Michael Psellus on Euripides and George of Pisidia

8/10/2019 Michael Psellus on Euripides and George of Pisidia

1/16

27/12/2014 16:32Classical Receptions

Page 1 of 16http://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/conf96/whitby.htm

Classical Receptions in Drama and Poetry in Englishfrom c.1970 to the Present

HomepageContacts

The ProjectAbout the projectProjectPublications(includingArchivedConferencepapers)SpecialistBibliographyMasks WorkshopVideo

Critical EssaysEssays

EJournalsNew VoicesPractitioners'Voices

2010

Confere nceA DemocraticTurn

ESeminar2009 DemocraticTurn Eseminar

1998-2008Archived topics

DramaDatabase

Search the DB

PoetryDatabase(pilot v. 1)An IntroductionCase Study 1 :Michael LongleyCase Study 2:Eavan BolandandOlga Broumas Database Pilot

Sample:Eavan BolandOlga Broumas

January Conference 1996

THE RECEPTION OF CLASSICAL TEXTS AND IMAGES

Michael Psellus on Euripi d es and George of Pisidia[ 1 ]

Mary Whitby, Royal Holloway, University of London

Contents Abstract

Although the stature and appeal of the dramatist Euripides has remainedunquestioned and contin ued to evoke new responses right up to the present day,George of Pisidia, a panegyrical and religious poet who wrote, like Euripides, iniambic trimeters, but worked in Constantinople in the first half of the seventhcentury AD, is now almost entirely forgotten. And yet just under a thousand yearsago, Michael Psellus (1018-?1078/97), a man who was not altogether unjustified inregarding himself as the greatest intellect of his day[ 2], chose to discuss whetherEuripides or George of Pisidia was the better poet, and it is likely that he ratedGeorge higher.[ 3] A question so startling to modern eyes merits furtherexamination. What context gave rise to it and what were Psellus' criteria? Howmuch did he know of his su b jects? To what extent does his view reflect the ways inwhich contemporaries received the poetry of their classical and late antiquepredecessors?

I

I begin with a very brief sketch of Psellus' own career and the wider culturalbackground, paying particular attention to the work of the Patriarch Photius, wholived two centuries before Psellus.

'Much the most versatile man of his generation',[ 4] Psellus combined in anenergetic life a public career as imperial adviser and civil servant, a period of disgrace in a monastery, the direction of the new philosophical school in theimperial university in Constantinople,[ 5] a reputation as a popular lecturer of international standing,[ 6] and an extensive and varied literary output whichincludes an anecdotal history (the Chronographia ) of his own time, orations, letters,poetry and a number of literary essays.[ 7] Our text has survived in only onedamaged copy,[ 8] and the literate and literary lite represented only a very smallfraction of the Byzantine population.[ 9] Yet Psellus was an influential teacher andideas were disseminated orally: the views of a man who 'dominated the intellectualand sometimes the political life of Constantinople for nearly fifty years'[ 10] are

likely to have been influential in his lifetime, at least among the educated.Psellus lived in a period of high renaissance. The revival of classical learning isassociated with the appearance of a new, easily-written minuscule script, perhapsabout 790,[ 11] and in the ninth century the recovery and preservation of texts fromthe classical past became a major occupation among the small scholarly elite.[ 12]The luxury manuscripts of Arethas of Caesarea, which date from the turn of theninth and tenth centuries, are only the most spectacular manifestation of thisactivity.[ 13] An encyclopaedic interest in the classical past was also manifest in theform of handbooks, syntheses and compilations: best known is the tenth-centurySuda lexicon, which is both a biographical reference book and a verbal glossary,important to us for its extensive quotation from texts now lost. The earliestByzantine lexicon, from the second half of the ninth century, listed words useful forprose writers and other obscure vocabulary.[ 14] It was compiled by Photius,Patriarch of Constantinople, a scholar at least the equal of Psellus in stature andimportance.[ 15]

Photius' major work, the Bibliotheca , although an incomparably more massive
http://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/welcom.htmlhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/e_archive/about.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/e_archive/2009/Intro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Conf2010/confpage2010.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/newvoices/index.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/GreekDramaVideoImages/dd2000index.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/Bibintro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/publications.htmlhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/publications.htmlhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/aboutproject.htmlhttp://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f10http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f4http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f2http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f15http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f14http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f13http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f12http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f11http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f10http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f9http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f8http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f7http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f6http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f5http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f4http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f3http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f2http://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/conf96/whitbyabs.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/conf96/cctoc.htmhttp://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f1http://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/PoetryDB/Broumas/broumasintro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/PoetryDB/Boland/Bolandintro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/PoetryDB/BolandBroumas/BolandBroumasIintro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/PoetryDB/longley/poetrylongleyintro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/PoetryDB/intro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/welcom.htmlhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/e_archive/about.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/e_archive/2009/Intro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Conf2010/confpage2010.htmhttp://www.open.ac.uk/arts/research/pvcrs/http://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/newvoices/index.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/essays/intro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/GreekDramaVideoImages/dd2000index.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/Bibintro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/publications.htmlhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/aboutproject.htmlhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/contacts.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/index.html


2/16



Ted HughesMichael Longley

Classicalhistoriography,ideas andmaterial cultureExhibitingDemocracy

ClassicalReceptionStudiesNetwork CRSN

Links

CopyrightNotice

undertaking, may be seen as an interesting precedent for the literary essays of Psellus. It is a review, compiled for Photius' brother Tarasius, of 280 rare textswhich he had sought out and read.[ 16] More than half of the texts are Christian,[17] although (at the other end of the literary spectrum) four novels are alsoincluded. Photius' reviews vary considerably in format and length, but manycomment on style or make other critical assessments which are probably original,although they use the technical terminology of the literary-critical tradition whichgoes back to the early centuries AD.[ 18] This range of interests and concern withstylistic questions are paralleled on a much smaller scale in the seven literaryessays of Michael Psellus.[ 19] Three of the latter are concerned with fourth-centuryChurch Fathers (with particular prominence given to John Chrysostom and GregoryNazianzen), while a fourth is devoted to Symeon Metaphrastes, who in the tenthcentury rewrote the corpus of saints' lives in a more elaborate style. One essay isdevoted to comparison of the novelists Heliodorus and Achilles Tatius.[ 20]

But in one respect Psellus is distinct from Photius. For Photius, although no doubtfamiliar with classical poetry from his school reading at least, had included in theBibliotheca only one poet, the Empress Eudocia, wife of Theodosius II, who wroteChristian poetry in Homeric centos: this suggests that he did not read poetry forpleasure.[ 21] Psellus, on the other hand, devotes one of his seven essays, to poetry- that on Euripides and George of Pisidia.[ 22] In addition, he may well be theauthor of a treatise on tragedy preserved anonymously in a group of texts of whichseveral are certainly to be attributed to Psellus[ 23] This is a theoretical work basedlargely on earlier discussions, some of which can be traced to the Chrestomathy of Proclus, and part probably to Hellenistic literary theory. Psellus' interest in poetry isto be explained in terms of his own creative writing, which includes a 540-line poemon rhetoric in Byzantine political verse,[ 24] and a brief set of versified rules for thecomposition of iambic poetry.[ 25] As for his interest in tragedy,[ 26] it has recentlybeen shown that in his historical writing he sought to present in tragic terms(among other modes) the dramatic events of the coup of April 1042 by which theEmperor Michael V was ousted from the throne, and of which Psellus was a personalwitness.[ 27] Hence Psellus' discussion of tragedy and of poetry in general isgenerated by its practical utility for himself.[ 28] This confident and creativeapproach to classical source material distinguishes him from the moreencyclopaedic and conservationist attitude of the ninth- and tenth-century classicalrevival. Psellus saw himself as a direct successor to the writers of the Hellenic past,an environment in which he felt at ease and able to make his own contribution.[ 29]

III turn now to the essay on Euripides and George of Pisidia and consider itsmotivation, themes and arrangement before examining more closely what Psellushas to say about each of the two poets.

According to its heading, the essay was composed in response to a question: 'Whowas the better poet, Euripides or Pisides?' This in itself provides important signalsabout context and content.

Are we to believe that such a question was in fact posed? It evokes an educationalenvironment, where teaching was regularly conducted by means of a series of shortquestions and answers which served both to aid the teacher in the organisation of material and to test the pupil on how much he had learned. This system was usedat various levels from the most elementary to advanced discussions, for example of theological questions.[ 30] The essay in response to a question may be seen as adevelopment of this technique, and a number of Psellus' minor works take thisform.[31] This reflects his role as a teacher and lecturer, interacting with ordirecting student interest. If the question was not asked, then it ought to havebeen, and Psellus would not have tackled it had he not thought it worthwhile.

But the length of these responses also associates them with another educationalcontext, that of the public performance as a virtuoso display by a distinguishedrhetorician, designed to impress and inspire listeners. The question provides Pselluswith the opportunity to show off both his learning and his performance skills. Itsliterary subject-matter is redolent rather of the lecture-theatre than the publicstage, where a less recherch topic might have been chosen, but the displayelement is an important factor for understanding the work. It helps to account forboth the high-flown opening section (lines 12-32) and the climax, the concludingpassage on George of Pisidia (lines. 110-32), where Psellus' illustration of the poet'suse of figurative expressions turns into a display of his own rhetorical and linguisticexpertise.[ 32] Psellus' reception of the two poets is a creative response, in which he
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f32http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f31http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f30http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f29http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f28http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f27http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f26http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f25http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f24http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f23http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f22http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f21http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f20http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f19http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f18http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f17http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f16http://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/copyright.htmlhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/links.htmlhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/crsn/index.shtmlhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/Projectsite/Challis/intro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/PoetryDB/longley/longlelyintro.htmhttp://www2.open.ac.uk/ClassicalStudies/GreekPlays/PoetryDB/hughes/hughesintro.htm


3/16



implicitly presents himself as a worthy successor.

The question and answer context and the performance element suggest a furtherpoint. The essay is to be seen as an impromptu composition, devised spontaneouslyin response to a specific demand. As in the case of a modern lecturer, impressiveperformance is in practice more important than accuracy. This is not to be viewedas a highly-researched, polished, and nicely judged assessment of the two poets.Psellus (as was customary in the ancient world) relies on the information he carriesin his memory, and is indeed proud to display his off-the-cuff learning. But hisaccuracy is not infallible[ 33] and, more important, reliance on remembered readingsometimes leads him (as it does the modern student) to digression. This isparticularly apparent in the discussion of Euripides, where a good deal of space isdevoted to comparison and contrast with the other two tragedians, particularlyAeschylus, almost certainly because Psellus recalls such comparisons from hisreading. (We know that they began in Euripides' own day, with Aristophanes'Frogs. )[34] This affects the balance of the essay: thanks to Psellus' use of pre-existing analyses, Euripides is accorded twice as much space (lines 33-99) asGeorge (lines 100-32), although Psellus apparently drew less on first-handknowledge of the texts in discussing the tragedian.[ 35]

It is not possible to determine to what extent the question-and-answer setting andthe pose of spontaneity represent reality as opposed to a convenient literary fiction.We are, however, invited to take the work at face value as a spontaneous responseto a genuine student question, and the stance is more important than its veracity.

[36]What aspects of these authors interest Psellus? His agenda is indicated in theopening words, where both poets are said to be 'useful in metrics and the art of poetry' (line 1).[ 37] After remarking on the difficulty of deciding how the two mendiffer from one another - not a problem which strikes the modern critic - hecontinues:

But [if anyone] has a notable knowledge about both [arts], aboutmetres and rhythms, that is, lofty and theoretical knowledge aboutmetres and feet, it is not altogether difficult to discover a certaindifference in either man and to bestow a crown of victory on one overthe other.[ 38]

This initial emphasis on metre indicates the major theme of the essay: it leads on todiscussion of diction and style, but metrical considerations are Psellus' focal point.

The discussion is arranged in four parts. A preliminary paragraph considershistorical changes in metre, concentrating on the hexameter of epic poetry and theiambic of tragedy (lines 12-32). Separate sections on Euripides (lines 33-99) andGeorge (lines 100-32) follow,[ 39] and a final brief paragraph gave Psellus' verdict.Tantalisingly the text is here too badly damaged for it to be clear what that verdictwas.[ 40] It seems likely, however, that Psellus favoured George, not least becausethere would seem to be little point in the comparison with Euripides if the Byzantinepoet were ultimately regarded as inferior.[ 41]

III

I pass over the difficult prefatory discussion of historical changes in metre (whosepurpose is in part to show off Psellus' own rhetorical virtuosity, even at the expenseof clarity),[ 42] and turn to his discussion of Euripides.

What interests Psellus about Euripides and why? How much does he know of him?The discussion centres on Euripides' metrical and musical versatility, his ability toimitate every subject and his skilful variation of metre according to character. Butincorporation of inherited material from the literary-critical tradition is a prominentfeature of this section, although even here personal taste will have influenced theselection.

A number of 'facts' typical of handbooks are adduced: Psellus mentions the name of Euripides' deme (Phlyeia),[ 43] and attributes to him 'eighty or more' plays.[ 44] Thesource of a reference to Euripides' ability to reduce the Athenians to tears (lines 66-7) is more difficult to trace, but it fits with Aristotle's judgement of the third

tragedian as 'the most tragic' (tragikotatos).[ 45] Interestingly it can also be linkedwith Psellus' description in his History of his own role in the coup which overthrewthe Emperor Michael V, where the sight of the refugee emperor and his uncle by thealtar caused him to be overwhelmed by the mutability of human fortune and
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f45http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f44http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f43http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f42http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f41http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f40http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f39http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f38http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f37http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f36http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f35http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f34http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f33


4/16



reduced to uncontrollable tears and groaning, like a spectator at a tragedy.[ 46]Psellus admires Euripides for his ability to evoke a proper response to tragic events,and his inclusion of this point is linked with his own creative writing.[ 47]

Initial commendation of Euripides' mastery in character-drawing and the delineationof passion leads to the first significant digression from the metrical focus (lines 40-7). Passion is identified as the distinctive characteristic of tragedy as opposed tocomedy, and this point is followed by a summary of the different elements of tragedy - stage action, chorus, episodes, etc., patently culled from a standardhandbook,[ 48] before Psellus returns to the importance of varying metre accordingto character. He soon moves to a comparison with Sophocles and Aeschylus (lines54-64), [ 49] who are judged to have 'more profound ideas and a more dignifiedlinguistic arsenal' and, although they sometimes lack grace and rhythmic euphony,they are in general considered more dignified and elegant.[ 50] Detailed attention isgiven to the difference in style between the Prometheus Bound and other works byAeschylus, interesting in view of modern doubts about the authenticity of thePrometheus .[51] Psellus makes clear that, like Aristophanes, he found Aeschylushard-going:[ 52] it is perhaps significant that the Prometheus was the firstAeschylean play to be read by Byzantine schoolchildren.[ 53] Euripides' grace andcharm, both in diction and passion, are commended by contrast,[ 54] while as inFrogs , the less contentious Sophocles gets no more than a couple of passingreferences (lines 34, 54f.,?84).

The first of Psellus' two references to specific Euripidean passages confirms the

derivative nature of his remarks: to illustrate Euripides' subordination of word-accent to music, he cites the opening choral words of the Orestes , with a discussionwhich draws on a fuller analysis by the first-century AD literary critic Dionysius of Halicarnassus.[ 55] But in commending Euripides' musical abilities, to which hedevoted more attention than he did to plot, Psellus reflects his own interest in thisdifficult and technical topic, independently attested by a letter and a substantialsection in the tragedy treatise plausibly attributed to him.[ 56] A comment onEuripides' skill in handling barbarian speech, which perhaps alludes to thePhrygian's song in the Orestes (1369-1502), also reflects Psellus' interests, since heelsewhere similarly commends a contemporary orator.[ 57] Psellus' concludingcriticism may be a personal response: Euripides 'deviates from propriety' (line 93)[58] in the debate scene of the Hecuba (like Orestes, part of the 'Byzantine triad' of Euripidean school texts, along with Phoenissae ), in giving the captive Hecuba 'theprize of honour' against the eloquent Odysseus.[ 59]

Although he incorporates second-hand critical material, Psellus' response toEuripides is a personal one. He selects features (metre, music) which interest himas a poet and scholar, and singles out effects which he especially admires or seeksto imitate (reproduction of barbarian speech, tragic pathos). His direct knowledge of the plays appears very limited: he refers only to texts on the school syllabus and inone case at least takes over an earlier discussion. He has no interest in treatment of myth, staging, plot construction, and so on because he does not aim to write atragedy himself and had no personal experience of living theatre.[ 60] All this makesit easier to understand why he juxtaposed Euripides with the iambic poet George of Pisidia.

IV

George of Pisidia is much closer than Euripides to Psellus, not only in time, but alsoin ethos. He lived in the early decades of the seventh century and, like Psellus, isassociated with a cultural renaissance, in George's case that fostered by theEmperor Heraclius and the Pariarch Sergius in the 620s, a decade of revivingByzantine political fortunes. In this period the classicising historian TheophylactSimocatta promoted Herclius' rgime by narrating the events of the reign of Maurice, the emperor in whose name Heraclius had ousted his predecessor Phocas,while at a lower literary level the Paschal Chronicle made a new record of worldhistory which culminated with Heraclius' restoration of the True Cross to Jerusalemin spring 630, an event interpreted as a prelude to the Golden Age.[ 61] George'scontribution to this movement was the composition of panegyrical poems (someofficially commissioned) in celebration of Heraclius' victorious campaigns against thePersians, together with works on Christian themes which included both propagandafor Heraclius' moves to secure church unity ( Against Severus ), Christian celebration(the Hexaemeron ) and personal introspection ( On the Vanity of Life ).[ 62] Hehimself belonged to ecclesiastical circles, working as an administrator for thePatriarch Sergius who was also his patron.[ 63]
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f63http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f62http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f61http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f60http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f59http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f58http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f57http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f56http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f55http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f54http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f53http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f52http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f51http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f50http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f49http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f48http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f47http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f46


5/16


6/16



V

A final consideration must be George of Pisidia's own reception of Euripides. If Psellus put the two poets side by side, it seems worth investigating whetherGeorge's poetry does have a particular affinity with that of Euripides. What didGeorge know of Euripides, and what would he have found interesting in him? Butthese questions cannot easily be answered, since there is very little evidence to goon. Although he does invoke figures such as Demosthenes, Galen and Proclus,[ 81]George does not, as far as I know, allude explicitly to Euripides. Hence judgementmust be based on his use of the plays.

Textual citation is the most obvious starting-point, but also the least satisfactory inview of the availability from at least the sixth century of lexica, handbooks andanthologies. Just as Psellus incorporated material from the literary critical traditionin his essays, so George certainly used easy guides to the classics where possible,and first-hand knowledge is difficult to prove.[ 82] The extremely limited evidenceavailable does, however, suggest that George favoured Euripides above the othertwo tragedians in this respect.[ 83] But this is in part because more of Euripidessurvived and he was more commonly cited in anthologies. Indeed the fact that twoof the allusions noted come from the 'alphabetical' plays of Euripides rather thanfrom the ten selected for school use may be an indication that George used ahandbook such as the anthology of Stobaeus.[ 84] Much more work remains to bedone in this area, but it is unlikely that George could be shown to have directknowledge of Euripides' plays.

Other stylistic features suggest the limitation of links between George andEuripides. George's use of the three-word trimeter is remote from Euripideanpractice,[ 85] while the most systematic analysis of his diction so far undertakenidentifies the inclusion of vocabulary hitherto confined to prose, particularlyspecialised medical vocabulary, as George's main innovation in this area.[ 86] Thismove towards prose usage is perhaps further reflected in the use of rhyming line-ends, in a manner analogous to that employed in some types of rhetorical prose.[87] On the other hand, in one case at least, George apparently expresses apreference for a Euripidean usage,[ 88] and more extensive research might add tothis haul. Even here, however, the proviso about lexical handbooks must apply,quite apart from our own limited knowledge of ancient authors.[ 89]

In fact in many ways it is preferable to follow Psellus' example and take metre as a

starting-point. In making the innovative decision to compose his panegyrics intrimeters rather than the traditional hexameters, George is most likely to havelooked to Euripides as a metrical model.[ 90] Furthermore, metrical characteristicscan be analysed and measured.[ 91]

Modern studies[ 92] of George's metrical practice uphold Psellus' verdict (lines 4-6)that George handled the iambic metre with greater precision than his successors.He had a good understanding of the metrical rules for the classical quantitativetrimeter, even though his verses also reflect care in the placing of accents, to assistthe understanding of a post-classical audience whose ear was unattuned todifferences in quantitative length between syllables.[ 93] His trimeters are also morevaried than those of his successors, who reduced the rhythm to a monotonous 12-syllable line with predictable accentuation: although the majority of George's linesare dodecasyllabic, he also writes 13- and 14-syllable lines, occasionally 15syllables.[ 94] The increase in the number is achieved by the use of resolved(divided) syllables, a practice most common in the classical comic poets and,among the tragedians, in Euripides. Analysis of specific types of resolution hassuggested that George is closer to Euripides than he is to the other two classicaltragedians.[ 95] It may be added that, like Euripides, George changed his metricalhabits over the course of his career. While Euripides' dramatic increase in resolutionin his later plays is well-known[ 96] George's later panegyrical poems showincreased care in the placing of accent at line-end.[ 97] Although he is unlikely tohave been aware of this phenomenon in Euripides, George's own innovativeinstincts will have attracted him to a poet of Euripides' richness and variety.

Thus George is more closely allied with Euripides than with the other tragedians,especially in his experimentation and refinement of metrical practice: as Euripidesresponded to new trends in contemporary music,[ 98] so George was increasinglyattuned to the limited sensitivity of his contemporaries to quantitative classicalmetres and adapted his technique accordingly. Both poets share a readiness toinnovate, to experiment with and revitalise a well-tried genre, and thus singlethemselves out for comment.[ 99]
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f99http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f98http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f97http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f96http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f95http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f94http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f93http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f92http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f91http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f90http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f89http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f88http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f87http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f86http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f85http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f84http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f83http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f82http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#f81


7/16



But such analogies are too limited to be very instructive. In the present state of knowledge, the verdict on George's reception of Euripides must remain open. Itseems that, like Psellus, he found Euripides the most accessible of the tragedians,but there is no evidence that he was directly acquainted with Euripides' plays, asopposed to extracts available in compendia. Technical metrical similarities, althoughtelling, may well be unconscious. But like Psellus, George has no interest inEuripides' plays as drama.

VI

It may be added that Psellus himself was not seriously interested in comparingGeorge's style with that of Euripides. Had he wished to do so, he would haveconcentrated on Euripides' iambics, rather than the lyrical parts of his plays.Nevertheless his response to the two poets is illuminating, combining as it does theinterests of a scholar and a creative writer. His erudition enables him to recall at willlearned literary discussions of the classical dramatists, perhaps a passage from theHecuba which he had found offensive to propriety, to relate an allusion in George of Pisidia to contemporary allegorical interpretation of Homer, as well as to make

judgements on technical metrical questions. These latter technical aspects were of interest for his own poetic aspirations. The composition of quantitative iambictrimeters in the eleventh century was likely to have been an exercise analogous tothe composition of classical Greek verse today - to be contemplated only by themost able, and with the assistance of all available handbooks. But Psellus is alsointerested in the effect of poetry on its audience: he admires Euripides' mastery of tragic pathos (and seeks to emulate it in his own historical writing), while George'sskilful handling of figurative language appeals to his taste: this he seeks to matchand outdo in his own rhetorical prose criticism of the poet. Classical versecomposition may have been almost beyond reach, but Psellus saw that classicalpoetry had lessons also for those who strove to write effective prose.

This one very limited example of reception perhaps encapsulates the best and worstof Byzantium: its degenerative tendency to incorporate, distil and often distortearlier scholarship, but also its sense of direct and confident inheritance of a richliterary tradition to which innovative additions could still be made.

[return to contents ]

Notes

[1] I am most grateful to Judith Mossman for help on responses to Euripides. Inrevising this paper for publication, I have benefited greatly from commentsgenerously made by Pat Easterling and by Lorna Hardwick and two anonymousreferees. This paper was written with the support of a Leverhulme Special ResearchFellowship. [return to text ]

[2] Cf. R. Browning, 'Enlightenment and Repression in Byzantium in the eleventhand twelfth centuries', Past and Present 69 (1975), 3-23 at 11 (= Studies onByzantine History, Literature and Education , Variorum 1977, no. XV): 'sometimeschildishly vain about his immense and superficial learning'. [return to text ]

[3] On the problem of Psellus' verdict, see further below, section II. [return to text]

[4] L. D. Reynolds and N. G. Wilson, Scribes and Scholars (2nd ed., Oxford 1974)60. [return to text]

[5] Founded, along with a school of law, by Constantine IX Monomachus in 1045.Psellus claims ( Chronographia 6. 37) to have revived philosophy single-handed fromdecline; cf. C. Mango, Byzantium: the Empire of New Rome (London 1980) 143. Forhis contribution to the development of philosophical studies in Byzantium, see C.Niarchos, 'The philosophical background of the eleventh-century revival of learningin Byzantium', in (edd.) M. Mullett and R. Scott, Byzantium and the Classical Tradition (Birmingham 1981) 127-35. [return to text]

[6] He boasted of attracting pupils not merely from every region of the Byzantineempire, but from Egypt and India too: Browning, 'Enlightenment' (n. 2) 20. [returnto text]

[7] Convenient survey in N. G. Wilson, Scholars of Byzantium (London 1983) 156-66. [return to text]
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t7http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t6http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t5http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t4http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t3http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t2http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t1http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/cctoc.htm


8/16



[8] The thirteenth-century codex Vaticanus Barberinianus graecus 240: details inAndrew R. Dyck, Michael Psellus: The Essays on Euripides and George of Pisidia and on Heliodorus and Achilles Tatius (Byzantina Vindobonensia xvi, Vienna 1986) 25-7.[return to text]

[9] C. Mango, 'Discontinuity with the classical past in Byzantium', in Mullett andScott (n. 5) 48-57. R. Browning ('Literacy in the Byzantine world', Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 4, 1978, 39-54) suggests that estimates of literacy tend tobe too low, although few would have a sophisticated level of knowledge. [return totext ]

[10] Browning, 'Enlightenment' (n. 2) 11. [return to text]

[11] C. Mango, 'The availability of books in the Byzantine empire, A.D. 750-850', inByzantine Books and Bookmen: a Dumbarton Oaks colloquium (Dumbarton Oaks1975) 29-45 at 45; id. Byzantium (n. 5) 138. [return to text]

[12] The earliest dated minuscule manuscript is from 835; see Reynolds and Wilson(n. 4) 51-4. [return to text]

[13] See Wilson, Scholars (n. 7) 120-35; R. Browning, 'Byzantine Scholarship', Past and Present 28 (1964) 3-22 at 11f.= Studies (n. 2) XIII. [return to text]

[14] On usefulness as a criterion in scholarship, see further n. 28. [return to text]

[15] See Wilson, Scholars (n. 7) 89-93; Mango, Empire (n. 5) 137-44; Browning,'Scholarship' (n. 13) 8-11. The classic study of the renaissance here cursorilysurveyed is P. Lemerle, Le premier humanisme byzantine (Bibliothque byzantine,tudes 6, Paris 1971) esp. chs. 7-10. Briefer survey (in English): Warren Treadgold,'The Macedonan Renaissance', in (ed.) Treadgold, Renaissances before theRenaissance (Stanford 1984) 75-98. [return to text]

[16] Wilson, Scholars (n. 7) 93-111, id. Photius, The Bibliotheca (London 1994).Photius does not include familiar school texts. The number of books available to himwas extraordinarily large by contemporary standards and there has been muchdiscussion of how he could have had access to so many, see further Mango,'Availability' (n. 11) 37-43, Warren Treadgold, The nature of the Bibliotheca of Photius (Dumbarton Oaks Studies 18, Dumbarton Oaks 1980); brief statement of problems, Treadgold, 'Photius and the reading public for classical philology in

Byzantium', in Mullett and Scott (n. 5) 123-6. [return to text][17] Over 40 per cent of these are specifically theological, reflecting the particularpreoccupations of a patriarch of Constantinople. Photius' Quaestiones Amphilochiae ,composed during a period of exile allegedly in response to questions posed byAmphilochius, metropolitan of Cyzicus, is also predominantly theological, seeWilson, Scholars (n. 7) 114-19. This work deserves mention in connection withPsellus' literary essays, some of which are similarly framed as responses toenquiries, although in Psellus' case no specific interlocutor is identified. Some of Photius' Amphilochian responses are of substantial length (e.g. no 1 has 37sections). See further below, section II. [return to text]

[18] Wilson, Scholars (n. 7) 103-5. The writings of Hermogenes and Dionysius of Halicarnassus are an important influence on both Photius and Psellus. [return totext]

[19] Surveyed by Wilson, Scholars (n. 7) 166-79. [ return to text ]

[20] On the continuing popularity of these novelists in the thirteenth century, seeWilson, 'Books and readers in Byzantium', in Byzantine Books (n. 11) 1-15 at 7f.;id. Scholars (n. 7) 26, 186. [ return to text ]

[21] Wilson ( Scholars , n. 7, 100, 111-13) collects evidence that Photius had indeedread some classical poetry at school; B. Baldwin ('Photius and poetry', BMGS 4,1978, 9-14) argues for deliberate exclusion of poetic texts from the Bibliotheca.Arethas claimed in a letter that 'every schoolboy' knew Sophocles' Ajax , see S. B.Kougeas, ho Kaisareias Arethas kai to ergon autou (1913) 142. (I am indebted toPat Easterling for this reference.) [ return to text ]

[22] Ed. Dyck (n. 8). [ return to text ]

[23] Ed. R. Browning, 'A Byzantine treatise on tragedy' (Acta UniversitatisCarolinae, Prague 1963) 67-81 (= Studies , n. 2, XI); cf. Wilson, Scholars (n. 7)
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t22http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t21http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t20http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t19http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t18http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t17http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t16http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t15http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t14http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t13http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t12http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t11http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t10http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t9http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t8


9/16



177f. [ return to text ]

[24] Dyck (n. 8) 33. On this metre, which is specifically associated with works forthe imperial family, see Michael Jeffreys, 'The Nature and Origins of ByzantinePolitical Verse', Dumbarton Oaks Papers 28 (1974) 141-95. [ return to text ]

[25] Dyck (n. 8) on 16ff. [ return to text ]

[26] See R. Browning, 'Ignace le diacre et la tragdie classique Byzance', Revuedes tudes grecques 80 (1968) 401-10 (= Studies , n. 2, XIV) for revival of interest

in tragedy in Byzantium in the 9th c., noting the reservations of Wilson, 'Books andreaders' (n. 20) 14f. [ return to text ]

[27] Andrew R. Dyck, ' Psellus tragicus : observations on Chronographia 5. 26ff.'Byzantinsche Forschungen 20 (1994) 269-90. See further below, section III. [ returnto text ]

[28] Usefulness is a regular motive for scribal comment and for selection from textsfrom the earliest period of classical scholarship, see (recently) Pat Easterling,'Menander: loss and survival', in Stage Directions: essays in honour of E. W.Handley , Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies Suppl. 66 (1995)153-60 at154-6, 160. Photius' Lexicon was compiled on this principle, and the opening wordsof Psellus' essay on Euripides and George of Pisidia comment on the usefulness of these authors, see below, section II. [ return to text ]

[29] Cf. Browning, 'Enlightenment' (n. 2) 10. [ return to text ]

[30] For the question in elementary education, see Mango, Empire (n. 5) 127.Christian collections are discussed by J. Haldon, 'The works of Anastasius of Sinai: akey source for the history of seventh-century east Mediterranean society andbelief', in (edd.) A. Cameron and L. I. Conrad, The Byzantine and early Islamic Near East: I Problems in the literary source material (Studies in Late Antiquity and EarlyIslam 1, Princeton 1992) 107-47 at 116-25. See also n. 17 on Photius' Quaestiones

Amphilochiae . [ return to text ]

[31] Examples collected by Dyck (n. 8) 52; cf. Browning, 'Treatise' (n. 23) 71, id.'Enlightenment' (n. 2) 9f. In the case of Psellus' commentary in political verse onthe biblical 'Song of Songs', it has been argued that there is no reason to doubt thatPsellus was answering an actual question from the emperor, 'What pious

conclusions can be drawn from that difficult book?', see Jeffreys (n. 24) 164; a workin political verse, however, is aimed at a rather different audience from the literaryessays, see Jeffreys' discussion. [ return to text ]

[32] So Dyck (n. 8) 71. On the opening section, see n. 42. [ return to text ]

[33] For example, Dyck (n. 8, 72) notes that Psellus confuses the Elements and theSeasons in referring to George's poetry. [ return to text ]

[34] Aristophanes was intensely studied almost continuously throughout antiquityas an exponent of the Attic dialect, although Wealth and Clouds were more widelyread than Frogs , see K. J. Dover, Aristophanic Comedy (Berkeley 1972) 224-9. Thehistory of competitions and of literary comparisons ( synkriseis ) between authors,also relevant to the genre of this work, is discussed by Dyck (n. 8) 27-9. [ return totext ]

[35] A. Pertusi ( Giorgio di Pisidia poemi I: panegirici epici , Studia Patristica etByzantina, Heft 7, Ettal 1960, 30f., 50) doubted whether Psellus had read mucheither of Euripides or of George. [ return to text ]

[36] Cod. Vat. Barb. gr. 240 (n. 8) preserves a series of treatises by Psellus: Dyck(n. 8) 26. The text is written on paper in an irregular and abbreviated hand whichsuggests that the copy was made for practical use rather than as a luxury item.[return to text ]

[37] Cf. n. 28. [ return to text ]

[38] Lines 8-11, tr. Dyck. [ return to text ]

[39] Although Psellus' citation of material on Aeschylus and Euripides indicatesknowledge of comparisons ( synkriseis ) between poets, he does not himself makedirect comparisons either in this essay or the one on Heliodorus and Achilles Tatius,but treats each author separately. [ return to text ]
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t39http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t38http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t37http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t36http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t35http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t34http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t33http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t32http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t31http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t30http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t29http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t28http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t27http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t26http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t25http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t24http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t23


10/16



[40] The damage probably goes back to the seventeenth century, since Leo Allatiusdid not include the conclusion in his extracts from the text: Dyck (n. 8) 25. [ returnto text ]

[41] Other arguments are adduced by Dyck (n. 8) 34-6. [ return to text ]

[42] Cf . Wilson, Scholars (n. 7) 178 'Psellos apparently lapses into florid verbiage,which will not be redeemed even if one day a less damaged text isrecovered.'[ return to text ]

[43] Also paraded in the essay on John Chrysostom, see Dyck (n. 8) on 3-4 and135. The information may have come from the Suda. [ return to text ]

[44] Line 64. The biographical tradition gives a total of 92, of which 78, 77 or 68were said to have been preserved: see Dyck ad loc. [ return to text ]

[45] Poetics 1453a29f. Plutarch describes how the tyrant Alexander of Pherae wasmoved to tears by one of Euripides' Trojan tragedies, see J. Mossman, Wild Justice(Oxford 1995) 218f. But he was not, of course, an Athenian. Xenophon ( Symposium3. 11) mentions the ability of the 5th/4th-century actor Kallippides to evokeaudience tears, but evidence for audience response is very limited, see A. Pickard-Cambridge The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (2nd ed., rev. J. Gould and D. M.Lewis, Oxford 1968) 274-8. [ return to text ]

[46] Chron. 5. 40. See Dyck (n. 27) 281-7. [ return to text ]

[47] For tragic patterning in prose biography, see Judith Mossman, 'Tragedy andepic in Plutarch's Alexander ', Journal of Hellenic Studies 108 (1988) 83-93,qualifying the arguments of P. De Lacy, 'Biography and tragedy in Plutarch',

American Journal of Philology 73 (1952) 159-71. De Lacy noted the censorious toneof Plutarch's allusions to tragedy, which is criticised, among other things, for itsfalse material, a view associated with Platonic ideas. Psellus, on the other hand,despite his own Platonic leanings, commends Euripides' veracity: '[the Athenians]fancied they beheld the spoken word as living action', lines 67f., tr. Dyck. (I amgrateful to Pat Easterling for drawing my attention to these articles.) [ return to text ]

[48] The anonymous treatise on tragedy (n. 23) also deals with the parts of tragedy(secs. 1, 4) . The ultimate source is probably Aritstole's Poetics : Dyck (n. 8) 58. Thispassage degenerates into banality, and it might be charitable to suspect the

intrusion of a scholiast's note. [ return to text ][49] The comparison is already implicit in the suggestion (line 34) that one mightprefer Sophocles to Euripides. [ return to text ]

[50] Lines 54-7. 'Dignity' is already associated with Aeschylean style at Frogs 1004,1061. [ return to text ]

[51] Articulated by M. Griffith in The Authenticity of Prometheus Bound (Cambridge1977), and in his commentary on the play (Cambridge 1983). [ return to text ]

[52] 'Without being, as it were, an initiate, one would not understand his mysteries'(lines 63-4). Persae is specifically singled out. [ return to text ]

[53] Wilson, Scholars (n. 7) 112. [ return to text ]

[54] But at line 37 two apparently contrasting qualities are both associated withEuripides, who is described as 'sometimes taking the lead in other forms of graceand dignity'. [ return to text ]

[55] On Literary Composition 11; see Dyck (n. 8) 62f. [ return to text ]

[56] For comparison with the letter, see Dyck (n. 8) on 88-89. Tragedy treatise (n.23) sec. 5: Euripides uses the chromatic and was the first to use polychords, bothmarks of the new style in music; in general he shows the greatest metrical variety.See Winnington-Ingram's commentary 74-8. [ return to text ]

[57] Dyck (n. 8) on 90. Euripides does not, however, attempt to reproduce thePhrygian dialect in the Orestes. [return to text ]

[58] 'Propriety' (to prepon) is a standard ancient literary-critical tool: Dionysius of Halicarnassus On Literary Composition is particularly concerned with the topic, e.g.20 'Propriety is a necessary concomitant to all the rest. Any work which is lackingherein lacks, if not its whole effect, at least the most important part of it.'; propriety
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t57http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t56http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t55http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t54http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t53http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t52http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t51http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t50http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t49http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t48http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t47http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t46http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t45http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t44http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t43http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t42http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t41http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t40


11/16



is later defined as 'what suits the persons or actions to be handled'. Tr. D. A. Russellin D. A. Russell and M. Winterbottom, Ancient Literay Criticism (Oxford 1972) 334f.[return to text ]

[59] Wilson ( Scholars , n. 7, 179) suggests that Psellus was genuinely moved by thescene. Judith Mossman has kindly drawn my attention to Theon, Progymnasmata ii.60. 29-30 (Spengel), 'we censure Euripides because his Hecuba philosophises out of turn' (discussing prosopopoeia ): this may allude to much earlier criticism of thisscene. [ return to text ]

[60] Cf. Easterling (n. 28) 160 on rejection of material tied to a particular context infavour of the universally applicable as a criterion for selection from a text(discussing Menandrean maxims). [ return to text ]

[61] See Michael Whitby and Mary Whitby, Chronicon Paschale 284-628 AD(Translated Texts for Historians vol. 7, Liverpool 1989) ix-xiv. [ return to text ]

[62] The panegyrical poems are edited by Pertusi (n. 35). Other major poems areto be found in Patrologia Graeca vol. 92. [ return to text ]

[63] Evidence relating to George's career and writing is collected by Pertusi (n. 35)11-16. [ return to text ]

[64] So Pertusi (n. 35) 14f., 49-67. Cf. id. 'Dei poemi perduti di Giorgio di Pisidia', Aevum 30 (1956) 395-427. The 11th-century cod. Paris. suppl. gr. 690 containsGeorge's Hexaemeron , but not the poem Against Severus , to which Psellus alludes:see further below. [ return to text ]

[65] On the material in Theophanes, see J. Howard-Johnston, 'The official history of Heraclius' Persian campaigns', in (ed.) E. Dabrowa, The Roman and Byzantine Army in the East (Krakow 1994) 57-85, who argues that George himself composed ahybrid prose/verse history of Heraclius' campaigns. [ return to text ]

[66] This poem has a much more extensive manuscript tradition than George'sother works, partly because it was for a time mistakenly attributed to Cyril of Alexandria, but also because its Creation theme gave it a much wider appeal, seePertusi, 'Poemi perduti' (n. 64) 402-5, 408f. [ return to text ]

[67] An explicit contrast with the variety required in drama appears to be made in a

damaged sentence (lines 103-4), but Psellus is not, it seems, critical of George (afurther reason for thinking that he ultimately judged George more highly). Ninetyhexameters On the Mortal Life are also attributed to George, but are unknown to orignored by Psellus, see Dyck (n. 8) on 101-2. [ return to text ]

[68] George's euphony (of diction) is again commended at line 110, whereasAeschylus and Sophocles were criticised for lack of euphony at 56f. (The Greekword used is slightly different in each case.) [ return to text ]

[69] For this phenomenon in George's panegyrical poems, see M. Marcovich, Three-word Trimeter in Greek Tragedy (Beitrge zur klassischen Philologie, Heft 158,Knigstein/Ts. 1984) 199. His ratios of 1/90.5 (panegyrics) and 1/118(Hexaemeron ) are much higher than those for Euripides (1/279.4), and closer toPsellus himself (1/44): see Marcovich 160-5. [ return to text ]

[70] Cf. J. D. C. Frendo, 'The significance of technical terms in the poems of Georgeof Pisidia', Orpheus 21 (1974) 45-55 at 54f.: the most striking single feature aboutGeorge's poetry is his use of words previously confined to prose. A similar 'artless'style was admired in Menander by the rhetorician Hermogenes, see Easterling (n.28) 154, and cf. Dyck (n.8) on 108-9. [ return to text ]

[71] Contrast the comments on Euripides' use of barbarian speech. In the sixthcentury, the orator Choricius praised his contemporary Procopius of Gaza in similarterms ( Or. 7. 8, 112. 10-15 Foerster-Richtsteig): in his lectures to the young, 'henever let pass a word that was not Attic... nor a syllable that spoilt the rhythm, nora sentence whose construction failed to please the ear.'[ return to text ]

[72] See Wilson, Scholars (n. 7) 169-71. [ return to text ]

[73] It is in fact the Elements, not the Seasons, who are likened to a four-horsecarriage, cf. n. 33. [ return to text ]

[74] See Dyck ad locc. [ return to text ]
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t74http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t73http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t72http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t71http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t70http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t69http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t68http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t67http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t66http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t65http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t64http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t63http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t62http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t61http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t60http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t59http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t58


12/16



[75] Dyck suggests (on 127-30) that Psellus may here be indulging in rhetoricalamplification with the aid of a lexicon, since Pertusi (n. 35, 30f.) found that,although George does on more than one occasion describe battle-scenes, the termschosen by Psellus do not occur in the surviving panegyrics, while several arecharacteristic of classical or Hellenistic battle-descriptions. In view of Psellus'deviation from the original in the other examples, it is likely that he was amplifyinghalf-remembered material, but it is also possible that he had read panegyricalpoems of George which are now lost. [ return to text ]

[76] J. D. C. Frendo, 'Special aspects of the use of medical vocabulary in the poemsof George of Pisidia', Orpheus 22 (1975) 49-56; A. Littlewood, 'The midwifery of Michael Psellos', in Mullett and Scott (n. 5) 136-42. [ return to text ]

[77] Dyck (n. 8) ad loc., Wilson, Scholars (n. 7) 161f. [ return to text ]

[78] See Dyck ad locc. [ return to text ]

[79] And incidentally corroborates the belief that George was to be acclaimed thevictor. [ return to text ]

[80] Cf. Littlewood (n. 76) 136: 'A distinctive feature of the Byzantines' imitation of classical literature is the tension between the desire to exhibit a fluent familiaritywith ancient models and the compulsion to demonstrate an ability to create newvariations of these same models,...'. Wilson 'Books' (n. 20) 11 comments onSymeon Metaphrastes' verbose elaboration of saints' lives; cf. id. Scholars (n. 7)167 on Psellus' essay on Symeon. [ return to text ]

[81] Demosthenes: Exp. Pers. ii. 1, Heraclias i. 93. Galen: Heraclias ii. 41. Proclus:Hex. 60, 75, 78. [ return to text ]

[82] Pertusi ('Poemi perduti', n. 64, 396) suspected that allusions to the tragedianswere derived from gnomological collections. Wilson ('Books', n. 20, 5) is notconfident that the sixth-century historian Agathias had read much Euripides. On thelimits of Agathias' knowledge even of Herodotus and Thucydides, see AverilCameron, 'Herodotus and Thucydides in Agathias', Byzantinische Zeitschrift 57(1964) 33-52=ead. Continuity and change in sixth-century Byzantium (London1981) II. (I am grateful to a referee for drawing my attention to this article.)[return to text ]

[83] Pertusi (n. 35, 38 n.1) noted at least seven allusions to Euripides in thepanegyrical poems, as opposed to two to Aeschylus and one to Sophocles. Thefigure for Euripidean allusion is higher even than that for Homer (5 instances), butin all cases the count is very low. [ return to text ]

[84] One allusion to Suppl. 508 ( Exp. Pers. iii. 52f) and one to Hel. 514 ( Exp. Pers.iii. 181): both are of a gnomic character, and the latter is not particularly close. SeeR. M. Piccione, 'Sulle citazioni euripidee in Stobeo e sulla struttura dell'

Anthologion ', Rivista di filologica 122 (1994) 175-218. Piccione notes Stobaeus'high proportion of citations from the nine alphabetical plays, and even more(approximately three-quarters) from plays now lost. (I am grateful to Pat Easterlingfor drawing my attention to this article.) [ return to text ]

[85] See n. 69. [ return to text ]

[86] See nn. 70, 76. Pertusi (n. 35, 39-43) noted in addition George's extensive useof rare and unique words, which were influential on later writers. [ return to text ]

[87] On George's use of rhyme, see Pertusi (n. 35) 45-7, who notes that it is aphenomenon of sixth- seventh-century religious poetry and prose homiletic. Theorator Gorgias was the most famous exponent of rhthymic and rhyming prose; seefurther J. D. Denniston, Greek Prose Style (Oxford 1952) 135f. [ return to text ]

[88] At Hexaemeron 1891 a relatively rare verb (stomo) is used in a sense knownelsewhere only in Euripides ('fence'), see LSJ s.v. IV, and cf. Mary Whitby, 'The Devilin Disguise: the end of George of Pisidia's Hexaemeron reconsidered', JHS 115(1995) 125 n. 45. [ return to text ]

[89] Pertusi (n. 35, 39f.) highlights the hazards of this kind of investigation. [ returnto text ]

[90] P. E. Bouvy (quoted by Pertusi, n. 35, 43) suggested that George tookEuripides as a metrical model. R. J. H. Jenkins ('The Hellenistic origins of Byzantine
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t89http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t88http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t87http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t86http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t85http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t84http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t83http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t82http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t81http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t80http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t79http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t78http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t77http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t76http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t75


13/16



literature', DOP 17, 1963, 37-52 at 41) stated bluntly that George's iambics aremodelled on the Euripidean rhesis ; some clarification is provided by his subsequentcomment (42), 'he might borrow his forms from what he understood of Euripides;but...'. [ return to text ]

[91] Cf. D. Feeney, 'Criticism ancient and modern', in (edd.) D. Innes, H. Hine, C.Pelling, Ethics and Rhetoric (Oxford 1995) 301-12 on the inadequacy of ancienttools of criticism and the problem of finding an adequate critical approach to ancienttexts. Metrical and stylistic analysis of late antique hexameter poetry was pioneeredby A. Wifstrand, Von Kallimachos zu Nonnos (Publications of the New Society of Letters 16, Lund 1933). [ return to text ]

[92] Valuable work was done in the metrical field at the beginning of this century bythe Pole Leo Sternbach ( Rozprawy Akademii Umiejetnosci , Wydzial filologiczny Ser.ii, tom. xv, Krakow 1900, 259-96), who first gave serious scholarly attention toGeorge of Pisidia, and many of his conclusions still stand. See further Paul Maas,'Der byzantinische Zwlfsilber', BZ 12 (1903) 278-323, esp. 289f. 321 (revised inKleine Schriften , Munich 1973, 242-88); Pertusi (n. 35) 43-5; M. West, Greek Metre(Oxford 1982) 177-80, 182-5; R. Romano, 'Teoria e prassi della versificazione: ildodecasillabo nei Panegirici epici di Giorgio di Pisidia', BZ 78 (1985) 1-22. [ return totext ]

[93] Accents are regulated at the line-end and before the caesura, see Pertusi (n.35) 43-5, West (n. 92) 184, Romano (n. 92). Romano gives a figure of 81.9%

paroxytone verse-endings in the panegyrical poems. [ return to text ][94] Pertusi (n. 35) 44 (two instances of 15-syllable lines in the Hexaemeron );Romano (n. 92). [ return to text ]

[95] Sternbach (n. 92, 289-91) found George's technique in handling tribrachs anddactyls comparable only to Euripides, not to Sophocles or Aeschylus: cf. Dyck (n. 8)on 4-6. [ return to text ]

[96] Although, of course, our sample for Euripides is much bigger than it is for hispredecessors, Aeschylus and Sophocles generally show less variation: see thediscussion of West (n. 92) 85-8. [ return to text ]

[97] Romano (n. 92) 10: increased preference for lines accented on the secondsyllable from the end (paroxytone). [ return to text ]

[98] See n. 56. Euripides' new-fangled musical ideas are satirised in Aristophanes'Frogs . [ return to text ]

[99] George's adoption of the iambic metre for panegyric, as opposed to thetraditional hexameter, is his most striking innovation. Euripides is central toAristophanic and Aristotelian criticism of tragedy, while George became a model forcomposers of iambics (Wilson, Scholars , n. 7, 187; Dyck, n. 8, 35) and was singledout by Psellus. [ return to text ]
http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t99http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t98http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t97http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t96http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t95http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t94http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t93http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t92http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t91http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/CC96/whitby.htm#t90


14/16




15/16




16/16



Michael Psellus on Euripides and George of Pisidia

Documents

Transcript of Michael Psellus on Euripides and George of Pisidia