time went by they [Phoenicians] changed their language and the type [shape] of the letters. (Book V, 58)

This vexed passage is the heart of a long lasting and continuing debate regarding the origin of the Greek alphabet, since it has been taken at gospel value by many to mean that the Greeks borrowed, at least some, of their letters from the Phoenicians. However, there is an increasing number of scholars and researchers, who argue with validity, that the Herodotus passage has been misunderstood and misinterpreted, if not taken out of context.

Referring to the Greek original text (quoted in the parentheses below), let us analyze the passage to extract its meaning the way Herodotus, most likely, meant it to read.

First, we notice that Herodotus makes a very important and significant disclaimer in this paragraph: he tells us that what he writes is a personal opinion (os emoi dokeei), not a widely accepted fact or a definitive statement.

Prior to this, Herodotus also makes a more general disclaimer that his opinion was formed not by facts, research or scientific knowledge, but rather it was based on taking information from others (anapynthanomenos).

If we look closely in what Herodotus himself says [in his History], writes Mary Lefkowitz in her book Not Out Of Africa, he makes it clear that he is putting forward his own interpretations and conjectures about what he saw and was told by native informants. (p. 62)

This is not an uncommon practice for Herodotus. To wit, Professor Perez Zagorin in his book Thucydides: An Introduction for the Common Reader writes that Herodotus in dealing with sources of information, his attitude was neither consistently critical nor generally credulous, but somewhere in between& To his readers he declares that it is his duty to report all that is said, but not obliged to believe it& His work is full of the most varied facts, speeches, stories and digressions for whose truth it is impossible to vouch& Very likely [Thucydides] placed Herodotus among the class of writers who, he said, take little trouble in the search for the truth and readily&accept whatever comes first hand. (p.16)

This is not to say that Herodotus is not a great historian, or that his writings are not important. On the contrary, his History is a remarkable book based on events that he encountered, but also on stories and folklore that he heard. Regarding his passage about the Greek alphabet he failed to establish a clear distinction between facts and generalizations and, in contrast to Thucydides, the historical evidence (tekmerion) in his narrative is missing, rendering his conjecture false.

To be fair, despite his controversial account, Herodotus actually makes it clear that the Greeks already had letters of their own, at the time of the Phoenicians arrival to Greece and is careful to point-out that the Phoenicians introduced only a few letters (eisegagon oliga) that where hitherto unknown to the Greeks (ouk eonta prin Ellesi). Surely, the most important and by far the most critical statement that Herodotus makes in his passage is the one confirming that in time the Phoenicians changed their language and the type (or shape) of their letters (ama ti foni metevallon kai ton rythmon ton grammaton). In other words, the Phoenicians assimilated and eventually spoke Greek and wrote in Greek letters!

However, what is considered the bone of contention in this entire debate is Herodotus’s subsequent paragraph. It reads in (translation) as follows: At that period, most of the Greeks living around the [Aegean] region were Ionians, who were taught these letters by the Phoenicians, and adopted them with few alterations for their own use, and using them they were saying, that the right thing to do was to call them Phoenician, since the Phoenicians brought them to Greece.

This passage is indeed both paradoxical and suspicious, because if we accept the notion that the Ionian Greeks adopted and used some Phoenician letters (metarythmisantes sfeon oliga ehreonto), this would be a striking contradiction to the former paragraph’s strong and assertive statement that the Phoenicians where the adopters, not the Greeks! Is Herodotus confused and uses bifurcated logic here, or is something else happening? Let’s examine the possibilities.

As difficult as it is to translate a passage from ancient Greek without altering its meaning, keep in mind that the ancient Greek writings can (and will) take an entirely different meaning by repositioning a comma, or by observing the proper gender, or even by inserting a word that the author has omitted.

Consider the following famous Delphic oracle, given by Pythia to an ancient Greek soldier leaving for war: Thou shall go and thou shall return not thou shall die in war (Exeis afexeis ou en polemo thnexeis). As an exercise to the reader, notice how the meaning of the sentence changes completely, first by placing the comma before the word not and then after it!

Furthermore, consider the word Egypt (Aigyptos); its feminine form (e Aigyptos) refers to the country Egypt, but its male form (o Aigyptos) refers to the mythical hero Egyptus, a forefather of the Greeks, not connected with Egypt.

Fascinating indeed, but after all, this is the beauty and power of the Greek language and also its mystique and challenge to the user, as well as the translator! Hence, modern translators and interpreters, who do not have either the analytical skills or good command of the language, not only make erroneous translations and interpretations, but unfortunately, these errors perpetuate and eventually amplify the problem.

With this in mind, let us reintroduce the later mentioned Herodotus paragraph, by inserting a key word (in brackets, bellow) that Herodotus may have omitted as redundant (autonoete): At that period, most of the Greeks living around the region were Ionians, who were taught these [Greek] letters by the Phoenicians and adopted them&

The suggestion that Herodotus meant Greek letters is consistent with what he told us in his first passage, i.e. that the Phoenicians had adopted the Greek letters (and language) and abandoned their own. Furthermore, it is important to note that he mentions the Phoenicians as importers of these letters rather than inventors, while his subsequent statement that the Ionians called the letters Phoenician (Phoenekeia keklesthai) is consistent with the ancient Greeks’ tendency to attach exotic origins to home-grown products, even if that practice had an unintentional long-term negative impact on their creativity and intellectual capital. This practice continues even today, inasmuch we attach origins to certain common items, such as French fries, Danish rolls, Canadian bacon, Venetian blinds, etc, even though it is highly unlikable that these products where actually invented in the named localities. 

If this explanation is not sufficient to persuade the skeptics, advocates of the belief that the alphabet was indeed a Greek invention, have expressed the opinion that the second paragraph may have not been written by Herodotus altogether, but it may have been inserted at a later date by someone with the intention to reduce the importance of Herodotus original passage.

Could this be so? Well, we know that through the ages, ancient Greek writings have been altered and edited, for various reasons and some more significantly than others, by various scribes and copiers of the original texts.

Herodotus History may have also been a victim of a later-day Hellenized zealot scribe, who in an attempt to minimize Hellenic cultural hegemony and inventiveness he targeted the crown jewel of all Greek accomplishments, their alphabet!

Could Herodotus been altered?

It would be historically unjust and unfair to claim that in a multicultural region where Greece is located, there were not intercultural interactions, influences and possibly adoptions of customs, thoughts and rituals.

The Greeks traveled throughout the Mediterranean Sea (and beyond) and came into contact with various peoples and cultures, and had an open mind and a voracious thirst for knowledge and new ideas.

Having said this, it is also safe to say that the Greeks invented what has been credited to them, and their contributions to philosophy, philology, mathematics, history, democracy, architecture and the arts, are well documented and do not need apologists.

The ancient Greek culture was home-grown and unique, and its accomplishments were the result of this uniqueness. However, since ancient times, other cultures studied and copied (or usurped) ancient Greek thoughts and ideas, in an attempt to lift their own ethnic group culturally, spiritually and socially.

The blatantly flawed Afrocentric Theory that was developed in modern times to satisfy nationalistic and multicultural tendencies, was an attempt to defraud and deceive academics, scholars and simple folks by erroneously claiming that Greek thought and civilization was stolen from Egypt (i.e. Africa).

Fortunately, this theory was ingeniously dispelled and totally discredited by Professor Mary Lefkowitz’s scholarly, courageous and widely accepted book Not Out Of Africa.

Similarly, the Phoenician Theory about the origins of the Greek alphabet, was developed at a time when, as the British scholar Dr. S.G. Remproke says, the Phoenicians were given an intermediary role that is not based on any historical information, in other words, a role of the transporter of wisdom from the chosen people of Israel to the uncivilized nations, and specifically the Greeks. This, of course, could be forgiven, since this was established around the end of the Medieval Ages, when religious fanaticism and backwardness had reached such a point that Iphigenia was presented as the daughter of Ieptha; Deukalion as Noah& Orpheus (Musaeus) as Moses and other similar distortions. (Magazine Davlos, pp. 13741-13750, January 2000)

During the last three centuries BCE, the Egyptians and the Jews, primarily those living in Alexandria during the Hellenistic times, tried very hard (and at times succeeded) to assert their own ideas and cultural beliefs through the written works of the Alexandrian Greeks, who for millennia lived, worked and flourished in Egypt and continued to exert the Hellenic influence to other cultures through their language, philosophy, science, religion and the arts.

Alexandria was the most cultural city of the Mediterranean, and within a century after Alexandria was built [by Alexander the Great in 332 BCE]& it had become the center not only of Hellenism but also of Judaism& the finest teachers, philosophers, and scientists flourishing within its walls, writes Theodore Vrettos in his book Alexandria, City of the Western Mind

In her book Not Out of Africa Dr. Marry Lefkowitz writes: The Jews shared the Egyptians’ patronizing attitude towards the dominant Greek culture. Jewish historians were determined to show that although the Jewish people were now subject to Greeks, they not only understood Greek culture& but these writers sought to show that Greek religion and philosophy had been inspired by Hebrew ideas& But an even more definitive assertion of the derivative nature of Greek culture was made by an Alexandrian Jew called Aristobulus in the second century BCE. Aristobulus did not hesitate to invent information, or to report information invented by others& He said that Greek philosophers Pythagoras, Socrates and Plato knew and studied the books of Moses& Of course, no scholar today would take seriously that claim& [but] by the first century CE some people believed [it, and]& the Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria and the Jewish historian Josephus both speak of Moses influence on Plato& Later, church fathers like Clement of Alexandria (150-215 CE) and Eusebius (260-340 CE), took a decisively more hostile line& accusing the Greeks of theft and plagiarism& The determination of both Jews and Christians to assert the priority of Hebrew culture over the Greeks, helps to explain why the Egyptians where eager to point out& that, the famous Greeks were inspired by Egyptian learning. It was a way of asserting the importance of their culture, especially in a time when they had little or no political power& But the fate of Jewish ethnic historians like Aristobulus offer a warning to modern day advocates of Greek cultural dependency. How many people have ever heard of Aristobulus? And, more importantly, who believes him? (pp 85-86)

It is well documented, that scribes and book editors published revised ancient Greek writings and books in a form that, implicitly or explicitly, attempted to favor a specific ethnicity for nationalistic, religious or other subjective reasons.

Professor Richard E. Rubenstein writes in his book Aristotle’s Children that the Catholic Church allowed universities to teach Aristotle’s philosophy and science, provided that his books had been examined and purged of all suspicion of error. (p. 173)

In other words, Aristotle’s books would be analyzed, interpreted and corrected (read, changed) to fit the specific needs, teachings and dogmas of the Catholic Church!

Even the New Testament, the most revered book for billions of Christians, was not immune to considerable changes by various scribes.

Professor Bart D. Ehram in his book Misquoting Jesus writes that & [in] thousands of places& the manuscripts of the New Testament came to be changed by scribes& [with] additions of sizable length& there are lots of significant changes (and lots more insignificant ones) in our surviving manuscripts of the New Testament (pp. 68-69) 

What, then, could have prevented the alteration of Herodotus’ History, by racially or nationalistically motivated scribes and book copiers, in an effort to elevate ethnic pride, by asserting that a non-Greek culture had inspired and was responsible for the origins of the Greek alphabet?

Unfortunately, we do not have the original Herodotus manuscript to compare and offer a definitive and conclusive proof to this theory, but why should we passively accept the negating rather than the assertive statement of his account about the Greek alphabet?

After all, in the absence of conclusive evidence for a claim that the Greeks themselves had arrived from the East  the Greeks always regarded themselves as indigenous (autochthones) -- the Levantines and their advocates were determined to show that at the very least the Greek alphabet was an eastern import, and had Sinaitic-Phoenician-Semitic roots!

The subsequent topics further examine this claim and present documented historical facts, as well as recent archeological findings that dispel a derivative theory, and raise claim to support the theory that the Greek alphabet (at some shape, form and factor) not only was invented and used by the Hellenes before Phoenician times, but eventually this alphabet made its way to the Levant, to be used first by the Philistines and subsequently by the Phoenicians and the Semitic peoples of that region.

Was Minoan Crete the birthplace of the alphabet?

Long before the excavations of Knossos in Crete by Sir Arthur Evans, scholars believed and taught that Greek writing began around the time of Homer, at 800 BCE.

The excavating work of Sir Arthur Evans in Crete, unveiled the Minoan writing scripts, known today as Linear A and Linear B.

Michael Ventris, an English architect, deciphered Linear B writing and proved, beyond any doubt, that the Minoans of the second millennium BCE were speaking and writing in Greek. The Aegean of that time was indeed Hellenic. In fact, as it turns out, the Linear scripts use symbols resembling many of the letters of the Greek alphabet.

Recent work that has been done on the decipherment of an even earlier Cretan script found on the Phaistos Disk, especially by Dr. Steven R. Fischer, proved that the disk writing is also Greek (contrary to hitherto various theories that the disk script was of Northern Semitic, Hittite, Egyptian, or other origins) thus extending the Hellenic connection of the Minoans into the third millennium BCE.

Dr. Fischer in his book Glyphbraker presents a meticulous and scholarly account of his decipherment of the Phaistos Disk that was based on the glyph correspondences between the Phaistos Disk and symbols of Linears A and B. His work has been endorsed by The National Geographic and is by far the most credible and realistic decipherment of the Phaistos Disk to-date.

In his book, Dr. Fischer concludes that the Minoan language of ancient Crete is the oldest documented language not only of Europe but also of the entire Indo-European language family& it was a Hellenic tongue, sister to Mycenaean Greek [Minoan Greek]& the Phaistos Disk indicates a preference for the written word in ancient Crete (it also suggests widespread literacy)& [and] the Hellenes were the first in the Aegean, indeed in Europe, to use writing& (pp. 119-120)

The Minoans spoke and wrote in Greek, at least 1300 years prior to the appearance of the Phoenicians! Some may argue that the Phaistos Disk is written in pictorial script (glyphs) and it is syllabic, not alphabetic. This is true. However, the relation of the Phaistos Disk to the syllabic Linear A and B scripts is stunningly similar, thus proving the continuity and evolution of these writing scripts. Furthermore, the similarity of the Minoan writing symbols to the Phoenician scripts (i.e. Proto-Sinaitic, ca. 1700 BCE; and Phoenician ca. 700 BCE), which are also syllabic and not alphabetic, suggest a relative connection that should not, and must not, be taken lightly or go unnoticed.

Hence, the question at hand is, did the birth and early evolution of the Greek alphabet begun in the East (Phoenicia) or the West (Crete)?

The ancient historian Diodorus of Sicily mentions in his writings that Dosiades, a writer of epigrams, told him that the letters were invented by the Cretans (Dosiades de en Kriti phisin evrethinai auta [grammata].) (Becker, E., Diodorus, II 783.14) 

Furthermore, according to the On-Line Encyclopedia Britannica, the late Sir Arthur Evans, the brilliant archaeologist and scholar who dedicated most of his life excavating, deciphering and documenting the advanced civilization of the Minoans, argued ingeniously that the alphabet was taken over from Crete by the Cherethites (Kereti=Cretans) and Palestu (Philistines=Pelasgoi) who established for themselves settlements on the coast of Palestine. From them it passed to the Phoenicians, who were their neighbors, if not their kinsfolk.

This is a statement and scientific observation of great importance, and has far reaching implications in the quest to identify not only the origins of the alphabet, but the origins of civilization in the Mediterranean.

Unfortunately, Evans’ theory of the origin of the alphabet laid dormant (and frankly, in my opinion, purposely ignored) until recent archaeological findings in Israel regarding the Philistines, a race that, until recently, we only knew from Old Testament references, have shed new light on the migrations, settlements and cultures of the people in the Mediterranean basin, and has stirred renewed interest in the relation between the Levantines (Middle Easterners) and the Minoan Greeks.

Will, finally, Evans be exonerated and his theories be proven right? Well, we are now almost certain that, despite previous theories that the Minoans migrated from the Levant, recent scientific and archeological findings are proving that it was the other way around!

As we understand and analyze these new findings, not through the prism of narrow nationalistic, ethnic or political interests, but in true and responsible scholarship, old misconceptions will tumble and the truth will prevail.

The Philistines: Savage warriors or peaceful innovators?

The Philistines was an immigrant culture and appears to settle in Palestine around 1200 BCE, establishing important cities like Ashrod, Ekron, Ashkelon, Gath and Gaza that constituted the Philistine Pentapolis (Five Cities).

The Philistines were known to the Egyptians as Palestu and also as the Sea Peoples and their migration to the Levant from their homeland might have been due to famine, outside invaders or devastating earthquakes and natural disasters.

Moshe and Trude Dothan, professors of Archeology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, have spent over 30 years excavating, analyzing, reconstructing and painstakingly recording the Philistine civilization, hence we now have a good, albeit still incomplete, understanding and appreciation of the contributions and the positive impact of their highly advanced culture in this area.

Historical and scientific evidence show unequivocally that the Philistines were composed of Greek-speaking tribes and recent archeological evidence point-out that they most certainly came from Crete (Caphtor). It is interesting to note that the biblical Cherethites were Cretans (Cherethites=Kereti=Cretans) and they became King David's personal and professional military force (1 Sam. 30:14).

The Cherethites are linked to the Philistines by Ezekiel, I stretch out my hand against the Philistines, cut off the Cherethites, and destroy the rest of the seacoast (Ez. 25:15-17). Zephaniah also mentions four of the five Philistine cities in his prophecies against Philistia, For Gaza shall be deserted, and Ashkelon shall become a desolation; Ashrod’s people shall be driven out at noon, and Ekron shall be uprooted (Zep. 2:4-7). Zephaniah further affirms that the Canaanites and Philistines were kinfolks from Crete: Ah, inhabitants of the seacoast, you nation of the Cherethites! The word of the Lord is against you, O Canaan, land of the Philistines& (Zephaniah 2:5-11)

The link and relation of the Philistines/Canaanites to Cretans is further strengthened by the fact that the Philistinean city of Gaza was also known as Minoa, the same name given to several trade stations that started from Crete. Joseph Yahuda, in his book Hebrew is Greek, associates the name Philistines with that of Pelasgoi, early inhabitants of Crete (Pelasgoi => Pelaskoi (g turns dialectally into k) => Pelastoi (k turns dialectally into t) => Palestoi (e and a interchange) => Palestu => Philistines.) (p. 3).

Although the Old Testament portrays the Philistines as godless violent warriors, dull-witted and uncouth barbarians, the Dothans, through their excavations and scholarly work, have revealed a culture and civilization just the opposite -- questioning whether the Biblical authors were vilifying their more cultured enemies, because of ethnic hostilities.

The archeological discoveries revealed that the Philistines were accomplished architects, sophisticated urban planners, highly artistic potters (using Mycenaean/Minoan decorative motifs), weavers, skilled iron-workers and advanced technologists. In short, the Philistines were a culture that profoundly affected and influenced other cultures around them. A civilized race, indeed, that used Aegean-style hearths in their buildings, practiced Aegean-cultic religion and cremated and buried their dead in Minoan/Mycenaean-style, rock-cut chamber tombs.

Gerhard Herm in his book The Phoenicians writes that the Philistines had not only had close contact with the Achaeans (i.e. Hellenes) but in fact stemmed directly from them. Goliath, who challenged David wearing Mycenaean armour, could have been a descendant of Menelaus, Achilles, Odysseus& Thus, here in the Gaza strip the last act of a drama was played out which had begun in Crete& (p. 56)

Until recently, scientists and scholars were unsure whether or not the early Philistines had a writing system. But, is it possible that an advanced culture like the Philistines, with established trade, religion and social structure could not write, while less advanced cultures around them allegedly did?

The Dothans in their book People of the Sea: The Search for the Philistines show a tablet that they excavated in Israel, dated around 1100 BCE, with early Philistine writing, that is related to the Minoan Linear scripts. Although not many examples of this writing have been found as yet to establish the definitive link and to aid the decipherment of this script, scholars are now almost certain that the Philistines used linear writing to record events.

In early 2007, in an article that appeared in The Israel Exploration Journal, distinguished Harvard professors Lawrence E. Stager and Frank Moore Cross commenting on several Philistine inscriptions found in the ancient city of Ashkelon in Israel, wrote that the inscriptions "reveal, for the first time, convincing evidence that the early Philistines of Ashkelon were able to read and write in a non-Semitic language, as yet undeciphered& perhaps it is not too bold to propose that the inscription is written in a form of Cypro-Minoan script utilized and modified by the Philistines  in short, that we are dealing with the Old Philistine script." Cross further states that the script had some characteristics of Linear A, the writing system used in the Aegean from 1650 B.C. to 1450 B.C. This undeciphered script was supplanted by another, Linear B, which was identified with the Minoan civilization of Crete and was finally decoded in the mid-20th century.

Hence, these Cretan migrants brought with them not only the Minoan Greek language, but also the linear script, the early Hellenic syllabic alphabet that planted the seed for the evolution of a regional rooted alphabet.

To wit, excavations at Tel Miqne in Israel in 1996 unearthed a Philistine dedication inscription of the seventh century BCE, written in a script dubbed by scholars Phoenician-Canaanite, in the absence of a more precise alternative nomenclature.

This tablet of Ekron, as it is commonly known today, is written in none other than a Philistine (i.e. Cretan) script that most likely evolved from the Minoan linear scripts, and was eventually adopted by both the Canaanites and the Phoenicians their neighbors [and] their kinfolk, according to Evans.

Furthermore, Aaron Demsky in an article published in Biblical Archeology suggests that the inscription of the tablet of Ekron names one of the Philistine kings as Akys (Greek: Acheos = Hellene), and his patron deity as Ptnyh (Greek: Potnia = Divine Lady => Great Goddess of the Aegean.), further confirming the Hellenic origin and lineage of the Philistines, their language and their writing (pp. 53-58.)

Sr. Arthur Evans may have finally been proven right! The letters of the so-called Phoenician alphabet were first used by the Philistines and had Minoan Hellenic roots!

Further Evidence and Conclusion

I have been and continue to be intrigued by the many theories presented in Joseph Yahuda’s book Hebrew is Greek where, through extensive linguistic research, the author builds a strong case that the language of the ancient Hebrews, who were known as Khabiru and Hepiru respectively in the Syrian and Egyptian annals, was continental Greek and that the Greek and Hebrew alphabets bear a striking resemblance to one another, in the order of letters, their names shape and pronunciation. (p. 19)

Yahuda further states in his book that it is Greek that anciently  long before the Trojan War  started altering into Hebrew, and not Hebrew into Greek. (p. 633)

The same author convincingly asserts in his book that when the Hellenic affinity of the Phoenicians had long been forgotten, it was assumed that the identity of the Greek with the Phoenician alphabet was simply a matter of borrowing. (p. 8)

These are powerful statements, based on thirty years of painstaking and meticulous scholarly research, by Joseph Yahuda, the results of which were compiled in the above mentioned book, a monumental work of about 700 pages.

The results of this research may be viewed as controversial and thought-provoking, yet they are well documented, compelling and scholarly, hence they cannot be waived-off, dismissed or ignored. This book diverges from narrow nationalistic motives and through science it casts doubt to the hitherto widely accepted theory that the Hebrew alphabet and language - as well as the Phoenician - are of Semitic origin!

Nor we can ignore the fact that as far back as the third millennium BCE, the Middle East was colonized by Minoan Philistines, and that the Phoenicians were related to the Philistines, and they all spoke Greek dialects and wrote using Greek characters.

In fact, the ancient historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-117 CE), in his book The Histories, writes this: Some say that the Jews were fugitives from the island of Crete& Evidence of this is sought in the name. There is a famous mountain in Crete called Ida; the neighboring tribe, the Ideaei, came to be called Judaei by a barbarous lengthening of the national name. Could this obvious etymological similarity be a mere coincidence? Furthermore, could it go unnoticed?

I submit that as archeology unearths more evidence, old theories will be revised and the new findings will eventually reveal the facts and truth. I also submit that the early Hellenic influence goes beyond the Aegean and Mediterranean basins. As Joseph Yahuda writes in his book, four thousand years ago the whole of the Middle East was overrun, colonized and controlled by Greeks and allied tribes. (p. 7)

Consequently, the languages and the writing systems that people of these regions used were developed and originated in the Aegean basin and mainland Greece and made their way to the Levant (and not the other way around) through these settlers.

The Greek alphabet is a product of this human migration and cultural evolution and was developed, in full circle, among people that shared a common Hellenic lineage, heritage and culture. The Greek alphabet, indeed, has Hellenic roots!

The debate on this and several related issues may not stop, and it should not, albeit debates of this sort must be based on historical and scientific facts and, as Dr. Dianne Ravitch of NYU said, history must be based on evidence, openly arrived at and openly argued, not myth, ideology or opinion.

About the author: George C. Chryssis is an entrepreneur, an award winning poet, a community activist, and a philanthropist. A prolific author, he has written four poetry books, a technical book (translated and published in Chinese also) and has contributed numerous editorials, commentaries, literary and general articles in various publications. For his contributions to Hellenism, literature, education, business and philanthropy, he has received over twenty awards and citations. He lives and works in Massachusetts.

Selected Bibliography

1. Demsky, Aaron, Biblical Archeology Review (NY, 1998)

2. Dothan, Moshe and Trude, People of the Sea: The Search for the Philistines (Macmillan, New York, 1992)

3. Ehram, Bart D., Misquoting Jesus (HarperCollins Publishers, New York, 2005)

4. Fischer, Steven R., Glyphbraker (Copernicus, New York, 1997)

5. Friedman, Richard E., Who wrote the Bible? (HarperCollins Publishers, New York, 1997)

6. Greenberg, Gary, Myths of the Bible (Sourcebooks, Inc., Naperville, IL, 2002)

7. Harris, Roberta L., The World of the Bible (Thames and Hudson Ltd, London, 1995)

8. Herm, Gerhard, The Phoenicians: The Purple Empire of the Ancient World (William Morrow and Company, Inc., New York, 1975)

9. Hopper, R.J., The Early Greeks (Harper & Row Publishers, New York, 1976)

10. Kalopoulos, Michael, The Great Lie (Xlibris, USA, 2003)

11. Lefkowitz, Mary, Not Out Of Africa (Basic Books, New York, 1996)

12. Rubenstein, Richard, Aristotle’s Children (Harcourt, Orlando, FL, 2003)

13. Vrettos, Theodore, Alexandria, City of the Western Mind (The Free Press, New York, 2001)

14. Yahuda, Joseph, Hebrew is Greek (Becket Publications, Oxford, 1982) 

15. Zagorin, Perez, Thucydides: An Introduction for the Common Reader (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2005)

 By: GEORGE C. CHRYSSIS

Early period of the American philhellenic movement

The 1776 American Revolution was an inspiration to the then enslaved Greeks, not only during the actual days of the revolutionary war, but long after its successful completion and the eventual declaration of independence and the creation of the United States of America.

There are unconfirmed reports, that in the battle of Monmouth, New Jersey, which took place on June 28^th, 1778, Greek volunteers fought under the leadership of a young man called Demetrios Ypsilanti, who allegedly later returned to Greece and might have fought or influenced the advent of the Greek War for Independence.

Today, a town near Detroit, Michigan, bears the name Ypsilanti in honor of a Demetrios Ypsilanti. Historians point out that the town was named after the Greek Revolution hero Demetrios Ypsilanti, brother of Philiki Eteria leader Alexandros Ypsilanti, rather than the Monmouth battle legend.  

Irrespective of whom the town was named after, the fact remains that the heroism of a true Greek freedom fighter inspired judge Augustus Woodward to name, in 1833, a town after a man who in the beginning of the 19^th Century, in charge of three hundred men, successfully battled an entire Turkish army, inflicting damage and eventually escaping without losing a single man.

When the bell of the Revolution rang in 1821 and the cry Freedom or Death resonated over the enslaved Greeks, a number of American philhellenes started a lobbying campaign in the United States for the support of the Greek War of Independence, a campaign that captured the imagination of many influential political and civil leaders in America.

The Greeks on the other hand, knew from the very beginning of their War for Independence that the American people would understand their struggle, having themselves fought for independence forty five years earlier, and sought the support and influence of the new American Republic to advance and promote the Greek cause.

Thus, on May 25^th, 1821, Petros Mavromichalis, on behalf of the Messinian Congress send a letter to the then Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, which was published in the American newspapers, asking for moral support. Your virtues, Americans, are close to ours, although a broad sea separates us, wrote among other Mavromichalis. We feel you closer than our neighboring countries and we consider you as friends, co-patriots and brothers, because you are fair, philanthropic and brave& Do not deny to help us&

Edward Everett, a Harvard professor and great philhellene, who was also the publisher of the North American Review, published every correspondence of letters or appeals that he was receiving from Greece and through articles and speeches he made strong public pronouncements for the recognition of the Revolution and for sending military aid to Greece.

On December 3^rd, 1822, US president James Monroe in his annual address to Congress said: A strong hope is entertained that the Greeks will recover their independence and assume their equal statue among the nations of the earth.

Unfortunately, on December 2^nd, 1823, president Monroe announced the Monroe Doctrine, which in essence excluded the United States from getting involved in European affairs and considered the then existing European governments (including the Ottoman) as de facto legitimate.

On December 8^th, 1823, Congressman Daniel Webster from Massachusetts made a motion in Congress for the appropriation of money, to send an American envoy to Greece and for the support of the Greek struggle for independence.

On January 19^th, 1824, Webster gave a powerful and resonating speech in defense of his proposal. I have in mind the modern not the ancient, the alive and not the dead Greece& today’s Greece, fighting against unprecedented difficulties& a Greece fighting for its existence and for the common privilege of human existence, said Webster.

Congressman Henry Clay, from Kentucky, supported Webster’s motion and in a moving oratorical speech on January 20^th, 1824, asked Congress to officially recognize the Greek War of Independence and to send an envoy to Greece to examine and report on the situation. He stressed the fact that the entire American nation was showing sympathy and support for Greece and urged Congress to suppress any fears and apprehensions and to help a Christian nation. In addition, General Sam Houston, a member of Congress, supported Daniel Webster’s motion.

Unfortunately, due to strong opposition from members of Congress that adhered to the principles of the Monroe Doctrine, the Webster motion was defeated.

However, the speeches of the great philhellenes, Webster and Clay, were widely publicized in America, Europe and South America and sparked the interest of many individuals, who decided to help the Greek revolution with various means. The influence and the positive contributions of the American philhellenes to the Greek War of Independence had just begun!

Thomas Jefferson and Adamantios Koraes

It is worth noting that Adamantios Koraes, a Greek physician, intellectual, scholar and an early prophet of the Revolution, who believed that independence of Greece could only be achieved by educational progress, wrote many times to Thomas Jefferson asking for his support to the struggle of Greece for independence.

Koraes, who at the time lived in Paris, met Jefferson there around 1785, when Jefferson served as the ambassador of the United States to France. Following Jefferson’s return to America in 1789, the two men continued their friendship through correspondence.

Koraes’ letters to Jefferson were passionate and full of patriotic zest, always promoting the case that it was to the best interest of America and the American people to help Greece attain its freedom. Help us, fortunate Americans, wrote Koraes in a letter dated July 10^th, 1823, We are not asking you for a handout. Rather, we are providing you with an opportunity to augment your good fortune.

Koraes believed that appealing to powerful, respected and enlightened philhellenes to intervene and influence their respective governments for the recognition of the Greek cause, was a powerful and invaluable political tool. Himself an enlightened revolutionary, he believed that the power of intellect and diplomacy was more effective than the might of soldiers and arms.

Through correspondence and personal contacts, Koraes convinced many foreign intellectuals that the continuing use of the Greek language since classical days, together with a continuous habitation of the same lands and of common religion, history and tradition, was conclusive evidence of the existence of a Greek national identity, thus establishing a strong argument for the recognition of an independent Greek state.

The American philhellenes

The first volunteer American to travel to Greece and join the Greek War of Independence was George Jarvis, a New Yorker, who went to Greece in 1822. He learned the Greek language, put on a foustanella (Greek kilted skirt) and upon joining the kleftes (Greek guerilla fighters) he became known as Kapetan Zervos. Jarvis was brave, participated in many battles and was repeatedly wounded. He died of natural causes in Argos on August 11^th, 1828, but his appeals back home for aid and contributions to the Greek cause paid off.

Jarvis became a role model for other American volunteers. In 1824, Captain Jonathan P. Miller, of Vermont, arrived in Greece. He too learned the Greek language, worn the foustanella and was fearless in battle. Miller was in Messolongi during its siege and in a letter to Edward Everett dated May 3^rd, 1826, he described the heroic exodus and the subsequent fall of Messolongi and the massacre of its population by the Ottomans.

While in Greece, Miller adopted a four-year-old boy, whom he brought back to Vermont. This boy, Loukas Miltiades Miller, eventually graduated from Vermont University in 1845, and shortly thereafter he married and moved to the town of Oshkosh, Wisconsin, where he engaged in business and civic activities. In 1853 he was elected a member of the State Legislature and in 1891 he was the first American of Greek origin to be elected to the Congress of the United States of America!

However, by far the best-known philhellene is Dr. Samuel Gridley Howe, a Bostonian physician. Upon his arrival in Greece, he enlisted in the Greek Army and for six years he served as a soldier and a chief surgeon. In 1829 he established a medical center in Aegina and a school for the blind in Corinth. Long after the revolution, Howe continued to be active in Greek affairs, both in Greece and in the United States. In 1866, during the Cretan Revolution, he returned to Greece with his wife Julia Ward Howe, to organize support for the new uprising of the Cretans against Ottoman tyranny and enslavement. To acknowledge and recognize the remarkable humanitarian work of Dr. Howe to the island of Crete, the Town of Chania has named a street in his honor.

Other American philhellenes who went to Greece to offer their services during the Revolution were George Wilson of Providence, Rhode Island, who excelled in bravery during the naval battle at Nafpaktos; James Williams, an African American from Baltimore who joined the Greek Navy forces; Estwick Evans from New Hampshire, who left behind his wife and children in order to fight the Greek War for Independence; captain John M. Allen; and William Townsend Washington, a distant relative of president George Washington, who despite his erratic personal behavior and colorful life-style he was fearless and brave and fell heroically fighting in the battle of Palamidi.

In the meantime, the Greek Revolution was gaining support among the philhellene American citizens and many were collecting money to help the Greek cause. Through the fundraising efforts of New York philhellenes, the amount of 6,600 sterling pounds was collected in 1824 and was forwarded to the Greek government via London, England.

During a fundraiser in New York City, Nicholas Biddle, a banker, offered the then largest personal donation of $300 to the New York Greek Relief Committee, while US president John Adams in a letter to the same committee encouraged the fundraising efforts.

Leading the fundraising efforts in Baltimore was Charles Carroll, of Carrollton, a signatory of the Declaration of Independence, and in Philadelphia the leader was Mathew Carey.

In 1825, the French General Lafayette, a great philhellene and staunch supporter of the Greek Revolution, visited the United States and in every affair that he attended in his honor, proclaimed the importance and the moral responsibility of helping, in any way possible, the Greek struggle for independence.

However, by 1826 the initial enthusiasm of the American public begun to wane, partly due to conflicting reports about the success of the war and also because of disturbing news about infighting and rivalry among the Greek leaders.

To rekindle the American philhellenic movement, the Greek revolutionary leader Theodoros Kolokotronis, through George Jarvis, sent a letter to Edward Everett dated July 5^th, 1826, in which the great Greek leader explained the situation in Greece, pledged unity and appealed for further help and support. Greece is forever grateful to the philanthropy of our Christian [American] brothers, wrote Kolokotronis, who share her struggle and who also support with their funds her just war [for independence]& the Greeks, determined to live or die free, do not fear shedding their blood& or the killing of their old, their women and their children& and they are ready to accept death rather than slavery; and now, more than ever, enthusiastically and united they are moving forward against [the Turks]& The Greek nation is not ungrateful to its benefactors. It is grateful to those who proclaim its epic struggle and their names will be recorded with indelible letters in the annals of the reborn Greece, in timeless display, for the respect of upcoming generations& Do not stop sending us your contributions& thus [you are] benefiting humanity and fulfilling Christ’s will. 

The letter was translated by Everett and parts of it, along with parts from Jarvis’ accompanying letter, were published in newspapers in Boston, Philadelphia, New York and other cities, sparking a new initiative of aid and assistance for the Greek nation.

Material aid to Greece

Captain Jonathan P. Miller returned to the United States in 1826 and through the efforts of the Greek Philhellenic Committee of New York, he was able to collect $17,500 worth of various relief supplies, which he took back to Greece onboard the ship Chancellor, on March 5^th, 1827.

The same year two more ships, Jane and Six Brothers, left New York harbor bound for Greece carrying various relief supplies of $25,000 in the aggregate.

At about the same time, two more shiploads of supplies totaling about $22,500 left the port of Philadelphia onboard the ships Tontine and Levant, while from Boston the ship Statesman carried to Greece cargo worth over $11,500.

All these relief provisions that contained food items, clothing, medical supplies and other necessities, were slated for and distributed to the suffering Greek civilian population, albeit soldiers and brigands usurped some supplies upon the arrival of the cargo to Greece.

On January 2^nd, 1827, Congressman Edward Livingston from Louisiana introduced a motion in Congress for the appropriation of $50,000 to purchase supplies for the needy people of Greece. His motion was defeated, but through private initiatives and fundraising activities $80,000 was collected in a combination of cash, food items and other in-kind aid.

In 1927 and 1928 a total of eight shiploads of supplies and relief aid worth more than $150,000 (an extraordinary amount by today’s standards) were dispatched to Greece and distributed by overseeing officials to needy members of the civilian population.

It was obvious that the publication of Kolokotronis’ letter had a great impact in rekindling the humanitarian interest of the Americans toward the ongoing Greek struggle. Furthermore, the various printed articles about Greece and its War of Independence that Everett and Carey published through their publications, along with the letters and reports published in American newspapers from the great philhellenes and humanitarians Howe, Miller and Jarvis, kept the struggle and plight of the Greeks in the forefront of the American public opinion.

It is estimated that thousand of Greeks were saved from starvation, exposure to the elements and disease through the efforts of these philhellenes. It may be safe to say that without the moral, intellectual, political, monetary and in-kind assistance of these American men, the outcome of the Greek War for Independence might have been different.

And lastly, several these men arranged to transport a number of war orphans to the United States that were adopted by American families. Many of these orphans received College education, excelled in their professions and became productive and admired citizens of the United States, while others chose to go back to Greece to offer their expertise and advice to the newly created Greek state.

About the author: George C. Chryssis is a successful entrepreneur, a philanthropist and a civic activist. He is also an award winning poet, a prolific author and a lecturer. He is a founder and former publisher of The Hellenic Voice, an Archon of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, a member of Leadership 100 of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, a member of AHEPA, past President of the Pancretan Association of America, and served as a Trustee and Vice Chairman of the Board of Hellenic College. He is currently a Trustee of Northeastern University and Wentworth Institute of Technology.

Selected Bibliography

1. Brewer, David, The Greek War of Independence (The Overlook Press, NY, 2001)

2. Koch, A. and Peden, W., The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson (Random House, NY, 1994)

3. Malafouris, M., Greeks in America 1528-1948 (In Greek, NY, 1948)

4. Papaioannou, George, The Odyssey of Hellenism in America (Patriarchal Institute of Patristic Studies, Thessaloniki, Greece, 1985)

5. Paroulakis, Peter, The Greeks: Their Struggle for Independence (Hellenic International Press, Darwin, Australia, 1984)

Την ανάγκη διαφύλαξης της ελληνικής γλώσσας και τη μεγιστοποίηση του έμπρακτου  ενδιαφέροντος όλων μας προς τους φωτοδότες της, τους ομογενείς δασκάλους, υπογράμμισαν σε εκδήλωση που από κοινού διοργάνωσαν η Ομοσπονδία Ελλήνων Εκπαιδευτικών Αμερικής και ο Σύλλογος Εκπαιδευτικών Νέας Υόρκης «Προμηθεύς», προχθές Κυριακή. Και αποδείχτηκε σωστός και αναγκαίος ο ετήσιος θεσμός που καθιερώθηκε για την αναγνώριση του έργου των ομογενών δασκάλων.

Σε όλες τις ομιλίες που ακούστηκαν, ήταν καθαρός ο προβληματισμός, αλλά και η αγωνία για το κράτημα της ελληνικής γλώσσας, για τη διαφύλαξη και μετάδοση στους νέους μας, του ελληνικού πολιτισμού και των αξιών της φυλής μας.

Είναι λυπηρό το φαινόμενο που αρκετές φορές παρατηρείται από την αδιαφορία μερικών προς την ελληνική γλώσσα. Είναι πολύ σωστά αυτά που έχουν λεχθεί.

Και πολύ σωστά, επίσης, έχει λεχθεί ότι η ελληνική γλώσσα αποτελεί κεντρικό πυλώνα της ύπαρξης και της διατήρησης του έθνους μας. Η εξασθένηση, η εγκατάλειψη και η κατεδάφισή της ενέχουν τον κίνδυνο της πνευματικής, πολιτισμικής και οικονομικής υποδούλωσης και της εθνικής εξαφάνισης.

Ναι, ακούστηκαν φωνές αγωνίας για το κράτημα της ελληνικής γλώσσας εδώ στην Ομογένεια. Εχουμε χρέος και ιερό καθήκον να τη φυλάξουμε σαν κόρη οφθαλμού, γιατί πραγματικά αποτελεί η αθάνατη ελληνική γλώσσα τους οφθαλμούς, τα μάτια, για να δει κανείς την αλήθεια, και τις μεγάλες αξίες και αλήθειες της ζωής.

Αυτή τη γλώσσα μοχθούν να κρατήσουν και να μεταδώσουν οι δάσκαλοι της Ομογένειας. Και αυτήν υπερασπίζονται, υποστηρίζοντάς την, οι δωρητές και ευεργέτες σχολείων και προγραμμάτων της ελληνικής γλώσσας. Σε όλους αυτούς, αλλά και στον καθένα που λίγο ή πολύ προσπαθεί για τη γλώσσα μας, απευθυνόταν ο γνωστός ιερωμένος και πανεπιστημιακός καθηγητής, Δρ. Δημήτριος Κωνσταντέλος, όταν, μιλώντας κατά την εκδήλωση της Κυριακής, τους αποκάλεσε μεγάλους ευεργέτες του Ελληνισμού.

Με το ίδιο πάθος μίλησε και ο πρόεδρος του Ελληνοαμερικανικού Εθνικού Συμβουλίου και της Παγκρητικής, Μανώλης Βεληβασάκης, όταν βεβαίωσε πως η Ομογένεια θα σταθεί αρωγός στις προσπάθειες της Ομοσπονδίας των δασκάλων για την εξασφάλιση της διδασκαλίας της ελληνικής γλώσσας.

Αυτές τις αρχές τήρησε και τηρεί και ο «Εθνικός Κήρυκας», ο οποίος υποστήριξε, υποστηρίζει και πάντα θα υποστηρίζει τη διαφύλαξη της ελληνικής γλώσσας και τη μετάδοσή της στις νεότερες γενιές. Αυτό δεν είναι υπόθεση ενός, ούτε ολίγων, ούτε κανενός οργανισμού. Είναι υπόθεση όλων μας.

Τιμή και δόξα σε εκείνους τους ομογενείς που έμπρακτα υποστηρίζουν τη διαφύλαξη της ελληνικής γλώσσας, αντιλαμβανόμενοι την αξία και την αναγκαιότητα που έχουμε, ως Ομογένεια, αλλά και ως έθνος.