This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this article if you can; the talk page may contain suggestions. (October 2009)

Ancient Greek marriage law concerns the laws and practices involving the institution of marriage in ancient Greece.

Marriage as a public interest[link]

The ancient Greek legislators considered the relation of marriage a matter not merely of private, but also of public or general interest. This was particularly the case at Sparta, where the subordination of private interests and happiness to the public was strongly exemplified in the regulations. For instance, by the laws of Lycurgus, criminal proceedings might be taken against those who married too late (graphe opsigamiou) or unsuitably (graphe kakogamiou), as well as against those who did not marry at all (graphe agamiou).^[1][2][3] These regulations were founded on the generally recognised principle that it was the duty of every citizen to raise up a strong and healthy progeny of legitimate children to the state.^[4]

So entirely, in fact, did the Spartans consider the teknopoioia (childbearing) as the main object of marriage, which the state was bound to promote, that whenever a woman had no children by her own husband, she was not only allowed, but even required by the laws, to cohabit with another man.^[5] On the same principle, and for the purpose of preventing the extinction of his family, the Spartan king Anaxandridas II was allowed to cohabit with two wives, for whom he kept two separate establishments: a case of bigamy, which, as Herodotus^[6] observes, was not at all consistent with Spartan nor indeed with Hellenic customs. Thus the heroes of Homer appear never to have had more than one kouridie alochos: lawfully wedded wife;^[7] though they are frequently represented as living in concubinage with one or more.

Solon also seems to have viewed marriage as a matter in which the state had a right to interfere, for we are told that his laws allowed agamiou graphe, though the regulation seems to have grown obsolete in later times; at any rate there is no instance on record of its application.^[8] Plato too may be quoted to prove how general was this feeling, for according to his laws,^[9] any one who did not marry before he was thirty-five was punishable not only with atimia (loss of civil rights), but also with pecuniary penalties, and he expressly states that in choosing a wife everyone ought to consult the interests of the state, and not his own pleasure.^[10]

Selecting a spouse[link]

But independent of any public considerations there were also private or personal reasons (peculiar to the ancients) which made marriage an obligation. Plato mentions one of these the duty incumbent upon every individual to provide for a continuance of representatives to succeed himself as ministers of the Divinity (toi Theoi hyperetas an' hautou paradidonai). Another was the desire felt by almost every one, not merely to perpetuate his own name, but also to prevent his heritage being desolate, and his name being cut off, and to leave someone who might make the customary offerings at his grave.^[11] With this view, childless persons would sometimes adopt children that had been left to die or were simply unwanted.

By the Athenian law a citizen was not allowed to marry with a foreign woman, nor conversely, under very severe penalties.^[12] However, proximity by blood (anchisteia), or consanguinity (syngeneia), was not, with some few exceptions, a bar to marriage in any part of Greece; direct lineal descent was.^[13] Thus brothers were permitted to marry with sisters even, if not homometrioi or born from the same mother, as Cimon did with Elpinice, though a connection of this sort appears to have been looked on with abhorrence.^[14] In the earlier periods of society, indeed, we can easily conceive that a spirit of caste or family pride, and other causes such as the difficulties in the way of social intercourse would tend to make marriages frequent amongst near relations and connections. (Compare Book of Numbers^ c. xxxvi.)

Heiresses[link]

At Athens, however, in the case of a father dying intestate, and without male children, his heiress had no choice in marriage; she was compelled by law to marry her nearest kinsman not in the ascending line; and if the heiress were poor (thessa) the nearest unmarried kinsman either married her or portioned her suitably to her rank. When there were several coheiresses, they were respectively married to their kinsmen, the nearest having the first choice (See Epikleros). The heiress in fact, together with her inheritance, seems to have belonged to the kinsmen of the family, so that in early times a father could not give his daughter (if an heiress) in marriage without their consent.^[15] But this was not the case according to the later Athenian law,^[16] by which a father was empowered to dispose of his daughter by will or otherwise; just as widows also were disposed of in marriage, by the will of their husbands, who were considered their rightful guardians (Kyrioi).^[17]

The same practice of marrying in the family (oikos), especially in the case of heiresses, prevailed at Sparta; thus Leonidas married the heiress of Cleomenes^{[disambiguation needed ]}, as of anchisteia, or next of kin, and Anaxandrides, his own sister's daughter. Moreover, if a father had not determined himself concerning his daughter, it was decided by the king's court who among the privileged persons or members of the same family should marry the heiress.^[18] A resemblance to the Athenian law respecting heiresses is also found in the Jewish code, as detailed in Numbers (c. xxvii. 1 — 11), and exemplified in Ruth (c. iv.).

But match-making among the ancients was not, in default of any legal regulations, entirely left to the care and forethought of parents, for we read of women who made a profession of it, and who were therefore called promnestriai or promnestrides.^[19] The profession, however, does not seem to have been thought very honourable nor to have been held in repute, as being too nearly connected with a panderer (proagogos).^[20]

Dates for marriage[link]

Particular days and seasons of the year were thought auspicious and favourable for marriage amongst the Greeks. Aristotle^[21] speaks of the winter generally as being so considered, and at Athens the month Gamelion, partly corresponding to our January, received its name from marriages being frequently celebrated in it. Hesiod^[22] recommends marrying on the fourth day of the month and Euripides^[23] speaks as if the time of the full moon were thought favourable.

Betrothal[link]

In Athens the engyesis, or betrothal, was in fact indispensable to the complete validity of a marriage contract. It was made by the natural or legal guardian (kyrios) of the bride elect, and attended by the relatives of both parties as witnesses. The law of Athens ordained that all children born from a marriage legally con­tracted in this respect should be legal gnesioi,^[24] and consequently, if sons, isomoiroi, are entitled to inherit equally or in gavel-kind. It would seem, therefore, that the issue of a marriage without espousals would lose their heritable rights, which depended on their being born ex astes kai engyetes gynaikos: i.e. from a citizen and a legally betrothed wife. The wife's dowry was also settled at the espousals.^[25]

At Sparta, the betrothal of the bride by her father or guardian (kyrios) was requisite as a preliminary of marriage, as well as at Athens.^[26] Another custom peculiar to the Spartans, and a relic of ancient times, was the seizure of the bride by her intended husband (see Herod, vi. 65), but of course with the sanction of her parents or guardians.^[27] She was not, however, immediately domiciled in her husband's house, but cohabited with him for some time clandestinely, till he brought her, and frequently her mother also, to his home. A similar custom appears to have prevailed in Crete, where, as we are told,^[28] the young men when dismissed from the agela of their fellows, were immediately married, but did not take their wives home till some time afterwards. Muller suggests that the children of this furtive kind of intercourse were called Parthenioi.

Divorce[link]

In cases of adultery by the wife, the Athenian law subjected the husband to Atimia, if he continued to cohabit with her, so that she was ipso facto divorced.^[29] But a separation might be effected in two different ways: by the wife leaving the husband, or the husband dismissing the wife. If the latter supposed her husband to have acted without sufficient justification in such a course, it was competent for her after dismissal, or rather for her guardians, to bring an action for dismissal (dike apopompes): the corresponding action if brought by the husband was a dike apoleipseos. If, however, a wife were ill-used in any way by her husband, he was liable to an action called dike kakoseos so that the wife was not entirely unprotected by the laws, a conclusion justified by a fragment in Athenaeus^[30] in which married women are spoken of as relying on its protection. But a separation, whether it originated from the husband or wife, was considered to reflect discredit on the latter independent of the difficulties and inconveniences to which she was subjected by it. At Sparta, barrenness on the part of a wife seems to have been a ground for dismissal by the husband;^[31] and from a passage in Dio Chrysostom,^[32] it has been inferred that women were in the habit of imposing suppositious children with a view of keeping (kataschein) their husbands: not but that the word admits of, if indeed it does not (from the tense) require, a different interpretation.

The duties of an Athenian wife are stated somewhat in detail Oeconomicus (Xenophon).

References[link]

This article incorporates text from the public domain Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities by William Smith (1870).

Marriage law refers to the legal requirements which determine the validity of a marriage, which vary considerably between countries.

Rights and obligations[link]

A Ketubah in Aramaic, a Jewish marriage-contract outlining the duties of each partner

A marriage, by definition, bestows rights and obligations on the married parties, and sometimes on relatives as well, being the sole mechanism for the creation of affinal ties (in-laws). These may include:

• Giving a husband/wife or his/her family control over a spouse’s labor, and property.
• Giving a husband/wife responsibility for a spouse’s debts.
• Giving a husband/wife visitation rights when his/her spouse is incarcerated or hospitalized.
• Giving a husband/wife access rights to his/her spouse's private parts.
• Giving a husband/wife control over his/her spouse’s affairs when the spouse is incapacitated.
• Establishing the second legal guardian of a parent’s child.
• Establishing a joint fund of property for the benefit of children.
• Establishing a relationship between the families of the spouses.

These rights and obligations vary considerably between societies, and between groups within society.^[1]

Common law marriage[link]

In medieval Europe, marriage came under the jurisdiction of canon law, which recognized as a valid marriage one where the parties stated that they took one another as wife and husband, even in absence of any witnesses.

The Council of Trent (convened 1545–1563) ruled that in future a marriage was only valid in Roman Catholic countries if it was witnessed by a priest of the Roman Catholic Church or, if obtaining a priest were impractical, by other witnesses. This ruling was not accepted in the newly Protestant nations of Europe, nor by Protestants who lived in Roman Catholic countries or their colonies in the Americas or elsewhere, nor by Eastern Orthodox Christians.

Common-law marriages were abolished in England and Wales by the Marriage Act 1753. The Act required marriages to be performed by a priest of the Church of England – unless the participants in the marriage were Jews or Quakers. The Act applied to Ireland after the Act of Union 1800, but the requirement for a valid marriage to be performed by a Church of England priest created special problems in predominantly Roman Catholic Ireland. The law did not provide an exception. The Act did not apply to Scotland because by the Acts of Union 1707 Scotland retained its own legal system. To get around the requirements of the Marriage Act, such as minimum-age requirements, couples would go to Gretna Green, in southern Scotland, to get married under Scots law.

The Marriage Act of 1753 also did not apply to Britain's overseas colonies of the time, so common-law marriages continued to be recognized in the future United States and Canada. In the United States, common-law marriages are still recognized in Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and the District of Columbia,^[2] and in several Canadian provinces.

All countries in Europe have now abolished "marriage by habit and repute", with Scotland being the last to do so in 2006.^[3]

Australia has recognised de facto relationships since the Family Law act of 2009.^[4]

Marriage restrictions[link]

Marriage is an institution that is historically filled with restrictions. From age, to gender, to social status, restrictions are placed on marriage by society.

Marriage age[link]

The minimum age at which a person is able to lawfully marry, and whether parental or other consents are required, vary from country to country.

In England and Wales the general age at which a person may marry is 18, but 16- or 17-year-olds may get married with their parents' or guardians' consent. If they are unable to obtain this, they can gain consent from the courts, which may be granted by the Magistrates' Courts, or the County or High Court family divisions.

Gender restrictions[link]

Legal, social, and religious restrictions apply in all countries on the genders of the couple.

In response to changing social and political attitudes, some jurisdictions and religious denominations now recognize marriages between people of the same sex. In some jurisdictions these are sometimes called "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships", while some others explicitly prohibit same-sex marriages.

In 1989, Denmark became the first country in the modern era to extend the rights and responsibilities of marriage to same-sex couples under the name of registered partnership^{[citation needed]}. As of 2011^[update], ten countries have come to recognise same-sex marriages for civil purposes, namely the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland and Argentina. To avoid the use of the term "marriage", some governments provide civil unions, which are open to couples of the same sex, and in some jurisdictions also to those of opposite sexes who do not want to marry, to confer all or a portion of the benefits of married status^{[citation needed]}. Civil unions (and registered/domestic partnerships) are currently recognized and accepted in approximately 30 out of 193 countries worldwide and in some U.S. states^{[citation needed]}. However, in countries where it has been adopted, applications for marriage licenses have far exceeded governmental estimates of demand.^[5] Some jurisdictions, such as the nations of Israel, Aruba, and the Netherlands Antilles, as well as the U.S. states of New Mexico, and Rhode Island, recognize same-sex marriages lawfully entered into elsewhere, while not permitting them to be performed locally.^{[citation needed]}

In addition to civil authorities, some religious denominations ceremonially perform civil unions and same-sex marriages, and recognize them as essentially equivalent to other marriages. For example, Lutheran churches in Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden and some Lutheran churches of the Evangelical Church in Germany allow blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples, as do Unitarian Universalist churches.^{[citation needed]}

As of August 2011^[update], seven U.S. states and the District of Columbia allow same-sex couples to enter into marriage – these states are: Massachusetts, Connecticut, California, Vermont, Iowa, New Hampshire, and New York. The Supreme Court of Connecticut has also ruled that restriction of marriage to heterosexuals is illegal under the state constitution,^[6] and gay marriages began in Connecticut on November 12, 2008.^[7]

California: On Feb. 7, 2012, the federal appeals court Tuesday,ruled California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional. The court cited that the ban only "lessen[ed] the status and human dignity" of homosexuals. (Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times/MCT) California originally passed what is known as 'Prop 8' allowing same-sex marriage, on June 16, 2008. Four months later, on November 4, 2008, voters overturned the ruling, amending the state constitution and revoking the right of same-sex couples to marry. ^[8]

In nine other U.S. regions, including Vermont, Maine, New Jersey, and the District of Columbia, civil unions or domestic partnerships are available to couples of the same sex, often carrying the same entailments as marriage, under a different name. However, these apply only to benefits under state law, and are not recognized by other states (with a few exceptions) or the U.S. federal government.

In Australia, de facto relationships are legally recognized in many, but not all, ways,^[9][10] with some states having registers of de facto relationships, although the federal government has amended existing legislation to specify that only marriages between a man and a woman will be recognized as "marriages".^[11] As a result, the Australian Capital Territory's 2006 Bill to give civil unions identical status and processes as registered marriages, was repealed by the federal government before it came into effect.

These developments have created a political and religious reaction in some countries, including in England, where the Church of England, after long debate, officially banned blessings of gay couples by Church of England clergy,^[12] and in the United States. In contrast to the three above-mentioned U.S. states where the state constitutions have been found by courts to require equivalent marriage for same-sex couples, several states have specifically defined marriage as between a man and a woman, often after popular referenda, including the state of Mississippi which passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman and refusing to recognize same-sex marriages from other states with 86% of the vote supporting that proposition.[1]PDF (29.9 KiB) Federally, the U.S. Congress has considered, but failed to pass, a Federal Marriage Amendment. In addition, while Lutheran churches in some countries allow blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples, as stated previously, in other countries (like Finland) such ceremonies are discouraged and rarely performed by the church.^{[citation needed]}

Kinship restrictions[link]

This section requires expansion.

Societies have often placed restrictions on marriage to relatives, though the degree of prohibited relationship varies widely. In most societies, marriage between brothers and sisters has been forbidden, with ancient Egyptian, Hawaiian, and Inca royalty being prominent exceptions. In many societies, marriage between first cousins is preferred, while at the other extreme, the medieval Catholic Church prohibited marriage even between distant cousins.

The marriage laws of all modern countries restrict the relatives a person is allowed to marry, though the degree of prohibited relationship varies widely. In most countries, marriage between brothers and sisters is forbidden. Many countries maintain a standard of required distance (in both consanguinity and affinity) for marriage.

In the United Kingdom, the Deceased Wife's Sister's Marriage Act 1907 removed the previous prohibition of a man marrying the sister of his deceased wife. In Australia, marriage with an ancestor or descendant is prohibited, as is a marriage between a brother and a sister, whether of whole blood or half-blood and even if the brother or sister has been adopted.

All mainstream religions prohibit some marriages on the basis of the consanguinity (lineal descent) and affinity (kinship by marriage) of the prospective marriage partners, though the standards vary.

Social restrictions[link]

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2008)

Many societies, even some with a cultural tradition of polygamy, recognize monogamy as the only valid form of marriage. For example, People's Republic of China shifted from allowing polygamy to supporting only monogamy in the Marriage Act of 1953 after the Communist revolution.^{[citation needed]} Polygamy is practiced illegally by some groups in the United States and Canada, primarily by certain Mormon fundamentalist sects that separated from the mainstream Latter Day Saints movement after the practice was renounced in 1890.^[13] Many African and Islamic societies still allow polygamy.^{[citation needed]} In North America, only Saskatchewan province allows and sanctions polygamous relationships under legal jurisdictional statute. {s.51 Saskatchewan Family Property Act"}

In the Indian Hindu community, especially in the Brahmin caste, marrying a person of the same gotra was prohibited, since persons belonging to the same gotra are said to have identical patrilineal descent. In ancient India, when gurukuls existed, the shishyas (pupils) were advised against marrying any of guru's children, as shishyas were also considered the guru's children and it would be considered marriage among siblings. However, there were exceptions, including Arjuna's son Abhimanyu's marriage to Uttra, the dance student of Arjuna in Mahabharata. The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 brought reforms in the area of same-gotra marriages, which were banned prior to the act's passage. Now the Indian constitution allows any consenting adult heterosexual couple (women 18 or older and men 21 or older) from any race, religion, caste, or creed to marry.

Many societies have also adopted other restrictions on whom one can marry, such as prohibitions of marrying persons with the same surname, or persons with the same sacred animal. Anthropologists refer to these sorts of restrictions as exogamy. One example is South Korea's general taboo against a man marrying a woman with the same family name. The most common surname in South Korea is Kim (almost 20%); however, there are several branches (or clans) in the Kim surname. (Korean family names are divided into one or more clans.) Only intra-clan marriages are prohibited, as they are considered one type of exogamy. Thus, many "Kim-Kim" couples can be found.^{[citation needed]}

Societies have also at times required marriage from within a certain group. Anthropologists refer to these restrictions as endogamy. An example of such restrictions would be a requirement to marry someone from the same tribe. Racist laws adopted by some societies in the past—such as Nazi-era Germany, apartheid-era South Africa and most of the United States in the nineteenth and the first half of the 20th century—which prohibited marriage between persons of different races could also be considered examples of endogamy. In the U.S., many laws banning interracial marriage, which were state laws, were gradually repealed between 1948 and 1967. The U.S. Supreme Court declared all such laws unconstitutional in the case of Loving v. Virginia in 1967.^[14]

Polygamy[link]

Polygamy, in which a person is married to more than one spouse at one time, is illegal in many countries, but accepted by other societies, though it is far less common than monogamy.^[15] In India, only Muslims are allowed to practice polygamy.^[16] Africa has the highest rate of polygamy in the world.^[17] In Senegal, for example, nearly 47 percent of marriages are multiple.^[18] Polygamy is normally not permitted in most western countries, though some recognise bona fides polygamous marriages entered into in countries that routinely perform such marriages, such as in a Muslim country.

State recognition[link]

In many jurisdictions, a civil marriage may take place as part of the religious marriage ceremony, although they are theoretically distinct. In most American states, a wedding must be officiated by the justice of the peace in order for it to be recognized. However, priests, ministers, rabbis, and many other religious authorities can act as viable agents of the state. In some countries, such as France, Spain, Germany, Turkey, Argentina, Japan and Russia, it is necessary to be married by government authority separately from any religious ceremony, with the state ceremony being the legally binding one. In those cases, the marriage is usually legalized before the ceremony. Some jurisdictions allow civil marriages in circumstances which are notably not allowed by particular religions, such as same-sex marriages or civil unions.

Marriage relationships may also be created by the operation of the law alone, as in common-law marriage, sometimes called "marriage by habit and repute." This is a judicial recognition that two people who have been living as domestic partners are subject to the rights and obligations of a legal marriage, even without formally marrying. However, in the UK at least, common-law marriage has been abolished and there are no rights available unless a couple marries or enters into a civil partnership. In all cases, a married person cannot become eligible for common law timeframe until divorced from any previous spouse.

In some cases couples living together do not wish to be recognised as married, such as when pension or alimony rights are adversely affected, or because of taxation consideration, or because of immigration issues, and for many other reasons. Usually, consent forms the basis of such relationships that are not really marital, with authoritative property laws being inapplicable.

The status in the eyes of one authority may not be the same as for another. For example, a marriage may be recognised civilly, but not by a church, and vice versa.^{[citation needed]} Normally a marriage entered into in one country will be recognised in other countries.^{[citation needed]} Sometimes, however, a religious ceremony or a marriage entered into in one country is not recognized by another, such as a same-sex marriage.^[19]

International recognition[link]

Some countries give legal recognition to marriages performed in some other state under the Hague Convention on Marriages (1978).^[20] For this to apply, both the country of marriage and the country where recognition is sought need to be members of this convention.

If the country of marriage is not a member of the Hague Convention on Marriages (1978), then the marriage documents will need to be certified following the Apostille convention. This certification is usually performed in the country of marriage by the embassy of the country whose recognition is sought.

License[link]

This section requires expansion.

Notice[link]

This section requires expansion.

In many countries there is a requirement to give notice of an impending marriage to the community so that objections to the marriage can be raised. This custom was in place as a mechanism to necessitate the consent of parents as well as the wider community.

Formality[link]

This section requires expansion.

"Treasure legal marriage, fight illegal marriage!", a slogan in the village of Xinwupu, Yangxin County, Hubei

While some countries, such as Australia, permit marriages to be held in private and at any location, others, including England, require that the civil ceremony be conducted in a place specially sanctioned by law (e.g., a church or register office), and be open to the public. An exception can be made in the case of marriage by special emergency license, which is normally granted only when one of the parties is terminally ill. Rules about where and when persons can marry vary from place to place. Some regulations require that one of the parties reside in the locality of the registry office.

Registration[link]

This section is empty. You can help by adding to it.

See also[link]

• Family law
• Marriage
• Prohibited degree of kinship
• Marriage Act 1961 of Australia

References[link]

Wikisource has the text of the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica article Husband and Wife.

External links[link]

• Lord Hardwicke 1754 Marriage Act

Ancient Greek
Ἑλληνική Hellēnikḗ
Spoken in	eastern Mediterranean
Era	developed into Koiné Greek by the 4th century BC
Language family	Indo-European Hellenic Ancient Greek
Writing system	Greek alphabet
Language codes
ISO 639-2	grc
ISO 639-3	grc
Map of Homeric Greece
This page contains IPA phonetic symbols in Unicode. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Unicode characters.

Beginning of Homer's Odyssey

Ancient Greek is the stage of the Greek language in the periods spanning the times c. 9th – 6th centuries BC, (known as Archaic), c. 5th – 4th centuries BC (Classical), and the c. 3rd century BC – 6th century AD (Hellenistic) of ancient Greece and the ancient world; being predated in the 2nd millennium BC by Mycenaean Greek. The language of the Hellenistic phase is known as Koine (common) or Biblical Greek, the language from the late period onward has no considerable difference from Medieval Greek. Koine is regarded as a separate historical stage of its own, although in its earlier form it closely resembles the Classical. Prior to the Koine period, Greek of the classic and earlier periods included several regional dialects.

Ancient Greek was the language of Homer and of classical Athenian historians, playwrights, and philosophers. It has contributed many words to English vocabulary and has been a standard subject of study in educational institutions of the West, since the Renaissance. This article's primary concern is the Epic and Classical phases of the language.

Dialects[link]

The origins, early forms, and early development of the Hellenic language family are not well understood because of the lack of contemporaneous evidence. There are several theories about what Hellenic dialect groups may have existed between the divergence of early Greek-like speech from the common Proto-Indo-European language. They have the same general outline but differ in some of the detail. The only attested dialect from this period^[1] is Mycenaean, but its relationship to the historical dialects and the historical circumstances of the times imply that the overall groups already existed in some form.

History of the Greek language (see also: Greek alphabet)

Proto-Greek (c. 3000–1600 BC)

Mycenaean (c. 1600–1100 BC)

Ancient Greek (c. 800–330 BC) Dialects: Aeolic, Arcadocypriot, Attic-Ionic, Doric, Locrian, Pamphylian, Homeric Greek, Macedonian

Koine Greek (c. 330 BC–330)

Medieval Greek (330–1453)

Modern Greek (from 1453) Dialects: Calabrian, Cappadocian, Cheimarriotika, Cretan, Cypriot, Demotic, Griko, Katharevousa, Pontic, Tsakonian, Maniot, Yevanic This box: view talk edit *Dates (beginning with Ancient Greek) from Wallace, D. B. (1996). Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. p. 12. ISBN 0310218950.

The major dialect groups of the Ancient Greek period can be assumed to have developed not later than 1120 BC, at the time of the Dorian invasion(s), and their first appearances as precise alphabetic writing began in the 8th century BC. The invasion would not be "Dorian" unless the invaders had some cultural relationship to the historical Dorians; moreover, the invasion is known to have displaced population to the later Attic-Ionic regions, who regarded themselves as descendants of the population displaced by or contending with the Dorians.

The Greeks themselves at this period considered there to be three major divisions of all the Greek people—Dorians, Aeolians and Ionians (including Athenians), each with their own defining and distinctive dialects. Allowing for their oversight of Arcadian, an obscure mountain dialect, and Cyprian, far from the center of Greek scholarship, this division of people and language is quite similar to the results of modern archaeological-linguistic investigation.

One standard formulation for the dialects is:^[2]

Distribution of Greek dialects in the classical period.[3] Western group:   Doric proper   Northwest Doric Central group:   Aeolic   Arcado-Cypriot Eastern group:   Attic   Ionic   Achaean Doric

West Group Northwest Greek Doric Aeolic Group Aegean/Asiatic Aeolic Thessalian Boeotian Ionic-Attic Group Attica Euboea and colonies in Italy Cyclades Asiatic Ionia Arcadocypriot Greek Arcadian Cypriot

West vs. non-west Greek is the strongest marked and earliest division, with non-west in subsets of Ionic-Attic (or Attic-Ionic) and Aeolic vs. Arcado-Cyprian, or Aeolic and Arcado-Cyprian vs. Ionic-Attic. Often non-west is called East Greek.

The Arcado-Cyprian group apparently descended more closely from the Mycenaean Greek of the Bronze Age.

Boeotian had come under a strong Northwest Greek influence, and can in some respects be considered a transitional dialect. Thessalian likewise had come under Northwest Greek influence, though to a lesser degree.

Pamphylian, spoken in a small area on the south-western coast of Asia Minor and little preserved in inscriptions, may be either a fifth major dialect group, or it is Mycenaean Greek overlaid by Doric, with a non-Greek native influence.

Ancient Macedonian was an Indo-European language closely related to Greek, but its exact relationship is unclear because of insufficient data: possibly a dialect of Greek; a sibling language to Greek; or a close cousin to Greek, and perhaps related to some extent, to Thracian and Phrygian languages. The Pella curse tablet is one of the many clear finds which support the idea that the Ancient Macedonian language is closely related to the Doric Greek dialect.

Most of the dialect sub-groups listed above had further subdivisions, generally equivalent to a city-state and its surrounding territory, or to an island. Doric notably had several intermediate divisions as well, into Island Doric (including Cretan Doric), Southern Peloponnesus Doric (including Laconian, the dialect of Sparta), and Northern Peloponnesus Doric (including Corinthian).

The Lesbian dialect was a member of the Aegean/Asiatic Aeolic sub-group.

All the groups were represented by colonies beyond Greece proper as well, and these colonies generally developed local characteristics, often under the influence of settlers or neighbors speaking different Greek dialects.

The dialects outside the Ionic group are known mainly from inscriptions, notable exceptions being fragments of the works of the poetess Sappho from the island of Lesbos and the poems of the Boeotian poet, Pindar.

After the conquests of Alexander the Great in the late 300's BC, a new international dialect known as Koine or Common Greek developed, largely based on Attic Greek, but with influence from other dialects. This dialect slowly replaced most of the older dialects, although Doric dialect has survived to the present in the form of the Tsakonian dialect of Modern Greek, spoken in the region of modern Sparta. Doric has also passed down its aorist terminations into most verbs of Demotic Greek. By about the 500's AD, the Koine had slowly metamorphosized into Medieval Greek.

Sound changes[link]

Greek alphabet
Αα	Alpha	Νν	Nu
Ββ	Beta	Ξξ	Xi
Γγ	Gamma	Οο	Omicron
Δδ	Delta	Ππ	Pi
Εε	Epsilon	Ρρ	Rho
Ζζ	Zeta	Σσς	Sigma
Ηη	Eta	Ττ	Tau
Θθ	Theta	Υυ	Upsilon
Ιι	Iota	Φφ	Phi
Κκ	Kappa	Χχ	Chi
Λλ	Lambda	Ψψ	Psi
Μμ	Mu	Ωω	Omega
History
Archaic local variants
Ligatures (ϛ, ȣ, ϗ) Diacritics
Numerals (6) (90) (900)
In other languages
Bactrian Coptic Albanian
Scientific symbols
Book Category Commons view talk edit

See Proto-Greek for a description of sound changes from Proto-Indo-European up through attested Ancient Greek.

Phonology[link]

The pronunciation of Post-Classic Greek changed considerably from Ancient Greek, although the orthography still reflects features of the older language (see W. Sidney Allen, Vox Graeca – a guide to the pronunciation of Classical Greek). For a detailed description on the phonology changes from Ancient to Hellenistic periods of the Greek language, see the article on Koine Greek.

The examples below are intended to represent Attic Greek in the 5th century BC. Although ancient pronunciation can never be reconstructed with certainty, Greek in particular is very well documented from this period, and there is little disagreement among linguists as to the general nature of the sounds that the letters represented.

Phonemic inventory[link]

Consonants[link]

[ŋ] occurred as an allophone of /n/ used before velars and as an allophone of /ɡ/ before nasals. /r/ was probably voiceless when word-initial (written ῥ)

Vowels[link]

/oː/ raised to [uː], probably by the 4th century BC.

Sound changes[link]

Assimilation[link]

In verb conjugation, one consonant often comes up against the other. Various sandhi rules apply.

Rules:

• Most basic rule: When two sounds appear next to each other, the first assimilates in voicing and aspiration to the second.
  • This applies fully to stops. Fricatives assimilate only in voicing, sonorants do not assimilate.
• Before an /s/ (future, aorist stem), velars become [k], labials become [p], and dentals disappear.
• Before a /tʰ/ (aorist passive stem), velars become [kʰ], labials become [pʰ], and dentals become [s].
• Before an /m/ (perfect middle first-singular, first-plural, participle), velars become [ɡ], nasal+velar becomes [ɡ], labials become [m], dentals become [s], other sonorants remain the same.

Compensatory lengthening[link]

Certain vowels historically underwent compensatory lengthening in certain contexts. /a/ sometimes lengthened to [aː] or [ɛː], and /e/ and /o/ become the closed values [eː] and [oː] and the open ones [ɛː] and [ɔː] depending on time period.

Vowel shift[link]

The Proto-Greek long vowel /aː/ was shifted to [ɛː] in the Attic dialect, except after /e i r/. In the Ionic dialect, it shifted in all environments, but in Doric and Aeolic, it did not shift at all.

Morphology[link]

Greek, like all of the older Indo-European languages, is highly inflected. It is highly archaic in its preservation of Proto-Indo-European forms. In Ancient Greek nouns (including proper nouns) have five cases (nominative, genitive, dative, accusative and vocative), three genders (masculine, feminine and neuter), and three numbers (singular, dual and plural). Verbs have four moods (indicative, imperative, subjunctive, and optative), three voices (active, middle and passive), as well as three persons (first, second and third) and various other forms. Verbs are conjugated through seven combinations of tenses and aspect (generally simply called "tenses"): the present, future and imperfect are imperfective in aspect; the aorist (perfective aspect); a present perfect, pluperfect and future perfect. Most tenses display all four moods and three voices, although there is no future subjunctive or imperative. Also, there is no imperfect subjunctive, optative or imperative. There are infinitives and participles corresponding to the finite combinations of tense, aspect and voice.

Augment[link]

The indicative of past tenses adds (conceptually, at least) a prefix /e-/, called the augment. This was probably originally a separate word, meaning something like "then," added because tenses in PIE had primarily aspectual meaning. The augment is added to the indicative of the aorist, imperfect and pluperfect, but not to any of the other forms of the aorist (no other forms of the imperfect and pluperfect exist).

There are two kinds of augment in Greek, syllabic and quantitative. The syllabic augment is added to stems beginning with consonants, and simply prefixes e (stems beginning with r, however, add er). The quantitative augment is added to stems beginning with vowels, and involves lengthening the vowel:

• a, ā, e, ē → ē
• i, ī → ī
• o, ō → ō
• u, ū → ū
• ai → ēi
• ei → ēi or ei
• oi → ōi
• au → ēu or au
• eu → ēu or eu
• ou → ou

Some verbs augment irregularly; the most common variation is e → ei. The irregularity can be explained diachronically by the loss of s between vowels. In verbs with a prefix, the augment is placed not at the start of the word, but between the prefix and the original verb. For example, προσ(-)βάλλω (I attack) goes to προσέβαλoν in the aorist.

Following Homer's practice, the augment is sometimes not made in poetry, especially epic poetry.

The augment sometimes substitutes for reduplication; see below.

Reduplication[link]

Almost all forms of the perfect, pluperfect and future perfect reduplicate the initial syllable of the verb stem. (Note that a few irregular forms of perfect do not reduplicate, whereas a handful of irregular aorists reduplicate.) There are three types of reduplication:

• Syllabic reduplication: Most verbs beginning with a single consonant, or a cluster of a stop with a sonorant, add a syllable consisting of the initial consonant followed by e. An aspirated consonant, however, reduplicates in its unaspirated equivalent: Grassmann's law.
• Augment: Verbs beginning with a vowel, as well as those beginning with a cluster other than those indicated previously (and occasionally for a few other verbs) reduplicate in the same fashion as the augment. This remains in all forms of the perfect, not just the indicative.
• Attic reduplication: Some verbs beginning with an a, e or o, followed by a sonorant (or occasionally d or g), reduplicate by adding a syllable consisting of the initial vowel and following consonant, and lengthening the following vowel. Hence er → erēr, an → anēn, ol → olōl, ed → edēd. This is not actually specific to Attic Greek, despite its name; but it was generalized in Attic. This originally involved reduplicating a cluster consisting of a laryngeal and sonorant; hence h₃l → h₃leh₃l → olōl with normal Greek development of laryngeals. (Forms with a stop were analogous.)

Irregular duplication can be understood diachronically. For example, lambanō (root lab) has the perfect stem eilēpha (not *lelēpha) because it was originally slambanō, with perfect seslēpha, becoming eilēpha through compensatory lengthening.

Reduplication is also visible in the present tense stems of certain verbs. These stems add a syllable consisting of the root's initial consonant followed by i. A nasal stop appears after the reduplication in some verbs.^[4]

Writing system[link]

Ancient Greek was written in the Greek alphabet, with some variation among dialects. Early texts are written in boustrophedon style, but left-to-right became standard during the classic period. Modern editions of Ancient Greek texts are usually written with accents and breathing marks, interword spacing, modern punctuation, and sometimes mixed case, but these were all introduced later.

Example text[link]

The following polytonic Greek text is from the beginning of Apology by Plato:

Ὅτι μὲν ὑμεῖς, ὦ ἄνδρες Άθηναῖοι, πεπόνθατε ὑπὸ τῶν ἐμῶν κατηγόρων, οὐκ οἶδα: ἐγὼ δ' οὖν καὶ αὐτὸς ὑπ' αὐτῶν ὀλίγου ἐμαυτοῦ ἐπελαθόμην, οὕτω πιθανῶς ἔλεγον. Καίτοι ἀληθές γε ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν οὐδὲν εἰρήκασιν.

Transliterated into the Latin alphabet using a modern version of the Erasmian scheme:

Hóti mèn humeîs, ô ándres Athēnaîoi, pepónthate hupò tôn emôn katēgórōn, ouk oîda: egṑ d' oûn kaì autòs hup' autōn olígou emautoû epelathómēn, hoútō pithanôs élegon. Kaítoi alēthés ge hōs épos eipeîn oudèn eirḗkasin.

Using the IPA:

hóti mén hymêːs, ɔ̂ː ándres atʰɛːnáioi, pepóntʰate hypo tɔ̂ːn emɔ̂ːn katɛːgórɔːn, oːk óida; egɔ̌ː d’ ôːn kaí autós hyp’ autɔ̂ːn olígoː emautôː epelatʰómɛːn, hǒːtɔː pitʰanɔ̂ːs élegon. kaítoi alɛːtʰés ge hɔːs épos eːpêːn oːdén eːrɛ̌ːkasin.

Translated into English:

What you, men of Athens, have learned from my accusers, I do not know: but I, for my part, nearly forgot who I was thanks to them, since they spoke so persuasively. And yet, of the truth, they have spoken, one might say, nothing at all.

Another example, from the beginning of Homer's Iliad: <poem style="margin-left: 2em">Μῆνιν ἄειδε, θεά, Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί’ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε’ ἔθηκε, πολλὰς δ’ ἰφθίμους ψυχὰς Ἄϊδι προΐαψεν ἡρώων, αὐτοὺς δὲ ἑλώρια τεῦχε κύνεσσιν οἰωνοῖσί τε πᾶσι· Διὸς δ’ ἐτελείετο βουλή· ἐξ οὗ δὴ τὰ πρῶτα διαστήτην ἐρίσαντε Ἀτρεΐδης τε ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν καὶ δῖος Ἀχιλλεύς.</poem>

Modern use[link]

The study of Ancient Greek in European countries in addition to Latin occupied an important place in the syllabus from the Renaissance until the beginning of the 20th century. Ancient Greek is still taught as a compulsory or optional subject especially at traditional or elite schools throughout Europe, such as public schools and grammar schools in the United Kingdom. It is compulsory in the Liceo classico in Italy, in the gymnasium in the Netherlands, in some classes in Austria, in Croatia in klasicna gimnazija and it is optional in the Humanistisches Gymnasium in Germany (usually as a third language after Latin and English, from the age of 14 to 18). In 2006/07, 15,000 pupils studied Ancient Greek in Germany according to the Federal Statistical Office of Germany, and 280,000 pupils studied it in Italy.^[5] Ancient Greek is also taught at most major universities worldwide, often combined with Latin as part of Classics. It will also be taught in state primary schools in the UK, to boost children’s language skills.^[6][7][8] Ancient Greek is also taught as a compulsory subject in Gymnasia and Lycia in Greece.^[9][10]

Ancient Greek is often used in the coinage of modern technical terms in the European languages: see English words of Greek origin.

Modern authors rarely write in Ancient Greek, though Jan Křesadlo wrote some poetry and prose in the language, and some volumes of Asterix have been written in Attic Greek^[11] and Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone has been translated into Ancient Greek.^[12]

Ancient Greek is also used by organizations and individuals, mainly Greek, who wish to denote their respect, admiration or preference for the use of this language. This use is sometimes considered graphical, nationalistic or funny. In any case, the fact that modern Greeks can still wholly or partly understand texts written in non-archaic forms of ancient Greek shows the affinity of modern Greek language to its ancestral predecessor.^[13]

An isolated community near Trabzon, Turkey, an area where Pontic Greek is spoken, has been found to speak a variety of Greek that has parallels, both structurally and in its vocabulary, to Ancient Greek not present in other varieties.^[14] As few as 5,000 people speak the dialect but linguists believe that it is the closest living language to Ancient Greek.^[15][16]

Latinized forms of Ancient Greek roots are used in many of the scientific names of species and in scientific terminology.

See also[link]

• Exploring the Ancient Greek Language and Culture (competition)
• Greek alphabet
• Greek declension
• Greek diacritics
• Mycenaean Greek language
• Koine Greek
• Medieval Greek
• Modern Greek
• Greek language
• List of Greek phrases (mostly Ancient Greek)

References[link]

Further reading[link]

• P. Chantraine (1968), Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque, Klincksieck, Paris.
• Athenaze A series of textbooks on Ancient Greek published for school use
• Hansen, Hardy and Quinn, Gerald M. (1992) Greek: An Intensive Course, Fordham University Press
• Easterling, P & Handley, C. Greek Scripts: An illustrated introduction. London: Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies, 2001. ISBN 0-902984-17-9

External links[link]

Wikibooks has a book on the topic of Ancient Greek

Ancient Greek test of Wikipedia at Wikimedia Incubator

Look up ancient greek in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Greek Wikisource has original text related to this article: Texts in Ancient Greek

• Ancient Greek Swadesh list of basic vocabulary words (from Wiktionary's Swadesh list appendix)

Grammar learning[link]

• A more extensive grammar of the Ancient Greek language written by J. Rietveld
• Recitation of classics books
• Ancient Greek Language Teaching Podcast
• Perseus Greek dictionaries
• Greek-Language.com Information on the history of the Greek language, application of modern Linguistics to the study of Greek, and tools for learning Greek
• Free Lessons in Ancient Greek, Bilingual Libraries, Forum
• Ancient Greek Tutorials Berkeley Language Center of the University of California
• New Testament Greek
• Acropolis World News A summary of the latest world news in Ancient Greek, Juan Coderch, University of St Andrews

Classical texts[link]

• Perseus Greek and Roman Materials
• Ancient Greek Texts

v t e Greek language · Eλληνική γλώσσα History Proto-Greek (c. 3000–1600 BC) Mycenaean (c. 1600–1000 BC) Ancient Greek (c. 1000–330 BC) Koine Greek (c. 330 BC–AD 330) Medieval Greek (330–1453) Modern Greek (from 1453) Alphabet Archaic alphabets Orthography Diacritics History Romanization Greeklish Numerals Linear B Cypriot syllabary Letters Alpha Beta Gamma Delta Epsilon Zeta Eta Theta Iota Kappa Lambda Mu Nu Xi Omicron Pi Rho Sigma Tau Upsilon Phi Chi Psi Omega Obsolete: Digamma Heta Koppa Stigma San Sampi Phonology Ancient Greek (accent) Koine Greek Modern Greek Grammar Ancient Greek (tables) Modern Greek Dialects Cappadocian Cretan Cypriot Chalkidiki Demotic Greek-Calabrian Griko Katharevousa Misthiotica Pontic Tsakonian Yevanic Literature Ancient Greek Byzantine Modern Greek Related topics Greek Wikipedia Exonyms Morphemes Terms of Endearment Place names Proverbs Greek language question Graeco-Armenian Graeco-Aryan Pre-Greek substrate Promotion and study Hellenic Foundation for Culture Center for the Greek language

Juan Williams
Juan Williams at the 2011 Texas Book Festival.
Born	(1954-04-10) April 10, 1954 (age 58) Colón, Panama
Education	Haverford College
Occupation	Author, journalist
Notable credit(s)	CNN Crossfire Fox News Sunday National Public Radio

Juan Williams (born April 10, 1954) is an American journalist and political analyst for Fox News Channel. He also writes for several newspapers including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal and has been published in magazines such as The Atlantic Monthly and Time. He was a senior news analyst for National Public Radio (NPR) from 1999 until October 2010. At The Washington Post for 23 years, Williams has worked as an editorial writer, op-ed columnist, White House correspondent and national correspondent.

Williams is the author of Eyes on the Prize: America's Civil Rights Years, 1954-1965 (1988),^[1] a companion to the documentary series of the same name about the African-American Civil Rights Movement;Thurgood Marshall: American Revolutionary (2000), a biography of Thurgood Marshall, the first black American to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States; and Enough (2006), which was inspired by Bill Cosby's speech at the NAACP gala, and deals with Williams' critique of black leaders in America, and as he puts it the "culture of failure."^[2] Williams has received an Emmy Award and critical praise for his television documentary work and he has won several awards for investigative journalism and his opinion columns.

Early years[link]

Williams attended Haverford College, from which he was graduated with a baccalaureate in philosophy in 1976.^[3]

Career[link]

Washington Post[link]

Some days after Williams wrote a column defending Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas against sworn testimony by Anita Hill charging sexual harassment by Thomas, it was revealed that several female employees of the Post had filed sexual harassment charges against Williams.^[4] The paper took disciplinary action against Williams and published an apology by him.^[5] On November 2, 1991, Williams wrote: "It pained me to learn during the investigation that I had offended some of you. I have said so repeatedly in the last few weeks, and repeat here: some of my verbal conduct was wrong, I now know that, and I extend my sincerest apology to those whom I offended."^[6]

National Public Radio[link]

Williams joined NPR in 2000 as host of the daily afternoon talk show Talk of the Nation.^[3] He then served as senior national correspondent for NPR.^[7] As a result of Williams' commentary on the Fox News Channel, NPR's President and CEO Vivian Schiller requested that Fox stop identifying him as an NPR host in 2009. NPR Ombudsman Alicia Shepard maintained that: "Williams tends to speak one way on NPR and another on Fox."^[8] Williams' comment on January 26, 2009, to Bill O’Reilly and Mary Katharine Ham, while appearing on Fox News' O'Reilly Factor, triggered the move.^[8]

NPR terminated his contract on Wednesday, October 20, 2010, two days after he made remarks on The O'Reilly Factor.^[9] He had commented, "Look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."^[10] According to NPR, the remarks were "inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR." As to the reason for the termination of Williams' contract, NPR’s President and CEO Vivian Schiller offered the following comment: "News analysts may not take personal public positions on controversial issues; doing so undermines their credibility as analysts..."^[11] On October 21, 2010, Schiller told an audience at the Atlanta Press Club that Williams' feelings about Muslims should be between him and "his psychiatrist or his publicist—take your pick."^[12] Schiller later apologized stating, "I spoke hastily and I apologize to Juan and others for my thoughtless remark."^[13]

Some observers have questioned whether NPR actually fired Williams for making the comments on Fox News, as opposed to making them in another forum.^[14] William Saletan of Slate.com compared the Williams situation to that of Shirley Sherrod, saying that both Sherrod and Williams had their words taken out of context in a way that made them appear racist and led to the loss of their jobs, except that Williams was victimized by liberals, rather than conservatives as in Sherrod's case.^[15] Saletan said that while Williams' confessed fears of Muslims were "unsettling", the context was Williams' argument that such fears should not be used to curtail the rights of Muslims or anyone else, and that Williams consistently argued that Muslims in general should not be blamed for the terrorist activities of Muslim extremists.^[15] NPR has been criticized by Williams and others for practicing a double standard in the firing, compared to their not firing Cokie Roberts, Nina Totenberg and other NPR reporters and analysts for their opinionated statements.^[16][17]

Fox News Channel[link]

He has been a Fox News Contributor since 1997.^[14] He has appeared on Special Report with Bret Baier and FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace. He also regularly appears on The O'Reilly Factor and has served as a guest host in O'Reilly's absence.^[18] After NPR announced his termination from their network in October 2010, Fox News offered him a new $2 million (a "considerable" raise^[19]), three-year contract and an expanded role at their network that includes a regular guest-host role Friday nights on The O'Reilly Factor.^[20]

Following his firing from NPR, Williams appeared on The O'Reilly Factor and discussed his thoughts on how his role at Fox played into NPR's decision: "I don't fit in their box. I'm not predictable black liberal. You [O'Reilly] were exactly right when you said you know what this comes down to. They were looking for a reason to get rid of me because I'm appearing on Fox News. They don't want me talking to you."^[20]

Television[link]

Williams is the recipient of an Emmy Award for his work in television documentary writing and has earned critical praise for a series of television documentaries including Politics: The New Black Power, A. Philip Randolph: For Jobs and Freedom, Civil Rights and The Press, Riot to Recovery and Dying for Healthcare.^[18]

Williams' 1988 book, Eyes on the Prize: America's Civil Rights Years, 1954–65, was written with the Blackside production team^[21] as a companion to the first season of the PBS series Eyes on the Prize. His 2003 book, This Far by Faith, is also a companion to a PBS series.^[22]

Williams is a contributor to a number of national magazines, including Fortune, The New Republic, The Atlantic Monthly, Ebony magazine, TIME and GQ and frequents a wide range of television programs including ABC's Nightline, Washington Week on PBS, and The Oprah Winfrey Show.^[18]

Williams has spoken at the Smithsonian’s celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education decision, which ended legal segregation in public schools, and was selected by the United States Census Bureau as moderator of its first program beginning its 2010 effort. He has received honorary doctorates from Lafayette College, Wittenberg University, and Long Island University, among other institutions.^[23][24][25]

Personal life[link]

Williams married Susan Delise in July, 1978. They are the parents of one daughter, Rae, and two sons, Antonio ("Tony") and Raphael.^[26] Tony, who was a Senate page and intern for GOP Senator Strom Thurmond from 1996 to 1997, was a speechwriter and legislative correspondent for Republican Senator Norm Coleman from 2004 to 2006; in 2006, Tony ran unsuccessfully for a seat on the Council of the District of Columbia, losing to Tommy Wells. The elder Williamses younger son, Raffi, is studying anthropology and playing lacrosse at Haverford College, his father's alma mater in Pennsylvania.^[27]

Juan Williams has been active on the Haverford College Board of Managers, in the Aspen Institute Communications and Society Program, in the Washington Journalism Center, and in the New York Civil Rights Coalition.^[3]

Awards[link]

Williams has received many awards, including honorary doctorates from Haverford College and State University of New York.^[28]

• Front Page Award, Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild (1979)
• Education Writers of America (1979)
• Columnist of the Year, Washingtonian (1982)
• Emmy Award (1989)
• Outstanding Memorial Book, Myers Center for the Study of Human Rights in the United States
• Best National Book, Time
• Political commentary award, American Association of University Women

Selected bibliography[link]

• Eyes on the Prize: America's Civil Rights Years, 1954-1965. Penguin (Non-Classics). 1988. ISBN 0-14-009653-1. 
• Thurgood Marshall: American Revolutionary. Three Rivers Press. 2000. ISBN 0-8129-3299-4. 
• This Far by Faith: Stories from the African American Religious Experience. Harper Paperbacks. 2003. ISBN 0-06-093424-7. 
• I'll Find a Way or Make One : A Tribute to Historically Black Colleges and Universities. HarperCollins. 2004. ISBN 0-06-009453-2. 
• My Soul Looks Back in Wonder: Voices of the Civil Rights Experience. Sterling. 2005. ISBN 1-4027-2233-8. 
• Black Farmers in America. The University Press of Kentucky. 2006. ISBN 0-8131-2399-2. 
• Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It. Three Rivers Press. 2007. ISBN 0-307-33824-X. 
• Muzzled: The Assault on Honest Debate. Crown Publishing Group. 2011. ISBN 0-307-95201-0. 

References[link]

External links[link]

• Juan Williams: Fox News Biography
• A Conversation with Juan Williams — Video from researchchannel.org
• Booknotes interview with Williams on Thurgood Marshall: American Revolutionary, October 11, 1998.
• In Depth interview with Williams, August 2, 2009
• C-SPAN Q&A interview with Williams, July 31, 2011