Byzantine Collections Libre

Byzantine Collections of Late Antique Authors: Some Remarks on the Excerpta historica Constantiniana*

U R

It is only in the early ninth century that we first detect signs of the Byzantine cultural re-naissance. After the dark ages of seventh and eighth centuries, large quantities of books are systematically removed from various libraries around the empire and placed in the capital Constantinople. The trend begins with the reign of Leo V (813-820), when an impressive amount of forgotten or lost works starts being accumulated. The phenom-enon is also linked in part to a palaeographical revolution in Greek writing. In the ninth century, the script basically changes and the uncial writing of the late antique period is replaced by a new style of writing, the minuscule. As a consequence, most of the uncial manuscripts brought to Constantinople were transliterated into minuscule, thus en-abling the scholars of the time to engage in an impressive study of the texts, from a philological as well as textual perspective. In effect, most of what we know of ancient Greek and Hellenistic has been handed down to us thanks to this activity, a landmark in the history of textual transmission1.

The Byzantine cultural renaissance was quick to permeate other sections of society and generate a great many new interests. During the period of Caesar Bardas, for exam-ple, university teaching was revived in the capital2. One of the reasons for this cultural renewal was the need for highly educated men to enter the imperial bureaucracy. From Basil I (867-886) onwards, the Byzantine empire becomes once more a centralized state under the strong control of the emperor. Its power depended as much on military re-sources as the efficiency of its imperial bureaucracy. Schooling and education thus be-came the mainstays of imperial power. Many Byzantine emperors of this period, includ-ing those who were relatively uneducated, such as Basil I, were fully conscious of its im-portance. Indeed, imperial euergetism also aimed at counter-balancing the cultural in-fluence of the ecclesiastical institutions. From the ninth century right through to the end of the empire, the emperors and the aristocracy alike were engaged in producing and preserving secular culture. As a consequence, the imperial palace in Constantinople

* I am indebted to Prof. William Adler (North Carolina State University) for his help with the translation

of the Greek text on pp. 74 f. and for his advice and discussion. Furthermore I should like to thank Dr. Philip Ditchfield (Rome) who kindly undertook the tedious task of improving my English phrasing.

1 See A. Dain, La transmission des textes littraires classiques de Photius Constantine Porphyrognte, DOP 8, 1954, 33-47, esp. 36-38; S. Impellizzeri, Lumanesimo bizantino del IX secolo e la genesi della bi-blioteca di Fozio, in: id., La letteratura bizantina da Costantino a Fozio, Firenze 1975, 297-365; N. G. Wilson, Scholars of Byzantium, London 1983.

2 P. Speck, Die kaiserliche Universitt von Konstantinopel, Mnchen 1974.

Bereitgestellt von | De Gruyter / TCS

Angemeldet | 212.87.45.97

Heruntergeladen am | 20.09.12 12:15

72 Umberto Roberto

went on to become one of the most important centres of Byzantine culture and learn-ing3.

The re-immersion of Byzantine intellectuals in late antique culture was a defining feature of the Byzantine Renaissance in the ninth and tenth centuries. The dark ages were perceived as a cultural void that had to be filled as quickly as possible. For contem-poraries, late antique culture functioned as an intellectual, spiritual, even technical model, and thus represented the link between their age and the antique Hellenistic-Ro-man tradition. Such a perception goes hand in hand with the Byzantine obsession to underline its continuity with Rome.

One of the hallmarks of the tenth-century Byzantine Renaissance is the increase in the production of corpora in Constantinople, including excerpta, syllogai, anthologies and florilegia4. Three significant elements of late antique culture are henceforth revived: admiration for Hellenistic-Roman antiquity (reverentia antiquitatis), encyclopaedic learning ( ), and, as a consequence, an increasing predilection towards the selection of texts and their synthesis. Some of the most extraordinary cultural achievements of late antiquity, such as the Corpus Iuris Civilis, compiled under Justinian, were based on these principles5. Of course, this decision to imitate antique and late antique models was to some extent an impediment to originality. From a purely artistic point of view, classicism lacked creativity and often produced sterile imitation6.

Nevertheless, the Byzantine Renaissance had strong didactic aims. In order to imi-tate antique models for example, Byzantine scholars needed to study ancient culture. Learning was the first step towards preserving and respecting their classical heritage. As a consequence, schools and universities soon became the centres of the Byzantine Re-naissance. But since it was impossible to preserve and learn everything, there had to be a selection of texts pure enthusiasm and engaging curiosity were not enough. As has already been noted, this approach to ancient learning not only linked Byzantine culture to late antiquity, it also generated an extraordinary series of corpora dealing with differ-ent themes and aspects of knowledge. Many of the great intellectual enterprises of this age, such as the Bibliotheca of Photius, had their roots in the Byzantine Renaissance and at its heart was always the desire to preserve and imitate classical models.

Cultural life in Constantinople and in the empire as a whole flourished under two scholar-emperors: Leo VI the Wise (886-912) and his son Constantine VII Porphyroge-nitus (913-959). Leo VI even brought his interests and cultural attitudes into the politi-

3 Dain, La transmission (see n. 1), 42; R. J. H. Jenkins, The Hellenistic Origins of Byzantine Literature, DOP

17, 1963, 37-52. 4 Dain, La transmission (see n. 1), 80; P. Lemerle, Le premier humanisme byzantin. Notes et remarques sur

enseignement et culture Byzance des origines au Xe sicle, Paris 1971, 300. 5 On the antiquitatis reverentia in Justinians codification see e.g. the Constitutio Tanta 10 (C.I. I 17,2.10,

AD 533). For the limits of such reverentia: G. Donatuti, Antiquitatis reverentia, Studi Parmensi 3, 1953, 205-240 = id., Studi di diritto romano II, Milano 1977, 829-862, esp. 854. For a more recent study, see also S. Puliatti, Antiquitatis reverentia e funzionalit degli istituti nelle riforme costituzionali di Giustiniano, in: Tradizione romanistica e costituzione, vol. 2, ed. L. Labruna/M. P. Baccari/C. Cascione, Napoli 2006, 1377-1401; L. De Giovanni, Istituzioni scienza giuridica codici nel mondo tardoantico. Alle radici di una nuova storia, Roma 2007, 469-477.

6 See P. Speck, Die byzantinische Renaissance, in: Selecta Colligere, vol. 1, ed. R. M. Piccione/M. Perkams, Alessandria 2003, 17-32, esp. 23: Etwas Entsprechendes zu provenzalischer Lyrik oder zu Dante ist in Byzanz ausgeschlossen, weil man sich fast sklavisch an den sptantiken Vorbildern orientiert.




Byzantine Collections of Late Antique Authors 73

cal and administrative spheres. He succeeded in finishing a project of his father Basil I, who had wanted to inaugurate a new era by the re-codification of imperial law.

During the reign of Basil, just two preliminary texts appeared. But under Leo VI however, 60 books of the Basilica were published. In effect, the re-codification of the im-perial law was based on a Greek adaptation of the late antique Corpus Iuris Civilis of Justinian7. After the crises of the dark ages, Leo VI seemed to take the emperor Justinian as his model. He follows his line both politically and legally. Like Justinian, he also adds supplementary Novellae to the Basilica after the latters initial publication8.

During his reign, Constantine VII acted in accordance with his fathers principles. Under his influence and euergetism Byzantine encyclopaedism flourished9. His earliest book was probably the De Thematibus, a compilation dealing with the origins of the im-perial provinces and their development after Heracliuss reform. Administrative aims form part of a more general intellectual and historical study: the collection, in fact, is based on older sources in that it is derived from antique and late antique authors10. The De administrando imperio was compiled in a similar way, representing a collection of data which effectively deals with internal and foreign policy. Constantine also showed great interest in the peoples who lived beyond his frontiers. Nevertheless, as Paul Speck has noted, it would be somewhat naive to consider this work as nothing more than a sort of official textbook for Byzantine diplomacy. The De administrando imperio is a pedagogic work aimed at improving the paideia of the reader. Its primary aim was in-deed scholastic, and Constantine wrote it for the personal use of his son Romanus11.

In late antiquity, just as in tenth century Constantinople, encyclopaedism required a preliminary selection of texts that were destined to be copied and preserved in the form of . Since the process of collection and compilation necessitated the synthesis of an enormous corpus of material, it might be useful to try to establish what some of the aims and criteria of those conducting it were. Highly instructive is the prooemium of the Excerpta historica Constantiniana. This is a collection () of historical texts produced in Constantinople during the mid-tenth century (945959) at the request of Constantine VII. Under the supervision of the emperor, a group of scholars was entrusted with the task of reading manuscripts of ancient and late antique

7 Basilicorum libri LX, ed. H. J. Scheltema/N. Van der Wal, Groeningen 1953-1988. See G. Matino, Tecnica

compositiva e forma letteraria dei Basilici di Leone VI, in: Societas studiorum per Salvatore DElia, ed. U. Criscuolo, Napoli 2004, 199-210.

8 See P. Noailles/A. Dain, Les Novelles de Lon VI le Sage, Paris 1944. Leo also published the Book of the Eparch, a collection of rules and regulations governing the activity of the Constantinopolitan guilds, based on late antique models: see The Book of the Eparch-Le livre du prefet, ed. I. Dujev, London 1970.

9 Concerning the problem of Constantinian encyclopaedism see P. Odorico, La cultura della . 1. Il cosiddetto Enciclopedismo Bizantino, 2. Le Tavole del Sapere di Giovanni Damasceno, ByzZ 83, 1990, 1-21, esp. 1-12, who prefers to speak of cultura della silloge instead of encyclopaedism.

10 Cf. Costantino Porfirogenito, De Thematibus, ed. A. Pertusi, Citt del Vaticano 1952; Th. Pratsch, Unter-suchungen zu De Thematibus Kaiser Konstantins VII. Porphyrogennetos, Varia V (Poikila Byzantina 13), Bonn 1994, 13-145.

11 Cf. Constantinus Porphyrogenitus, De administrando imperio, ed. G. Moravcsik/R. J. Jenkins, Washing-ton 1967; C. Sode, Untersuchungen zu den De Administrando imperio Kaiser Konstantins VII. Porphy-rogennetos, Varia V (see n. 10), 149-260. In addition to the De administrando imperio and De Thema-tibus, two other works were produced by the entourage of Constantine, De Caerimoniis Aulae Byzantinae and Scriptores post Theophanem. See Lemerle, Le premier humanisme byzantin (see n. 4), 287 f.; Wilson, Scholars (see n. 1), ch. VII.




74 Umberto Roberto

historians and excerpting texts, dealing with certain major topics. It is highly probable that the emperor himself drew up the list of the historians to be excerpted. In the end, 53 topics () were compiled in an unknown number of volumes (). Today, we are in possession of the following volumes two volumes of the Excerpta de virtutibus et vitiis (= EV), one volume entitled de insidiis (= EI), another entitled de legationibus gentium ad Romanos (ELR), another known as de legationibus Romanorum ad gentes (ELg), and another referred to as de sententiis (= ES)12.

The interest that the entourage of Constantine Porphyrogenitus took in ancient historiography can be seen as early as 920-925, a period in which many remarkable manuscripts were copied in the imperial palace13. This interest represents a preliminary step for the great enterprise of the Excerpta Constantiniana. The prooemium of the whole collection shows how the method and criteria for this enterprise effectively corre-sponds with the pattern of compilation of excerpta during the Macedonian dynasty14. From a methodological point of view, the work is worth consulting. The prooemium was included at the beginning of each book. It is now preserved in the Excerpta de legationibus and in the Excerpta de virtitubus et vitiis15:

-, - , -, - , - ,

Only those of the kings and private citizens of former times, whose minds were not distract-ed or softened by pleasures, but who through virtue maintained pure the nobility of their soul, persevered in hard work and devoted themselves to letters. All those who, as lovers of learning, lived a life according to reason,wrote, each in his own way, something rather significant, on the one hand out of a desire to leave for posterity some evident proof of their

12 Critical editions: Excerpta de virtutibus et vitiis, I, rec. Th. Bttner-Wobst, Berlin 1906, II, ed. A. G. Roos,

Berlin 1910; Excerpta de insidiis, ed. C. de Boor, Berlin 1905; Excerpta de legationibus, ed. C. de Boor, Berlin 1903; Excerpta de sententiis, ed. U.-Ph. Boissevain, Berlin 1906. In general see C. de Boor, Zu den Excerptsammlungen des Konstantin Porphyrogennetos, Hermes 19, 1884, 123-148; Th. Bttner-Wobst, Die Anlage der historischen Encyklopdie des Konstantinos Porphyrogenitos, ByzZ 15, 1906, 88-120, esp. 97 f.: according to his calculation, we possess of the entire collection. For the general cultural back-ground see Jenkins, The Hellenistic Origins (see n. 3), 47-52; Lemerle, Le premier humanisme byzantin (see n. 4), 280-288; Wilson, Scholars of Byzantium (see n. 1), 143-145. For a more recent study, see B. Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens. Logique dune anti-histoire, in: Fragments dhistoriens grecs. Autour de Denys dHalicarnasse, ed. S. Pittia, Rome 2002, 537-559.

13 Dain, La Transmission (see n. 1), 43. 14 Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens. Logique (see n. 12), 556 f., suggests an interesting comparison be-

tween the Excerpta Constantiniana and the juridical production under Leo VI. See for example the text of the prooemium of the Procheiron in A. Schminck, Studien zu mittelbyzantinischen Rechtsbchern, Frankfurt am Main 1986, 56-61. In general, for method and aims of the see Odorico, La cultura (see n. 9).

15 See Excerpta de virtutibus et vitiis (see n. 12), 1-3; Excerpta de legationibus (see n. 12), 1 f. On the prooemium see: Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens. Logique (see n. 12), 538 f. The Codex Turonensis C 980, which preserves the Excerpta de virtutibus et vitiis, was mutilated at the beginning. The first editor, Valesius (1634), could restore the prooemium collating the text with the tradition of the Excerpta de lega-tionibus. Today, the first folium of the Codex Turonensis (and therefore the prooemium) is lost. The Codex Turonensis C 980 was copied in the imperial library: see J. Irigoin, Pour un tude des centres de copie (suite), Scriptorium 13, 1959, 177-209, esp. 177-181.





- . - , , - - , - , -, , , - , -, - - , - -, - , - - , , - , . , - -, , - -, , . - , - -.16

great learning, and on the other to reap from their readers everlasting admiration. But over the course of so many years, the number of events became immense, as did the compo-sition of writings. And history was woven into a continually expanding and never-ending web. It was thus inevitable that later in time the conduct of the men sloped downward, and they became indifferent to the common good and more careless in gaining knowledge of the past. With the attainment of truth being so far away, the discovery of history lies shrouded in uncertainty, because of the scarcity of useful books, and because of the fear and dread over the profusion of words. For that reason, Con-stantine Porphyrogenitus, the most orthodox Christian of the rulers who have ever reigned, and a man of the greatest talent for under-standing the common good, and possessed of an energetic intellect, made a most excellent decision, both for collective good, and benefi-cial for life. He first decided to undertake an active search and to collect from everywhere over the oikoumene books full of diverse and varied erudition. Then, as the volume and wordiness of the writing appeared both to wear down readers and to be troublesome and a general burden, he thought it necessary to divide it up into little parts, and generously offer to everyone the utility derived from it. From this selection, scholars could devote more sustained attention to the texts, and impress more firmly on their mind the elo-quence of these texts. Therefore, he brilliantly and perspicaciously divided the material into themes, 53 in number, containing the collec-tive magnificence of history. And there is nothing of these compositions that will escape this segmentation of themes, nor has anything at all been left out in the succession of dis-courses by this division into single exposi-tions. On the contrary, such a synopsis, or, stated more accurately, adaptation, preserves the elements as a unity, and adapts each one of them to these themes. Of these treatises the present one, which bears the title On virtues and vices, is the 50th, while the first one has received the title On the proclamation of the kings.

16 For a French translation see Lemerle, Le premier humanisme byzantin (see n. 4), 281 f.; Italian transla-

tion: R. M. Piccione, Scegliere, raccogliere e ordinare. Letteratura di raccolta e trasmissione del sapere, Humanitas 58, 2003, 44-63, esp. 54 f.




76 Umberto Roberto

There are at least two ways to approach the Excerpta Constantiniana. Firstly, it is pos-sible to consider the entire collection as a selection of texts possessing a coherent and original character. The final result of this preliminary selection () in itself a creative process is an autonomous work. Indeed, according to the cultural perceptions of this period, selection was considered a valid philosophical and rhetorical activity17. The second way of approaching the Excerpta Constantiniana is to exploit the collection as a useful repository of historiographical fragments, belonging to works which, more often than not, are lost. From this perspective, scholars are particularly drawn to the methodological process of the selection, hoping to draw from it the original text employed by the excerptor. Our analysis will consider the Excerpta Constantiniana, in accordance with this second perspective.

According to the author of the prooemium, these are the major aims of the Excerpta Constantiniana: A cultural aim: to create a coherent and comprehensive collection of historical texts able to replace the plethora of books scattered all over the empire and in some cases almost impossible to find. In this way, historical knowledge as a whole could be im-proved. A practical and didactical aim: to compile a selection of excerpta () that might be useful as exempla for readers, in particular for politicians and those engaged in government and bureaucracy. Of course this kind of selection hinders the preservation of the original text in its integrity. The narrative continuum of each historical work se-lected by the excerptores is irremediably lost in the Excerpta Constantiniana. However, the excerptores do not seem to have considered this a major problem18. An artistic aim. Constantine speaks of the collective magnificence of history ( ): the excerptor should select the texts according to their stylistic and literary quality. This work adheres to the objective presented in the prooemium: the collection ought to help the reader appreciate the correctness of the language ( ) of ancient historiography19. To achieve these aims, an imperial commission was engaged to make a selection of texts based on certain general criteria. The concomitant collection () was then to be preserved, studied and learned. The general criteria, which included utility, synthesis and artistic quality20, now need to be investigated more fully.

Concerning their utilitarian aspect, books were considered essential in preserving and propagating ancient culture. The Constantinian excerptores have as their fundamen-tal aim the preservation of historical knowledge, already endangered by a scarcity of

17 See Lemerle, Le premier humanisme byzantin (see n. 4), 287 f.: on the one hand, he considers the

Excerpta Constantiniana as anti-histoire; on the other, he assumes that it is possible to consider the whole collection as an encyclopdie morale: Il (scil. Constantin) a voulu faire uvre de moraliste : aider les hommes se tourner vers le bien, en mettant commodment leur porte les leons et exemples du pass capables de les y inciter. Les Excerpta sont, ou veulent tre, une encyclopdie morale. See also Odorico, La cultura (see n. 9), 9-11.

18 The collection was huge. Since many texts were excerpted more than once for the different volumes in the collection, it is possible that the overall extension of the Excerpta Constantiniana was double com-pared to the texts of the selected historians. See C. M. Mazzucchi, Cassio Dione in epoca bizantina, Aevum 53, 1979, 94-139, esp. 133.

19 See Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantinien. Logique (see n. 12), 539. 20 See E. V. Maltese, Tra lettori e letture: lutile e il dilettevole, Humanitas 58, 2003, 140-164.





pertinent books ( ). What would be a useful text for scholars in tenth-century Byzantium? There are at least three different ways in which a text might be perceived as useful. There are texts which are practical. Scientific texts, for instance such as medicine, natural sciences, veterinary, military art, etc. A very interesting corpus has recently been studied by Anne McCabe. The science of Hippiatrica presents a typical schema for encyclopaedic collections of the tenth century, which are based on late an-tique corpora. It should also be stressed that the principal manuscript of the recensio B in the textual transmission of the Hippiatrica shows a clear relationship with the scripto-rium of Constantine21. From this point of view, imperial euergetism is fundamental to understanding the cultural flowering of the tenth century. Nevertheless, despite appear-ances, we should be wary of exaggerating the real usefulness of these texts for two rea-sons. Firstly, the collections are often based on very old sources. Therefore, the informa-tion they contain was in many cases already obsolete and well out of date. Secondly, the stylistic and linguistic level of these texts was often too elevated for people who might be interested in these works. For example, in the case of Hippiatrica, it is very difficult to imagine how even a literate horse breeder or veterinary surgeon would be able to under-stand the advice given in the manuscript of recensio B. Just as in the case of Constanti-nes collections, these corpora were usually composed for practical and scholastic rea-sons, but remained antiquarian in character. Although they preserve practical informa-tion, their primary value was for teaching, particularly at school22. Apart from their in-numerable practical applications, one should also take into consideration their spiritual elements. Texts can not only enrich and elevate minds, they can also raise and restore the spirit. In this case, books were considered by scholars , useful to the soul. Last, but not least, a text could be entertaining and amusing. Reading was of course a pleasant past-time for an important segment of Byzantine society. This aspect should be considered as another good reason for selecting and collecting ancient texts. Even if their quality was not suitable for the moral values and religious beliefs of the period, these texts were copied and preserved because they were enjoyable23. In the case of the Excerpta Constantiniana, utility means pertinence to one of the 53 themes of the collec-tion. The excerptor read the text assigned to him and looked for passages which might be suitable for extrapolation.

Selection () and brevity represent the second point. But how were texts se-lected? In the first place, producing a collection of texts required a propensity for brevity and synthesis, another feature which linked the tenth century to late antiquity. In the Byzantine Renaissance, mixed compilations on different themes were highly appreci-ated: anthology, florilegia and collections of excerpta. The first step in this work was a selection (). For instance, the excerptores Constantiniani were requested to select historical texts according to certain precise themes (). Since they were told to avoid prolixity and long-windedness (), they strove to dissect the texts as mi-nutely as possible ( ). Not only are abridged versions

21 See A. McCabe, A Byzantine Encyclopaedia of Horse Medicine. The sources, compilation and Transmis-

sion of the Hippiatrica, Oxford 2007. 22 See McCabe, A Byzantine Encyclopaedia (see n. 21), 299-301. 23 One example of this is the continued survival of the late antique romance in Byzantium. See Maltese, Tra

lettori e letture (see n. 20), 152-162.




78 Umberto Roberto

of historical texts generally easier to read, they also allow the reader to better appreciate the style of the author. To produce excerpta each excerptor had to extract from his origi-nal text quotations in extenso, in accordance with the general theme. The excerpta are not epitomized texts. They are exact quotations, carefully selected by the excerptor. Nevertheless, the individual choice of each excerptor already represents in itself a cul-tural experience, worthy of study in its own right24.

Lastly, as concerns the artistic quality, it may be said that the selection and synthesis by the excerptores ought to allow the philological correctness of the text ( ) and the magnificence of history ( ) to emerge. Without this work, the reader may be distracted by verbosity () and over-whelmed by the large number of manuscripts, some of which were bad.

In the case of the Excerpta Constantiniana, each scholar (excerptor) was commis-sioned to create excerpta from one author concerning the 53 subjects of the collection. It is possible to infer that each excerptor was expected to read at least one or two ancient historiographical works. Probably, the entire commission was composed by twenty scholars or students from the Magnaura school. They were assisted by a group of copy-ists. The excerptores selected at least 26 authors25.

In order to divide it up into little parts ( ), each excerptor had to read the work, after which he carefully selected passages and divided the whole excerpta according to the 53 different subjects. Thereafter, the excerpta were copied by a copyist26.

From the many different studies which try to compare (when possible) the excerpta with the original text of the excerpted author, it is possible to argue that the excerptores followed a common pattern in working on the original manuscripts. Since some rules appear to guide the whole collection, I will present these rules according to my own experience while working on the text of John of Antioch. The latter wrote a universal chronicle, , parts of which eventually ended up in at least three - of the Excerpta Constantiniana27. What follows are some general remarks:

24 See P. A. Brunt, On historical Fragments and Epitomes, CQ 30, 1980, 477-494; Piccione, Scegliere, racco-

gliere, ordinare (see n. 16). 25 See Lemerle, Le premier humanisme byzantin (see n. 4), 285-287. Concerning the order of the selected

authors: Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens. Logique (see n. 12), 540 and 545-553. 26 See Bttner-Wobst, Die Anlage (see n. 12), 99 f. Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens. Logique (see n. 12),

557 f., suggests that the excerptores could profit from the methodological experience of the great juridical syllogai which had been composed under the Macedonian emperors.

27 See Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta ex Historia chronica, introduzione, edizione e traduzione a cura di Umberto Roberto, Berlin 2005. The Excerpta Constantiniana de virtutibus et vitiis, de insidiis, de legatio-nibus contain the most important group of fragments securely ascribable to John of Antioch. In particu-lar: a) 75 Excerpta de virtutibus et vitiis in the Codex Turonensis C 980, f. 85r-102v (XI saec.) under the title: (f. 85). b) 110 Excerpta de insidiis in the Codex Scorialensis I 11, f. 107r-154v (XVI saec.) as well as in Codex Parisinus 1666 (XVI saec.). These are excerpta from the reign of David until the death of Phocas in the Codex Scorialensis I 11; but just up until the emperor Zeno in Codex Parisinus 1666 (XVI saec.). c) 1 excerptum de legationibus Romanorum ad gentes. There were also Excerpta de sententiis from John of Antioch, which are now lost: see C. de Boor, Suidas und die Konstantinische Exzerptsammlung I, ByzZ 21, 1912, 381-424, esp. 411, n. 1. Excerpta from John Malalas are also present only in two volumes: Excerpta de virtutibus and Excerpta de insidiis: see B. Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens et la Chrono-





a) The excerptores worked according to rigorous criteria regarding the conservation of the original text, as the comparison between the original text of the historian selected for the collection and the excerpted texts in the Excerpta Constantiniana confirms. Respect for text and philological rigour exclude any arbitrary interference or textual contamination by the excerptor, even if the stylistic and linguistic level was not appro-priate to the scholars cultural level28. b) From a purely stylistic and syntactical point of view, slight alterations by the excerptores are possible in order to give autonomy to each excerptum29. In particular: In order to separate the excerptum from the incipit, the conjunction is inserted by the excerptor at the beginning of each text. In addition, some alterations or brief epitomes can sometimes be found at the end of the excerptum. Despite these interfer-ences at the beginning and the end, the narrative kernel of each excerptum is exactly transcribed from the original30. Apart from the introduction of , the excerptor occasionally intervenes at the be-ginning of the excerptum in order to give narrative autonomy to the text. He usually inserts names of person or places, chronological data, sometimes even a short introduc-tion to explain what precedes the excerptum. Many mistakes are liable to occur in this phase, regarding for instance names and dating. Concerning John of Antioch, there are some evident confusions which may be ascribed to the excerptor Constantinianus. See e.g. fr. 115 (EV 14); fr. 138 (= EI 23); fr. 139 (EI 24); fr. 140 (EI 25). Concerning chronological errors, it ought to be remarked that in many cases mistakes or misunder-standings are rather ascribable to the excerptor and not to John himself. The latter are often the consequence of the drastic editing by the excerptor31. Apart from these alterations, all personal remarks or any possible forms of contamina-tion from other sources do not in general occur. c) By virtue of the synthetic nature of their work, the excerptores are extremely concise. They usually do not abridge, but simply delete that which they consider to be unessen-tial to the narrative structure of the excerptum32. Omission of text is the most common characteristic in the Excerpta Constantiniana. In the course of this process, some slight interventions may occur to rationalize the text33. Concerning John of Antioch, it is very

graphie de Jean Malalas, in: Recherches sur la Chronique de Jean Malalas, vol. 1, ed. J. Beaucamp et al., Paris 2004, 119-136, esp. 123 f.

28 Speck, Die Byzantinische Renaissance (see n. 6), 25 and 28. 29 C. de Boor, Die Chronik des Georgios Monachos als Quelle des Suidas, Hermes 21, 1886, 1-21, esp. 2 f. 30 Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens. Logique (see n. 12), 542 f. For John Malalas see Flusin, Les Excerpta

Constantiniens (see n. 27), 124: the Excerpta Constantiniana from Malalas belong to a direct tradition, now lost, whereas the extant Codex Baroccianus 182 is at times an epitome of the Chronographia. For a critical edition of Malalas see Ioannis Malalae Chronographia, ed. I. Thurn, Berlin 2000.

31 In general the excerptores are scarcely interested in preserving chronological data. For this attitude, equally applicable to the excerpta from Malalas see Flusin, Les Excerpta constantiniens (see n. 27), 126.

32 Brunt, On historical fragments and epitomes (see n. 24), 483-485; Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens. Logique (see n. 12), 542 f.

33 The excerptores usually preferred to cut rather than epitomize those parts of the text which were not suitable for the theme of the corresponding volume in the excerpta. Through this intervention they could avoid prolixity and verbosity. However, according to de Boor, Suidas I (see n. 27), 399, when the excerptor epitomizes the text, it usually means that elsewhere in other volumes the same text is present in his integral version.




80 Umberto Roberto

instructive to compare the long fragment in the Codex Athous 4932 (= Iviron 812) with two Excerpta Constantiniana which derive from the same section of the , i.e. the book four on the consul ( ). The cutting of the excerptor appears very significant. Although considerable for their length, both excerpta do not allow the reader to understand exactly how long and complex the whole text of the Codex Athous 4932 is. In addition, both excerpta derive from the volume de virtutibus (EV 17 f.); in the volume de insidiis there are therefore no texts from the book four on the consul of the . In short, though the Excerpta Constantiniana offers good evidence for the structure and the most important themes of the work, it does not allow the reader to restore the in its entirety. For example: the excerptor does not extrapolate any excerpta from the first two books of the work (), concerning the period from Adam to Abraham. Thanks to other textual traditions (Codex Parisinus gr. 1630 and Excerpta Salmasiana II), we know that this part was significant. Therefore, the excerptor deliberately decided to almost ignore it for the volumes de virtutibus et vitiis and de insidiis. In de virtutibus a sole excerptum is drawn from the part concerning a philosophical interpretation of Heracles (fr. 6.2 originally in book one of the ). In de insidiis, the excerptor starts his selection of texts from King David (fr. 33 = EI 1)34. d) : a possible interpretation of this passage suggests that the excerptor respected the narrative sequence of the original text, even if he had to cut a great deal of text from the original. The case of John of Antioch seems to confirm this interpretation. In fact, the Excerpta de virtutibus and de insidiis present both an identical narrative and chrono-logical sequence. The similarities between the two different sets of excerpta allows us therefore to restore the exact sequence of the entire work. The excerptor worked on the text to create excerpta, but he did not alter the narrative sequence. As a consequence, the Excerpta Constantiniana is useful in restoring the narrative and historiographical struc-ture of the . e) A text which was too long and complex could always be subdivided into several dif-ferent excerpta by the excerptor. These excerpta are usually scattered in the volumes of the sylloge. At the end of an excerptum it is sometimes possible to find a reference to other volumes where the text continues. The reference is introduced by the words 35.

34 For drastic cutting in the Excerpta Constantiniana from Malalas see Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens

(see n. 27), 127: Tout en restant un extrait, le passage que nous venons danalyser pourrait videmment donner, sil tait seul, une ide assez fausse du texte de Malalas, ainsi amput de plusieurs pages. It is not possible to calculate how many excerpta from John of Antioch were in the lost volumes of the Excerpta Constantiniana. For both volumes de virtutibus et vitiis, and de insidiis, the was very use-ful. Despite their presence in the volume, no excerpta from the de sententiis has been preserved. On the other hand, the volume de legationibus contains a unique excerptum on the republican age. The distribu-tion among the volumes of excerpta was therefore a personal choice of the excerptor. For this selection he was probably influenced by the historiographical character of the work: see de Boor, Zu den Excerpt-sammlungen (see n. 12), 123-129. A second possibility is that the excerptor did not possess a complete manuscript of the . In this case, they do not mention texts from the archaiologia, since they have a mutilated manuscript.

35 See for example de Boor, Zu den Excerptsammlungen (see n. 12), 131. See also Bttner-Wobst, Die Anla-ge (see n. 12), 107 n. 4. In some cases it is possible to restore the original text joining different excerpta





f) The excerptores tend to eliminate quotations of sources from the excerpted text. In the case of John of Antioch one can see how frequent this omission is by comparing the Excerpta Constantiniana with the same text found in other lines of transmission36. g) When the same text appears useful for two different volumes, it is possible to find two different excerpta deriving from a single source. This is an excellent opportunity to evaluate the work of the excerptor. In the case of John of Antioch see, e.g., fr. 33 (= EV 5 [hinc Suda 95] ~ EI 1), i.e. two excerpta drawn from the same text dealing with King David37. Elsewhere, too, it is possible to find some Excerpta de virtutibus that correspond to passages in the Excerpta de insidiis. It goes without saying that comparison between the two traditions is fundamental in restoring John of Antiochs original text. See: fr. 206 (EV 39 ~ EI 50); fr. 224 (EV 48 ~ EI 57); fr. 246 (EV 51 ~ EI 71). Some lemmata from the Suda also come from John of Antioch, since the author of the Suda worked on many historical authors (including John of Antioch) using the Excerpta Constantiniana. Many researchers have remarked how most of the historiographic quotes in the Suda are actu-ally copied from the Excerpta Constantiniana. In the case of John of Antioch, it is im-portant to note that the author of the Suda had at his disposition all (or at least a great part) of the volumes of the Exc. Constantiniana. This explains the presence of tracts within the Suda which are identical to those coming from the extant volumes of the Exc. Constantiniana: evidently the lexicographer of the Suda copied these tracts from the volumes still extant, de virtutibus, de insidiis and de legationibus. In addition it also explains the presence of many other tracts within the Suda which show a narrative structure very similar to that found in those extant parts of the Exc. Constantiniana (or elsewhere in the textual tradition of John), but which offer more information, and some-times more text. Evidently, in this case the author of the Suda has taken sections of Johns work from those volumes of the Exc. Constantiniana which are now lost38. h) Even if not frequent, there are some Excerpta Constantiniana from John of Antioch whose text is evidently epitomized by the excerptor Constantinianus. Sometimes the epitome is extensive. For instance, see the excerptum de insidiis 77 (fr. 277) on the last

together, e.g., the two Excerpta de virtutibus 56 and 57 Bttner-Wobst come from the same text, as the comparison with Eutropius X 6, source of John of Antioch, shows. This operation is also valid for certain excerpta and lemmata of the Suda (which come from the Excerpta Constantiniana): see below n. 39.

36 Omitted quotations in the Excerpta Constantiniana can be found in Malalas: see Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens (see n. 27), 127-129 and n. 65.

37 This is the text on David as found in the EV 5: , . . . . The same text in EI 1 is arranged thus: , , , . . It is evident that the Excerpta de virtutibus preserved a better version of the original text by John of Antioch. In the Exc. de insidiis, e.g., the excerptor omits Davids sorrow. See in general Roberto, Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta (see n. 27), XXXI-XLII.

38 On the relationship between the Suda and the Excerpta Constantiniana cf. C. de Boor, Suidas und die Konstantinische Exzerptsammlung II, ByzZ 23, 1914-1919, 1-127. For John of Antioch see in particular Roberto, Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta (see n. 27), LXXIX-CI. In general, on the historiographical lemmata see Il lessico Suda e la memoria del passato a Bisanzio, ed. G. Zecchini, Bari 1999.




82 Umberto Roberto

period of the kingdom of Valens. At the end of the excerptum the epitome is so brief that the reference to the battle of Adrianople is almost incomprehensible39. In general the Excerpta Constantiniana was composed according to the same criteria upon which most tenth-century collections were based. These include not only a re-spectful and conservative approach for the ancient (or late antique) text (reverentia antiquitatis), but also a selection of texts which were appropriate for the aims of the collection (utilitas), together with a concern for brevity (brevitas).

As has been stated, the work of the excerptor implied making a large number of methodological and selective choices. These choices were to some extent personal and should now be addressed, since the numerous problems the excerptor had to resolve while going about his work are fundamental in understanding the material. Such prob-lems need to be borne in mind when attempting to evaluate the importance of the Excerpta Constantiniana in the textual transmission of an author. This is particularly true in the case of John of Antioch: a) We do not know how many manuscripts (per historian) were used by the excerpto-res, nor can we easily determine their textual condition. It is possible to infer from the excerpta (and the mistakes in them), that these manuscripts were sometimes bad testi-monia40. For example, Polybius manuscript was mutilated41. It is very probable that the excerptores made use of a mutilated manuscript (or even a florilegium of excerpta) for the section of Cassius Dio concerning books 21-35. Also in the case of the Universal History of Nicolaus Damascenus, the manuscript used by the excerptores was corrupt42. The excerpta from the Chronographia of John Malalas were also extracted from a frag-mentary manuscript43. In the case of John of Antioch, the excerpta from the last part of his (from Justin I to Phocas) are based on an epitome. Therefore, the excerptores would appear to have consulted a fragmentary manuscript of the work be-fore integrating this with an epitome44. To conclude, it would appear that the ambitious project to concentrate in the imperial library of Constantinople the best manuscripts of

39 For a similar case in the tradition of John Malalas on Theseus (Io. Mal. IV 16,18 ~ EV 4) see Flusin, Les

Excerpta constantiniens (see n. 27), 129. According to Mller, the abridged version of the last part of the should be ascribed to the excerptor Constantinianus. Concerning this problem see U. Roberto, The Circus Factions and the Death of the Tyrant: John of Antioch on the fate of the Emperor Phocas (forthcoming).

40 According to P. Schreiner, Die Historikerhandschrift Vaticanus graecus 977: ein Handexemplar zur Vor-bereitung des Konstantinischen Exzerptenwerkes?, JB 37, 1987, 1-29, the Vaticanus graecus 977 is a unique case of a manuscript used by the excerptores and still extant. It includes the work of Theophy-lactus Simocatta. For a critique, see Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens. Logique (see n. 12), 544, n. 34.

41 Bttner-Wobst, Die Anlage (see n. 12), 97 f. 42 Concerning Cassius Dio see: Bttner-Wobst, Die Anlage (see n. 12), 98 f.; Mazzucchi, Cassio Dione (see

n. 18), 135 f. On Nicolaus Damascenus: Bttner-Wobst, Die Anlage (see n. 12), 100; . Parmentier-Morin, Les Fragments de Denys dHalicarnasse attribus Nicolas de Damas. Recherches sur la composition des Excerpta Constantiniens, in: Fragments dhistoriens grecs (see n. 12), 461-479, esp. 470-476: the insertion of two texts from Dionysius Halicarnassensis among the excerpta from Nicolaus Damascenus was prob-ably caused by an error in the textual transmission.

43 See Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens (see n. 27), 129-133; in general: M. Jeffreys, A lacuna in Theophanes text of Malalas?, in: Studies in John Malalas, ed. E. Jeffreys/B. Croke/R. Scott, Sydney 1990, 268-276.

44 Who is the Author of this epitome? On the question see Roberto, Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta (see n. 27), XLII-XLIV.





ancient and late antique historians failed. The excerptores could not always work on good and complete manuscripts, and as a result the excerpta contain many mistakes and misinterpretations45. b) Of course it is possible that some of the mistakes and misunderstandings arose as the excerptores tried to restore corrupt manuscripts. See, e.g., the very interesting case of an excerptum on Cincinnatus and the war between the Romans and the Hernici, fr. 85 = EV 13 ~ Suda 2732. Concerning the triumph of Cincinnatus on his enemies, the re-stored text by John of Antioch reports: ( in codex) (scil. Cincinnatus) . The word is restored by Th. Bttner-Wobst, in accordance with the source of John, Dionysius Halicarnassensis VI 34,3. The Codex Turonensis C 980 for the Exc. de virtu-tibus has the corrupted form . It is clear that the corrupt form was also in the original manuscript of John of Antioch which was itself used by the excerptores. The same text in the Suda confirms this opinion. In fact, the text in Suda 2732 presents the form instead of . Evidently, when the lexicographer copied from the manuscript of the Exc. Constantiniana in the imperial palace, he was unable to under-stand the corrupted reading and corrected it to , which would have been more comprehensible to his readers. Besides that, in 846 the Suda presents a dif-ferent version of the same text, which was drawn from another volume (lost) of the Exc. Constantiniana. The sentence presents an interesting alternative reading: in-stead of . This variation in the reading confirms that in an excerptum be-longing to a different volume the original text was similarly corrupted. The lexicogra-pher corrected it as as an alternative to , as used in 2732. c) Some mistakes may have occurred in the different phases of the work, during the selection of the texts as well as the copying of the excerpta. As we have already seen in the case of John of Antioch, mistakes and misunderstanding by the excerptores were fre-quent during the process of creating excerpta from the original text. These are mainly incorrect names, misunderstandings in the interpretation of the text and chronological mistakes. Such mistakes need to be constantly borne in mind when using the Excerpta Constantiniana to re-establish the tradition in critical editions. It is highly probable that many other mistakes arose during the textual transmission of the excerpta down to our manuscripts46. d) From a general perspective, useful syllogai may even have contributed indirectly to the disappearance of the original text. Great works with many books were often re-placed by syllogai of excerpta from the same texts47. This occurs for instance in the case of the Corpus Iuris Civilis in the East, which was later replaced by the Basilica of Leo. In the case of John of Antioch, the Excerpta Constantiniana not the original was copied

45 See Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens. Logique (see n. 12), 540 f.: it is probable that the excerptores

were using just one manuscript per author. 46 Brunt, On historical fragments (see n. 24), 454; de Boor, Die Chronik (see n. 29), 3; Flusin, Les Excerpta

Constantiniens (see n. 27), 122. 47 Dain, La Transmission (see n. 1), 80; for an opposing view see Lemerle, Le premier humanisme byzantin

(see n. 4), 287.




84 Umberto Roberto

and used in Constantinople by the author of the Suda as well as by the author of the excerpta which are in the Codex Parisinus 163048.

To conclude, on a historiographical level, the Excerpta Constantiniana carefully pre-serves the thinking of the excerpted historian. However, a more cautious approach is needed when dealing with the textual transmission. The excerptores do not usually alter the language and style of the original text which they excerpt. However, they intervene in the narrative structure, omitting bits of text, changing names and chronological data in order to create a new excerptum, and making slight alterations to arrange the text. In addition, as one would expect, many other mistakes and misunderstandings have crept into the textual transmission of the Excerpta Constantiniana. All these elements plead for prudence when considering the Excerpta Constantiniana as a fundamental source for general theories on an author or his historiographical identity49. Concerning John of Antioch, the Excerpta Constantiniana is indubitably the best group of texts that we pos-sess for this historian. On the other hand, it is instructive to compare the excerpta with the long fragment in Codex Athous 4932, i.e. the sole fragment that has come down to us in a direct tradition. The correlation between the Codex Athous and the two Excerpta Constantiniana from the same text shows how relevant and drastic the omission of text by the excerptores Constantiniani was. Indeed, if we only had the Excerpta Constantinia-na to rely on, we would never have known that John of Antioch dedicated at least two of his books to the period spanning the creation of Adam to the Trojan War50. As the case of Malalas confirms, when reading John of Antioch, the Excerpta Constantiniana should be considered with prudence when attempting to restore the text of the .

48 For the relationship between the Excerpta Constantiniana and the excerpta in the Codex Parisinus 1630,

see Roberto, Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta (see n. 27), XLV-LIII. Some errors present in both traditions suggest that the Excerpta Constantiniana and the Codex Parisinus 1630 come from the same manuscript.

49 See Flusin, Les Excerpta Constantiniens (see n. 27), 122, 133-136; see also 129 for the possibility to reconstruct the vrai Malalas through the Excerpta Constantiniana: Pour conclure, les excerpteurs, dans lensemble, visent fournir des extraits de Malalas. Mais leur faon de procder, dans ce cas plus quailleurs, peut-tre, est marque par une certaine libert. L o nous ne disposons pas de moyen de contrle, il est imprudent de penser quun extrait, dans sa totalit, ou mme en partie, reproduit mot mot le vrai Malalas. After studying the tradition of John of Antioch, I can confirm Flusins opinion. This opinion should be considered as a methodological postulate, which may help to avoid misunder-standings in classifying the textual traditions of John of Antioch. I refer in particular to the conclusions on the echt Ioannes Antiochenus by P. Sotiroudis, Untersuchungen zum Geschichtswerk des Johannes von Antiocheia, Thessaloniki 1989, 148-153. The same judgement concerning the value of the Excerpta Constantiniana in the textual tradition of John of Antioch is expressed by S. Mariev, Neues zur Johan-neischen Frage?, ByzZ 99, 2006, 535-549, esp. 537-539. Mariev also retains that there is a coherent nar-rative style in one part of the Excerpta Constantiniana, which would represent the real John of Antioch (538). As a consequence, all the other textual traditions should now be judged upon the basis of this group of excerpta together with their literary style. This is a radical position which fails to take into con-sideration the problems of the Excerpta Constantiniana, nor the importance of a historiographical approach to the material transmitted under the name of John of Antioch.

50 See Roberto, Ioannis Antiocheni Fragmenta (see n. 27), XXIV-XXVIII.




Byzantine Collections Libre

Documents

Transcript of Byzantine Collections Libre