Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 295

BYZANTINE AUTHORS. LITERARY ACTIVITIES AND PREOCCUPATIONS

THE

MEDIEVAL MEDITERRANEAN

PEOPLES, ECONOMIES AND CULTURES, 400-1500

EDITORS

Hugh Kennedy (St. Andrews) Paul Magdalino (St. Andrews) David Abulafia (Cambridge) Benjamin Arbel (Tel Aviv) Mark Meyerson (Toronto) Larry J. Simon (Western Michigan University)

VOLUME 49

B enjamin A rbel (Tel Aviv) M ark M eyerson (Toronto) L arry J. S imon

BYZANTINE AUTHORS:

LITERARY ACTIVITIES AND PREOCCUPATIONS

Texts and Translations dedicated to the Memory of Nicolas Oikonomides

EDITED BY

JOHN W. NESBITT

and Translations dedicated to the Memory of Nicolas Oikonomides EDITED BY JOHN W. NESBITT BRILL LEIDEN

BRILL

LEIDEN BOSTON

2003

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Byzanthine authors : texts and translations dedicated to the memory of Nicolas Oikonomides / edited by John W. Nesbitt. p. cm. – (The Medieval Mediterranean ; v. 49) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 90-04-12975-8 1. Byzantine prose literature–Translations into English. I. Oikonomides, Nicolas. II. Nesbitt, John W. III. Series.

PA5196.E54B98 2003

888’.020808–dc21

ISSN

0928–5520

ISBN

90 04 12975 8

2003045164

© Copyright 2003 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Brill provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910 Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change.

printed in the netherlands

Preface

TABLE OF CONTENTS

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

vii

Chapter One—Cosmological Confectionary and Equal opportunity in the Eleventh Century. An Ekphrasis by Christopher of Mitylene

.

(Poem

Paul Magdalino

42) .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

1

Chapter Two—Two Teaching Texts from the Twelfth-Century

.

Orphanotropheion Timothy S. Miller

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. 9

Chapter Three—Alexander the Monk’s Text of Helena’s Discovery of

the

Cross (BHG 410)

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

23

John W. Nesbitt

 

Chapter Four—Elias the Monk. Friend of Psellos George T. Dennis

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

43

Chapter Five—Five Miracles of St. Menas John Duffy/Emmanuel Bourbouhakis

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

65

Chapter Six—Elias of Heliopolis. The Life of an Eighth-Century

Syrian Christian Saint Stamatina McGrath

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

85

Chapter Seven—Two Military Orations of Constantine Eric McGeer

 

111

Chapter Eight—A Byzantine Instructional Manual on Siege Defense:

The De Obsidione toleranda. Introduction, English Translation and

Annotations

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

139

Denis Sullivan

 

Bibliography

 

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

267

Index

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

279

This page intentionally left blank

PREFACE

This volume was born from a wish to honor the memory of a man who was for many of the contributors both a mentor and a friend. From this wish evolved the idea of publishing a group of texts and translations. The authors were free to choose their texts and as a result the contributions are of varying length and content. The longest, the De obsidione toleran- da (chapter eight), is a military manual, an instruction booklet on tech- niques of countering the investment of a town or fort. The publication of Prof. Sullivan’s translation provides the opportunity to reprint the (Brill) Greek text of 1947. In contrast with defensive tactics, the two orations (chapter seven) which Dr. McGeer has translated reflect on imperial mil- itary policy and the outward expansion of Byzantium into Moslem terri- tories. Dr. McGrath (chapter 6) has translated a text which offers a glimpse of the precarious nature of the practice of Christianity within the borders of Islam. In a much lighter vein are Prof. Magdalino’s translation of an ekphrasis (chapter one) celebrating the merits of a cake decorated with signs of the zodiac and Prof. Dennis’s translations of letters of Psellos (chapter 4) describing the ribald doings of a monk named Elias. Dr. Nesbitt’s text (chapter 3) on Helena’s discovery of the cross is offered as a contribution to the history of pilgrimage. Prof. Miller’s texts (chap- ter 2) provide a valuable insight into the educational activities of the Orphanotropheion of St. Paul and the teaching techniques in vogue among instructors at this orphanage. Prof. Duffy and his student have contributed a hagiographical text relating some five miracles of the pop- ular Egyptian saint, St. Menas. The volume presents a wide spectrum of literary genres and topics which claimed the attention of Byzantine writers and their reading public. The editor gratefully acknowledges the help of Dr. McGrath in resolv- ing computer-related problems. He also wishes to thank Dr. McGrath, and his wife Carla, for help with proofreading. Thanks are also expressed to Dr. Karen Rasmussen for her patience in formatting this book and preparing the Adobe Acrobat version from which it is printed.

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER ONE

This page intentionally left blank

COSMOLOGICAL CONFECTIONERY AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN THE ELEVENTH CENTURY. AN EKPHRASIS BY CHRISTOPHER OF MITYLENE (POEM 42)

Paul Magdalino

Although published a century ago, the poems of Christopher of Mitylene deserve to be better known for their rich information on the realities and mentalities of Byzantine secular society. 1 A short article by Nikos Oikonomides remains the best introduction to this material. 2 It therefore seems fitting that a collection of translations dedicated to Nikos’ memo- ry should include one of Christopher’s least known and more unusual pieces. 3 As an ekphrasis, or rhetorical description, it is singular in three ways: in describing a piece of confectionery, in celebrating a work of art by a woman, and in attesting to a type of representation which is hardly ever encountered in Byzantine art of the medieval period.

in a circle the Zodiac in dough, to his cousin

I saw the heavens as works of your fingers. For from modest but smooth dough, you have stretched out the heavens for us like a curtain, 4 and you have adorned it with houses of the stars. By houses I mean the double sextet of the Zodiac, which you have put forward as symbols of the virtues and passions, most vividly for all people: Leo for the manly, Taurus for the savage, Gemini for fornicators 5 and Virgo for the conti- nent, Cancer for the twisted, most fittingly, Libra for the just, and Sagittarius for the malevolent. Capricorn is for those whose bed has been dishonoured, while for the senseless, Aries is wisely chosen. Aquarius is appropriate to the dropsical, speechless Pisces to all quiet types, and Scorpio to all stinging slanderous tongues. These are the houses of the wandering stars. Two trios of duck eggs keep the exact shape of the Pleiades, while the hens’ eggs you may understand as the planets, Mercury, Moon, Sun and Jupiter, Venus, Mars and Saturn too, for though

1 Ed. Kurtz (1903) from MS Grottaferrata Z. a.29

2 Oikonomides (1990).

3 Ed. Kurtz (1903) no.42, 23-6; Italian translation with short introduction by Milazzo (1983).

4 Psalm 103: 2.

5 This is presumably an allusion to the use of the word ‘twins’ (d¤dumoi) to mean testicles.

2

PAUL MAGDALINO

they may be fixed and established, they are still seven in number. Of the five larger eggs, the middle one is to be taken as the star of Orion, for Scorpio aspects him diametrically, signifying the ancient wound just as it happened. 6 But the other four acquire a novel significance. For the four positions of the four eggs are a most exact fourfold fixation of the four cardinal points, of the ascendant, that is the east, of the setting, that is dusky evening, of the meridian, that is mid-day, and the anti-meridian, the northern quarter. The eggs themselves signify the foursome of winds, blowing from the four points of heaven. 7 For Zephyr comes out of the west, Apeliotes from the eastern parts, while Notos proceeds from the south, and as for the Arctic wind, even if explanation falls silent, the very name shows whence it blows. What then of the quartet of pastry finials which cap the eggs? This is the quartet of seasons in the sky, for as the wise rhapsody bears witness, the seasons dwell at the gates of heaven. I would even have seen here what the starless sphere of heaven looks like, were it not completely invisible to mortal men; for it is fashioned and is present here, but is not seen: that is its nature. So wise and resourceful in her mind is the creator of this new sky. O all wise Providence of God the Word, what arts you bestow even upon women, what minds you implant in them too! Others may talk of men like Pheidias, Zeuxis indeed and Parrasios, Polygnotos the actually unknown, Polykleitos who rather is inglorious, and Aglaophon of the murky intellect, even the resourceful hands of Daidalos: it is all trash and bombast, nothing any more. But let the script admire the novel art-works of all women, saying, ‘Who gave to female nature a consummate knowledge of textiles, and every aspect of the science of embroidery?’ 8 Not wishing to go in for mass generaliza- tion, I would rather marvel at the art of one woman, who has skilfully given me such a work to behold. But you, O glory of virgin women, I wish to address you yourself: if you make these things out of flour and dough, what, I want to know, will you make with warp and woof? But as one can learn from what you have crafted, you would indeed in the art of weaving also surpass all Penelopes and Helens, amen I say unto thee, and women of Lesbos too.

The poem evokes a loaf or cake sculpted with representations of the twelve signs of the Zodiac, and studded with eighteen eggs, from differ-

6 Aratos, Phaenomena 634-46 (Martin ed., pp. 38-9) tells a version of the myth of Artemis and Orion, according to which the the goddess killed the huntsman, in revenge for violating her, by setting a scorpion on him; this explains why the constellation of Orion sets when that of Scorpio rises.

7 Iliad V.749.

8 Cf. Job 38: 36.

COSMOLOGICAL CONFECTIONERY

3

ent birds and of different sizes, symbolising the Pleiades, the seven plan- ets known to the ancient and medieval world (the moon, Mercury, Venus, the sun, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn), the star of Orion, and the four cardi- nal points. It is not clear that all the symbolism expounded by the poet was intended by the confectioner, and this makes the confection some- what difficult to visualise in detail. Nevertheless, since the representa- tions of the Zodiac appear to be unambiguous, it is reasonable to suppose that they formed a band around the rim of a circle of baked dough, with eggs set before the figures of Aries, Cancer, Libra and Capricorn; these eggs were surmounted with crusts, which were probably fashioned in the form of personifications of the four seasons. Bread decorated with eggs is attested in Byzantium by the twelfth- century canonist Theodore Balsamon, in his commentary on canon 23 of the Council in Trullo. Balsamon records that one Easter, at a village in Thrace, he observed the local peasants, both men and women, coming to the parish church after vespers and presenting the priest with gifts of food which included “birds’ eggs set together in bread dough” (metå Ùrniye¤vn »«n §n zÊm˙ êrtou sunhnvm°nvn). 9 Such loaves are still baked as part of traditional Easter fare in Modern Greece. Another tradi- tional practice, though more associated with weddings than with Easter, is the confection of ornamental loaves encrusted with finely-wrought fig- ures, foliage and other designs. In recent practice, the two types of con- fection are not combined, being made for different occasions, and with different types of dough, baked to a different finish in each case. The Easter bread tends to be simply shaped, with braiding the most elaborate form of ornamentation, and it is soft enough to eat, whereas the wedding bread is baked hard almost to the consistency of plaster of Paris. Almost as unusual as the medium of representation is the design itself. Although the artistic representation of the Zodiac was well established in the secular culture which Byzantium inherited from antiquity, surviving examples are very rare, and Christopher of Mitylene’s poem is the only literary attestation. Of the two extant zodiacal cycles earlier than the thir- teenth century, one is part of a complex celestial diagram illustrating an eighth-century manuscript of Ptolemy’s Handy Tables (Vat.gr.1291); the diagram has a precise astronomical significance, which, however, con- tinues to elude satisfactory explanation. 10 The other representation is depicted on the opus sectile floor of the katholikon of the Pantokrator

9 Ed. Rallis and Potlis, vol. II (1852) 355; cf. Koukoules (1955) 161.

10 For the date, see Wright (1985) 355-62; for the diagram, see Tihon (1993) 194-200. On fol. 2 v of the same manuscript is a miniature representing the northern celestial hemisphere with half the zodiac (Aries to Virgo).

4

PAUL MAGDALINO

monastery. 11 Executed c. 1130, it is closer to the work described in our ekphrasis not only in date, but also in its inclusion of the four seasons, depicted in personification at the four cardinal points. The rarity of the zodiacal cycle in Byzantine art is possibly to be explained by the church’s condemnation of astrology, although the Zodiac had been thoroughly tamed for Judaeo-Christian use, 12 and rep- resentation of it did not necessarily serve an astrological agenda; in itself, it could signify the solar year or stand as a two-dimensional symbol of the heavenly spheres. It is evidently in this non-astrological sense that Christopher of Mitylene chooses to interpret his cousin’s handiwork. He assigns no qualities or influences to the planets, and while he alludes to their zodiacal houses, he does not comment on the association between planetary positions and zodiacal signs which was the essence of astrolo- gy, and he does not even specify the locations of the eggs representing the planets on the loaf. The moral attributes which he attaches to the zodiacal signs are based on a facile and obvious symbolism that has noth- ing to do with astrological doctrine. He ignores the astrologers’ classifi- cation of signs into male and female, diurnal and nocturnal, hot and cold, 13 and he does not imply that people are born under the signs whose qualities they exhibit. In another poem (no. 92), where Christopher prais- es the beauty of the night sky, he likens the stars to angels praising God. The author seems less concerned with the cosmological significance than with the artistry of the work he describes. The point of his poem is to praise a novel work of art, novel because it is fashioned from every- day foodstuffs, and by a woman. The point is emphasised by the rhetor- ical synkrisis with famous ancient artists — a topos of ekphrasis which Christopher here puts to doubly subversive use. Instead of citing the great exempla from antiquity as models to be emulated, he derides and dismisses them. This was a common device of Christian homiletic, yet the contrast which Christopher draws is not between the outdated absurd- ities of pagan mythology and the revealed truth of Christianity, but between the inflated reputations of dead males and the unsung but tangi- ble achievements of living women. One should be wary of reading fem- inist sentiment into a piece of stylish rhetorical inversion by a male author of the eleventh century, whose works also include a poem cele- brating the artistic genius of the spider, complete with an ekphrasis of the spider’s web (no. 122). However, Christopher does not confine his atten- tion to one domestic example or to the domain of home baking, but uses

11 Ousterhout (2001) 133-50, esp. 144-6.

12 Hübner (1983).

13 Bouché-Leclercq (1899), ch. 5.

COSMOLOGICAL CONFECTIONERY

5

the art of one woman to exemplify the skill of all women as producers of finely woven and embroidered textiles. Unfortunately, it is not clear from his brief allusions whether he he is referring to domestic production, or to the more commercial and guild-based manufacture which is implied in the description by his contemporary, Michael Psellos, of the festival of Agathe: the yearly occasion, on 12 May, when the women involved in the carding, spinning, and weaving of wool and linen gathered for a religious ceremony followed by dancing. 14 It is also unclear whether he is thinking only of wool and linen textiles, or also envisages the manufacture of the high-quality silks for which Byzantium was famous. 15 The elevated ter- minology which he uses to describe female expertise – the knowledge (gn«siw) of textiles, the science (§pistÆmh) of embroidery, the art (t°xnh) of weaving – would seem appropriate to artefacts at the top of the range. The tenth-century Book of the Eparch mentions women engaged in the silk industry, and women were prominent among the silk- weavers of Thebes in the twelfth century. A cautiously feminist reading of the ekphrasis is appropriate to both the period and the author. The eleventh century was a time when imperi- al women were especially important on the political scene, and their prominence was recorded by two historians, Michael Psellos and Anna Comnena, who both in their different ways clearly found it remarkable. 17 Psellos also wrote three gender-specific works which are key sources for the role and image of women in Byzantine society: his funeral orations on his mother and adopted daughter, Styliane, 18 and the text on the festi- val of Agathe, which provides a unique aperçu of a public event organ- ised by and for women. Yet for all his insight and interest, Psellos’ view of women’s place in society shows a condescension which we do not find in Christopher of Mitylene, either in the ekphrasis we have examined or in his other poems concerning women (nos. 52, 57, 61, 66-7, 70, 75-7, 81, 140). Psellos says that his mother was second to none at weaving, but had little time for it; “she was terribly annoyed that she did not have a male nature, and that it was not possible for her to converse fearlessly with letters”. 19 As for Styliane, he says, one must not imagine that because she was literate, she neglected her “womens’ work” of weaving

14 Ed. Sathas, vol. 5 (1876) 527-31; Laiou (1986) 111-22.

15 On Byzantine silk and other textile production, see in general the chapters by A. Muthesius and G. Dagron in Laiou (2002); Jacoby (1991-2) 452-500; Kaplan (1998) 313-27.

16 Leo VI, Liber Praefecti 7.2 (Koder ed., p. 100); John Tzetzes, Epistulae 101-2; Choniates 74, 98.

17 See in general Hill, James, Smythe (1994) 215-29; Hill (1999).

18 Ed. Sathas (1876) 3-61, 62-87; cf. Leroy-Molinghen (1969) 155-63.

19 Ed. Sathas 7.

6

PAUL MAGDALINO

and embroidery. 20 Unlike Psellos, Christopher of Mitylene is not writing from the lofty perspective of the philosopher, 21 but approaches mundane, material reality for its own sake and on its own terms. Although his poems are educated and elegant commentaries on everyday life, they draw simple morals and do not strain to relate their subject-matter to higher levels of meaning or of being. He does not need to relativise the artistic achievements of contemporary women, because it is enough for him to reflect the real value their products were accorded in the home, the market-place and the ceremonial magnificence of the court.

20 Ibid. 66.

21 Psellos makes his philosophical priorities clear in all the minor works cited above, and a recent study argues that they are basic to his writing of history: Kaldellis (1999).

CHAPTER TWO

This page intentionally left blank

TWO TEACHING TEXTS FROM THE TWELFTH-CENTURY ORPHANOTROPHEION

Timothy S. Miller

Vaticanus Palatinus gr. 92 contains a short poem (folios 145 v -46) and a prose essay (folios 207-08) which offer valuable information concerning the Orphanotropheion of Saint Paul, the premier philanthropic institution of Constantinople and, during the twelfth century, one of the capital’s leading educational centers. 1 Although the Orphanotropheion outranked all other charitable institutions of the Byzantine Empire, no typikon has survived which outlines how the orphanage functioned, nor do any extant hagiographical sources describe the buildings, monasteries, and church- es which formed part of this complex institution. 2 To understand how the Orphanotropheion educated its children, organized its administration, and financed its operations, one must ana- lyze a wide variey of sources, from the laws of the emperor Leo I (457- 74) to twelfth-century literary works such as Anna Komnena’s Alexiad. 3 The two texts, published here for the first time, provide new information concerning both the teaching methods used at the orphanage as well as its administrative organization, information which supplements what scholars have gleaned from published sources. Vaticanus Palatinus gr. 92 was copied in the last decades of the thir- teenth century in Southern Italy. It belongs to a large group of manuscripts, which preserve short poems and prose texts used to teach Classical Greek grammar, vocabulary, orthography, and syntax. Some of these short works were extracted from Classical Greek literature, while others were composed by Byzantine teachers to illustrate difficult grammar rules or to introduce unfamiliar vocabulary. 4 Vaticanus Palatinus gr. 92 is unusual among these instructional codices in that, beginning on folio 122 v , it identifies the Byzantine instructors who composed the original poems and prose essays. As Carlo Gallavotti has demonstrated, many of these author/instructors taught in Constantinopolitan schools of the twelfth century. 5 This manuscript iden-

1 For a detailed description of Vat. Pal. gr. 92, see Gallavotti (1983) 21-30.

2 Miller (1994) 83-104.

3 Anna Komnena, Alexiad, 15.7.3-9 (Leib ed. 3.214-18); Prodromos, “Monodie” 1-14.

4 Gallavotti, (1983) 21-30. See also Browning (1976) 21-34.

5 Gallavotti (1983) 24-30.

10

TIMOTHY S. MILLER

tifies the author of the poem on folios 145 v -46 as “Leo of Rhodes” and that of the prose work on folios 207-08 as “of Rhodes”. Since the manu- script identifies no other author as “of Rhodes”, and both of these texts refer to exactly the same issue, we can safely assume that Leo of Rhodes wrote both texts. The poem and the prose work prove that Leo of Rhodes taught at the Orphanotropheion of Saint Paul in Constantinople. This Leo is most likely the same man who became metropolitan of Rhodes sometime before 1166. 6 During the twelfth century, the patriarch of Constantinople and the emper- or often selected metropolitan bishops from among prominent teachers at the Orphanotropheion. The emperor John II (1118-43) confirmed Stephen Skylitzes, one of the leading teachers and eventually director of the orphan school (not the orphanotrophos), as metropolitan of Trebizond. 7 At the end of the twelfth century, Constantine Stilbes attained the metropolitan see of Kyzikos after beginning his career as a catechism teacher at the Orphanotropheion. 8 During the same years, Basil Pediadites taught gram- mar at the orphan school and then advanced to shepherd the metropolitan church of Kerkyra. 9 It would, therefore, not be unusual for a teacher at the Orphanotropheion, like Leo, to receive a promotion to an important see such as Rhodes. 10 Leo wrote both of these texts for teaching. Greek grammar manuscripts, like Vaticanus Palatinus gr. 92, contain many short iambic dodecasyllabic poems such as Leo’s first text. Students used such poems to learn both Classical meters based on vowel length and the more recent stress rhythms used in Byzantine dodecasyllabic poetry. Leo’s second text belongs to a cat- egory of teaching tools called schede. The ancient Greek word schedos meant a riddle or puzzle. In the eleventh century, Michael Psellos used the word to describe a teaching exercise, a short essay that provided examples of difficult words or confusing grammatical constructions from ancient Greek. In the Alexiad, Anna Komnena described students at the Orphanotropheion hard at work recopying schede, exercises she consid- ered to be innovations of her generation. 11 In claiming that schede were a recent innovation, Anna was probably referring to a new type of schedos, associated with Theodore Prodromos and Stephen Skylitzes, both gram-

6 Hierarchia (1988) 1.203.

7 Prodromos, “Monodie” 9-10.

8 Browning (1963) 26-32.

9 Ibid. 20-22.

10 Browning (1976) 25, where Browning assumes that the attribution toË ÑRÒdou refers to the bishop of Rhodes.

11 Anna Komnena, Alexiad 15.7.9 (Leib ed. 3.218).

TWO TEACHING TEXTS

11

mar teachers at the Orphanotropheion. In a recent article, Ioannis Vassis has shown that authors of twelfth-century schede, such as Prodromos, deliberately used misspellings, tricky elisions, and changes in pronunci- ation of both vowels and consonants to give their compositions two or more possible meanings. To determine the correct meaning of such texts, students had to rewrite the schede following the strict rules of Classical Greek pronunciation, orthography, and grammar. 12 It is also possible to classify Leo’s poem as a schedos exercise since it too contains what appears to be a deliberate misspelling. On line 12 the manuscript reads efiw Œw, which would mean “into the ear”, echoing the prÚw Œta of line 11. It could also be recast, however, as ‡svw which in the context makes better sense “so in the same way”. Because of many deliberate misspellings in schede exercises, it is extremely difficult to provide an accurate printed text of such prose com- positions. Should it be presented in its form as a puzzle, or should the mod- ern editor recast the text as the students were supposed to recopy it? 13 As Vassis has shown, Prodromos prepared difficult schede. Fortunately, Leo of Rhodes wrote easier exercises. The prose schedos edited below has only two passages where strange orthography and elisions make the mean- ing unclear. Leo seems to have written this schedos primarily to teach his students to observe proper rules of accentuation and to check carefully for proper breathing marks. 14 Some twelfth-century intellectuals attacked the use of schede. Anna Komnena condemned them as a confusing intertwining of words (plokÆ). Both John Tzetzes and Theodore Balsamon used the same term, ploke, to describe the useless complexity of the schedos exercises, as designed by Prodromos and Skylitzes. 15 In place of such schede, Anna Komnena recommended a return to reading the original works of the ancient Greeks. 16 In preparing this edition, I have reproduced both the poem and the prose schedos, found in Vaticanus Palatinus gr. 92. I have included in the

12 Vassis (1993-94) 1-19.

13 Vassis (1993-94) 14-19, where he resolves the problem by presenting the schedos first as transmitted by the manuscript (überlieferte Fassung) and then written out with the errors and contradictions eliminated (entschüsselte Fassung).

14 For example, on folio 207 v , the schedos text has the reading ≥syh eÈfrÒsunon. A review of the forms of afisyãnomai, however, shows that ≥syh does not exist, but if the readerchanges the breathing mark to ¥syh (a change which would not alter the pronunciation of the word), the verb becomes the third-person, singular, aorist, passive of ¥domai, a verb which occasion- ally appears in a construction with a neuter substantive adjective, such as eÈfrÒsunon.

15 Vassis (1993-94) 9-10, and notes 33 and 34.

16 Anna Komnena, Alexiad, 15.7.9 (Leib ed. 3.218). For additional information concerning schede, see Garzya (1974), section VII (pp. 1-14).

12

TIMOTHY S. MILLER

apparatus criticus the words that have been written above the line in smaller letters. The same hand which copied the body of the text appears to have added these superscripted words. The copyist probably included these words to assist students in understanding the text since, in most cases, the superscriptions offer a common synonym for a more obscure Greek word in the text.

THE POEM

Fol. 145 v

NËn oÈ prÚw Ímçw toÁw §n èm¤ll˙ n°ouw oÈd¢ prÚw Ímçw toÁw sunelyÒntaw f¤louw, éllå prÚw aÈtÚn t∞w sxol∞w tÚn prostãthn §jagoreÊv tØn §mØn ékhd¤an.

ToË ÑRÒdou kuroË L°ontow

5

ka‹ tØn ÙdÊnhn §kf°rv t∞w kard¤aw ka‹ pr°sbin aÈtÒn, oÈk ¶xvn ˘ ka‹ drãsv, t“ pammeg¤stƒ poimenãrx˙ prof°rv. k°kmhka ka‹ går proslal«n brefull¤oiw pl°kvn épe›pon toÁw èmillhthr¤ouw.

10

…w oÔn §fãnhw, PaËle, kur¤ou stÒma | l°gvn prÚw Œta t“ sof“ didaskãlƒ. oÏtv per ‡svw tlhpayoÁw éndrÚw xãrin t“ patriãrx˙ frãze t∞w ofikoum°nhw. d¤dajon aÈtÚn toÁw makroÁw §moÁw pÒnouw

15

˜souw én°tlhn s∞w xãrin klhroux¤aw. ékoÊsetai s«n fllar«w prosfyegmãtvn. prosd°jetai sou toÁw lÒgouw éspas¤vw. §nde¤jetai tÚ f¤ltron ˘ prÒw se tr°fei. tÚn går ımo›on o‰da file›n toÁw trÒpouw

20

ka‹ =Êseta¤ me t∞w pikrçw plinyourg¤aw.

4 ékhd¤an] yl¤cin supr. scr. || 6 pr°sbin] parãklhton supr. scr. | aÈtÒn] ka‹ prostãthn supr. scr. || 7 prof°rv] prosp°mpv supr. scr.

8 k°kmhka] épe›pon supr. scr. || 10 …w] kayÉ supr. scr. || 11 didaskãlƒ] XrusostÒmƒ supr. scr. || 12 ‡svw] efiw Œw ms

||

TWO TEACHING TEXTS

13

TRANSLATION

Now, neither to you, the youths in the contest, nor to you, my assembled friends, but to him, the patron of the school,

I confess my apathy,

and I set forth the pain of my heart, and having no <other> course of action,

I present him as my ambassador to the exceedingly great patriarch.

For I am worn out in addressing the tribes of young children, and I renounce my weaving contentious words. Therefore, just as you appeared as the mouth of the Lord, Paul, when you spoke into the ear of the wise teacher [John Chrysostom], so, in the same way, on behalf of a wretched man speak to the ecumenical patriarch. Teach him my long painful labors, as many as I have endured on behalf of your inheritance. He will listen joyfully to your utterances. He will readily accept your words. He will show the affection which he nourishes toward you. For I know that a similar person loves these ways. And he will rescue me from this bitter brick making.

14

TIMOTHY S. MILLER

THE PROSE Schedos

Fol. 207 ToË ÑRÒdou

ÉEpaxy¢w ¶rgon pçsa didaskal¤a, polÁ pl°on d¢ paidodidaskal¤a, to›w d¢ trighrãsasin efis°ti pl°on, ıpo›ow êra kaÉgΔ kayå ka‹ sÁ épofÆn˙ per‹ §moË: ˘ pçn êr˙w, tel« gÉ, Œ ka‹ m°litow ≤d¤vn tª frãsei, dikaiodÒta ka‹ Ùr- fanotrÒfe lamprÒtate, kr¤nv går =ipØn pãlin §n lo|gism“ sunet“ tÚ efikÚw ka‹ énagka›on t«n lÒgvn moi prÚw s¢ épote¤nasyai, ka‹ tolmhr«w §rvt∞sai tosaÊthn [ka‹ dÊnamin] ¶xein §m°, tØn ékmØn ˘w ±nãlvsÉ efiw tÚ leitoÊrghmÉ éteir∞, toËto neËra mØ eÈtux«n. mØ går oÈk ênyrvpÒw tiw §gΔ ·nÉ §park« tosoËton xrÒnon prÚw tÚ mustagvge›n, ≥dh dÉ êskhnow êggelow. miÉ ≤ §mØ oÈs¤a m«n, efi fulãttei tØn ofike¤an fÊsin, t«n épay«n; polloË ge ka‹ de›. ÉEpe‹ oÔn Íp¢r pãntaw o‰syÉ ¶rgon ≥dh §m°, filoiktÒtate, tÚ §paxy¢w t∞w mustagvg¤aw §p‹ xrÒnoiw makro›w §nergÆsanta, ˜ti ka¤ soi, yesp°sie, Œs- mai efiw taÊthn, ˜ti mãlista dejiÚn ¶krinaw metå toË thnikaËta sofoË érxi- poim°now. efi går mÆ, dialanyãnei tÚ makroxrÒnion taÊthw mÉ, e‡kosi talai- pvr¤& §ntaËya d¢ ¶th §st¤tå d¢ t∞w Ífedr¤aw pare¤syvsan. o‰sya går ka‹ aÈtÚw tØn ≤m«n §fore¤an √ diempisteuye‹w metå ka‹ êllvn meg¤stvn érx«n, ìw efi ka‹ y°lv t“ lÒgƒ perilabe›n, ne›mai tr‹w §k kair«n t«n nËn énast°llo- mai. Efiw o‰kton kamfye¤w, sumpay°stat°, moi él°jei, §kkakÆsonti t“ musta- gvge›n. §pikoÊrei ta›w sa›w prÚw tÚn patriãrxhn eÈprosd°ktoiw fvna›w. ka‹

1

ÉEpaxy¢w ¶rgon] fortikÚn prçgma supr. scr. || 2 épofÆn˙] épofπn˙ ms ||

3

˘ pçn] ˜p ín ms et ka‹ fvnØn supr. scr. | êr˙w, tel« gÉ] ka‹ épçr˙w ka‹ Ípãrxv supr.

scr. | ≤d°vn] ka‹ glukÁw supr. scr. || 6 [ka‹ dÊnamin] supr. scr.] dunatÚn ·nÉ ms | ±nãlvsÉ ms] ka‹ kathnãlvsa supr. scr. || 7 éteir∞] éblabØ supr. scr. || 8 êskhnow] ka‹ és≈matow supr. scr. || 9 m«n] ka‹ îra supr. scr. | efi] ka‹ §peidÉ supr. scr. | de›] pr°pei supr. scr. || 10 o‰syÉ] ka‹ gin≈skeiw supr. scr. || 11-12 Œsmai ms] ka‹ §mb¤blhmai supr. scr. || 12 mãlista] ka‹ l¤an supr. scr. || 14 o‰sya] gin≈skeiw supr scr. || 15 §fore¤an] ka‹ tØn §pitÆrhsin supr. scr. | √ ] ka‹ kayÉ supr. scr. | meg¤stvn érx«n] ka‹ §jousi«n

supr. scr. || 16 ne›mai] ka‹ parasxe›n supr. scr. | tr‹w] ka‹ §k tritÒw supr. scr. || 18 él°jei] ka‹ boÆyei supr. scr. | t“] ka‹ t¤ni supr. scr. || 20 e‰ar] ka‹ ¶ar supr. scr. | efiste›nai] ka‹ stena‹ supr. scr. ||

TWO TEACHING TEXTS

15

TRANSLATION

All teaching is difficult work, but especially teaching children, and even more difficult for those who are very old, such as I am, as even you make known concerning me. Everything you happen to take up, I finish, o chief justice (dikaiodotes), sweeter than honey in your diction, and most illustrious orphanotrophos. For, after wise deliberation, I judge it rea- sonable and necessary for me to let my words rush forth to reach you, even daring to ask that I have so much strength, a man who expended the strength of his prime in this unyielding service, a man not fortunate in physical strength. For I am not such a man that I am strong enough to serve so long in this mystagogia, already an incorporeal angel. If my being guards its own nature, it is not one of those who suffer no changes, is it? Not at all! Because you already know, most merciful one, that I have performed beyond all others in the arduous work of the mystagogia for a long peri- od of years, and that I have exerted myself to such an extent in your inter- est, reverent one, you have judged me especially acceptable, together with the wise arch-shepherd [serving] at that time. If not, then I receive no credit for this long service—at this time twenty years of drudgery, omitting the years in subordinate service. For you yourself know our supervisory position with which I was entrusted along with all the other offices. Although I want to include these in the speech, I restrain myself from reciting them most especially at the present moment. Most sympathetic one, protect me, bent down in supplication, since I am exhausted by this mystagogia. Give help with your acceptable appeals to the patriarch. May your meeting with him, o honorable one, lead me from the oppressions of winter to reach the spring air. He has

16

TIMOTHY S. MILLER

§k xeim«now yl¤cevn efiw e‰ar efiste›nai, [Œ] pan°time, prÚw aÈtÚn ¶nteujiw sØ diagãg˙ me. ¥syh eÈfrÒsunon, ˜ti oÈ fa¤nontai kekleism°nai tis‹n afl pÊ- lai t∞w eÈsplagxn¤aw aÈtoË, éllÉ ín eÔrow efiw svthr¤an ényr≈pou mçllon §k- te¤non. yarr« goËn …w ín nuxyÆsonta¤ soi ka‹ énapetasyÆsontai, |ka‹ tª mak- rò mou talaipvr¤& ·levn ı f¤loiktow §nidΔn lÊtron ofl mogÆsanti d≈sei moi. éndrÚw tÚ loipÚn tlhpayoËw Íperlãlei. tÚn PaËlon ßjeiw tÚn m°gan sunergã- thn ˘n pr°sbin aÈtÚn égaya›w §pÉ §lp¤si pros∞ja t“ =hy°nti. tØn tÒlman bl°peiw: toÊtƒ d¢ ka‹ s¢ sÆmeron suneisf°rv. ka‹ går ˜sow moi PaËlow §n to›w èg¤oiw, tosoËton aÈtÚw §n broto›w ¶rrei fyÒnow.

21 ¥syh] ≥syh ms et ka‹ §l°xyh supr. scr. | tis‹n] tÉ efis‹n ms || 22 eÔrow] ka‹ plãtow supr. scr. || 23 nuxyÆsonta¤] ka‹ diegeryÆsontai supr. scr. || 24 mogÆsanti] ka‹ kakopayÆsanti supr. scr.

TWO TEACHING TEXTS

17

rejoiced in what is gracious so that the gates of his mercy appear not to be closed to some, but rather he is stretching wide for the salvation of man. I am confident that [these gates] will be stirred by you and spread wide. Seeing my long suffering, the compassionate one will give his mer- ciful release to me struggling on his behalf. For the rest, speak on behalf of a long-suffering man. You will have Paul as your great colleague whom, with good hopes, I have added as an ambassador to the one under discussion. You appear bold. Today I commission you [ to go] to him. For as much as Paul [is my ambassador] among the saints, so much does this jealousy among mortals disappear.

COMMENTARY REGARDING THE ORPHANOTROPHEION

Both Leo’s poem and his schedos describe how his teaching duties have wearied him and how he longs for the patriarch of Constantinople to relieve him from his labors among “the tribes of young children” (poem, line 8). In the poem, he addresses his appeal to the heavenly patron of the school, Saint Paul. From earlier sources we know that Saint Zotikos founded the orphanage of the capital city, probably in the fourth century, but that the emperor Justin II rededicated the institution to Saints Peter and Paul in the late sixth century when he built a splendid church for the Orphanotropheion. 17 Peter gradually receded in importance, and by the twelfth century sources often connected the Orphanotropheion with Saint Paul. 18 In the prose schedos, on the other hand, Leo refers directly to the supervisor of his school, the director of the Orphanotropheion of Constantinople. 19 As in the poem, so also in the prose schedos, Leo men- tions only Paul the apostle as the patron of the school where he was teaching. These two instructional texts, thus, provide additional evidence that by the twelfth century Paul had emerged as the sole patron saint of the Orphanotropheion. Leo’s poem opens by describing youths in a contest (toÁw §n èm¤ll˙ n°ouw); line 9 refers to weaving contentious words, an expression which clearly refers to Leo’s work in writing schede. 20 Why were schede con- tentious and the children of the orphanage involved in contests?

17 Theophanes 1.244.

18 Vie de St. Cyrille le Philéote, chap. 47.4-6 (pp. 229-31). See also Basil Pediadites identi- fied as a teacher sxol∞w grammatik«n toË PaÊlou, in Browning (1963), 20-22.

19 For the office of orphanotrophos, see Miller (1994) 99-104, and Guilland (1965) 205-21.

20 Vassis (1993-94) 9-10, and notes 33 and 34.

18

TIMOTHY S. MILLER

Several instructional poems, similar to Leo’s poem presented here, demonstrate that grammar schools of Constantinople held some form of student contests in connection with schede. In two eleventh-century poems, Christopher of Mytilene and John Mauropous, later metropolitan of Euchaita, referred to students engaged in schede competitions. 21 Moreover, Giuseppe Schirò published an anonymous poem, also from the eleventh century, which invoked heavenly assistance for two children participating in a schedos contest. 22 More recently, Robert Browning cited a nine-line verse composition in Marcianus graecus XI.31 which called on St. Paul to reward the victor in a grammar and schedos compe- tition. Since Paul was the sole patron of the Orphanotropheion, this sche- dos contest surely took place in the orphanage of Constantinople. 23 In view of such references to schede contests at grammar schools in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, we can safely assume that Leo’s arduous duties included training students to contend in such events. In both his poem and his prose schedos, Leo emphasizes how difficult he found working with the children at the orphanage. Leo compares his duties to the slavery of the Hebrews in Egypt when they labored in mak- ing bricks for Pharoah (Exod. 1:14). It is not clear why Leo considered his work with the children so difficult. Perhaps he had discipline prob- lems. We know from the frank letters of a thirteenth-century metropoli- tan of Naupaktos, John Apokaukos, that among the orphans at his epis- copal school, some were difficult to control. 24 Leo’s schedos also offers some new information regarding the Orphanotropheion’s staff organization. Leo claims to have worked at the school for more than twenty years. He began his cursus honorum in hum- ble positions, but at the time of writing this schedos, he held some sort of supervisory position (§fore¤an), a post he attained after having served in other important offices. Although Leo did not mention specific offices, his schedos clearly reveals that there were several ranks of instructors at the Orphanotropheion. In the prose schedos, Leo addresses his appeal that he be assigned a post outside the Orphanotropheion to the institution’s director, the orphanotrophos. Leo pleads with the director to obtain a promotion from the patriarch of Constantinople. In his funeral oration in honor of Stephen Skylitzes, Prodromos also described the patriarch as involved in deciding promotions on the teaching staff of the Orphanotropheion,

21 Schirò (1949) 13 (Christopher of Mytilene) and 18, note 21 (John Mauropous).

22 Ibid. 27-28.

23 Browning (1976) 32 (verses reproduced from Marcianus gr. XI.31, folio 277 v .).

24 Apokaukos, ep. 27 (pp. 85-86) and ep. 100 (pp. 150-52).

TWO TEACHING TEXTS

19

although he also mentioned that the emperor had made the final decision to appoint Skylitzes head of the teaching faculty at the orphan school. 25 In both the poem and the prose schedos, on the other hand, Leo viewed the patriarch as playing the key role in personnel decisions at the Orphanotropheion. In neither text does the author refer to the emperor, even though we know from many lists of state officials that the orphan- age director was ranked as a member of the imperial bureaucracy. From other sources, it appears that the orphanotrophos dealt primarily with financial and legal issues and functioned as an imperial magistrate. The teachers of the orphanage school, however, received their right to teach from the local bishop, in the case of Constantinople, from the patriarch. Thus, according to Theodore Prodromos, the patriarch confirmed Stephen Skylitzes’ promotion to a high teaching post at the Orphanotropheion by anointing Stephen with holy chrism. 26 In the prose schedos, Leo addresses his immediate superior. the orphanage director, as dikaiodotes and orphanotrophos. During the twelfth century, the dikaiodotes had evolved into one of the leading judges of the imperial bureaucracy. 27 Several other sources of the twelfth century reveal that orphanotrophoi also held important judicial posts. An oration of Theodore Prodromos addressed Alexios Aristenos as both orphan director and nomophylax, a post which by the twelfth century included judicial duties. 28 According to a speech by Niketas Choniates, the orphanotrophos John Belissariotes had excelled in the study of law. 29 Leo’s schedos, thus, provides additional evidence that the men who served as directors of the Orphanotropheion of Saint Paul had extensive legal training in Roman/Byzantine law and often filled high-ranking judicial posts at the same time they supervised the orphan home and school. Both these teaching texts offer internal evidence that Leo wrote them for the students to present in public schede contests. In his poem, Leo specifically mentions that he is not addressing the children who were participating in the competition nor his colleagues who were either spec- tators or coaching other young contestants. Rather, he is offering a verse prayer to the school’s patron, Saint Paul. Although he implores Saint Paul to present his plea to the patriarch, the flattering references to the

25 Prodromos, “Monodie” 9.

26 Prodromos, “Monodie” 9. See also Criscuolo (1975) 378-79 and 387 note 37.

27 ODB 624.

28 Prodromos, “Eisiterios” (PG, 133, cols. 1268-74) not only mentions Alexios Aristenos as holding the office of nomophylax and orphanotrophos, but the speech stresses Aristenos’ role as magistrate.

29 Choniates 1.151.

20

TIMOTHY S. MILLER

head of the church in Constantinople suggest that in fact the patriarch was present at this academic contest. In the case of the prose schedos, on the other hand, it seems that only the orphanotrophos attended the event. Another twelfth-century source reveals that high officials sometimes attended these student contests. In one of his orations, Constantine Manasses described a contest for grammar students which took place in the presence of the orphanotrophos and the emperor Manuel I (1143- 80). 30 Like Leo and Theodore Prodromos, Manasses also taught in the grammar schools of Constantinople and composed a number of extant schede. 31 If the emperor presided over some of these events, it is not sur- prising that the patriarch also attended grammar competitions held in the Byzantine capital, as Leo’s poem suggests.

30 Mannases 181.

31 Browning (1976) 26-27.

CHAPTER THREE

This page intentionally left blank

ALEXANDER THE MONK’S TEXT OF HELENA’S DISCOVERY OF THE CROSS (BHG 410)

John W. Nesbitt

In 1991 Stephan Borgehammar published a well-researched, stimulating book entitled How the Holy Cross Was Found. 1 Borgehammar was inter- ested in reconstructing Gelasius of Caesarea’s account, in his lost Church History, of Helena’s discovery of the cross at Jerusalem. Accordingly he was led to consider whether Alexander the Monk’s Historical Treatise on the Finding of the Cross might contain, in the section dealing with Helena and her travels to Jerusalem, some traces of Gelasius’s text. In the end he concluded his objective was beyond reach because “the edition is very unsatisfactory, leaving room for hesitation about individual phras- es.” 2 Borgehammar’s assessment is just. The edition to which he refers is the one printed in PG, a text originally edited and published by J. Gretser in his De cruce Christi of 1600. 3 Gretser’s edition is based (as I under- stand matters) upon: a) a Munich manuscript of the 16th century; b) a manuscript owned by the humanist and Jesuit, Andreas Schott; and c) a manuscript of Grottaferrata. 4 The Munich manuscript is corrupt, the Schott manuscript has never been identified, and the Grottaferrata text is now lost. 5 Such is the state of research on the text after some 400 years. The Historical Treatise occupies some 31 columns in the PG edition and may be fairly described as a “World Chronicle”. It commences with a discussion of the Divine Logos and proceeds to a listing of the occa-

1 Borgehammar (1991).

2 Borgehammar (1991) 25.

3 J. Gretser, De cruce Christi, II (Ingolstadt: 1600) 1-52; eadem editio Opera Omnia, II (Regensburg:1734) cols. 1-30 (notes cols. 31-6). The latter was the source of the text reprint- ed in PG 87.3, cols. 4016-76 (Helena’s recovery of the cross is found at cols. 4061-64). The PG also prints a condensed version, cols. 4077-88. The “edition” published in 1913 by P. C. Pennacchini is simply a re-publication of Gretser’s text: see Pennacchini’s Discorso storico dell’invenzione della Croce del monaco Alessandro (Grottaferrata: 1913) 7-75. The full title of Alexander Monachus’s Treatise, as it appears regularly in manuscripts, is LÒgow flstorikÚw per‹ t∞w eÍr°sevw toË tim¤ou ka‹ zvopoioË StauroË.

4 Schott collated the manuscript in his possession with the manuscript preserved at Grottaferrata. In the notes to his edition Gretser distinguishes between “Cod. Bav.”, “Cod. Sch.”, “Sch.”, and “Cod. Crypt. Ferr.”. The Munich manuscript used by Gretser is of the 16th century and has the shelf number ms. gr. 271.

5 H. G. Opitz tried to locate the Grottaferrata manuscript which Gretser mentions, but he was unsuccessful. Opitz (1934) 539.

24

JOHN W. NESBITT

sions on which the cross is pre-figured in the Old Testament. The author continues with a narration of Christ’s life and historical events beyond Christ’s death (in particular, persecutions of Christians) to the end of the reign of Constantine I. Then follows: a) Cyril of Jerusalem’s “Letter to Constantius” of 350/351 regarding an appearance of the cross over Jerusalem; and b) a lengthy eulogy of the cross. The Historical Treatise was a popular text; a new editio princeps would involve (either in whole or in part) some forty manuscripts. Our goal here is fairly modest. It is our intention to offer an edition of the section of the Historical Treatise’s account dealing with Helena’s discovery of the cross. The edition incor- porates prior editions and adds ten more manuscripts that have been selected, for the most part, because of their age and general reliability. We have included later manuscripts in order to give an idea of the range of variations within the manuscript tradition. After presenting our edition of what might be considered the culminating section of the Historical Treatise, we shall then turn to larger questions, such as the date of the Treatise’s composition, the author’s intent and his anticipated audience.

LIST OF MANUSCRIPTS.

Am

Milan, Ambrosiana Library, gr. A 63 inf. (11th century)

B

Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auctarium E.2.6 (12th century)

BN 1

Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Ancien gr. 1454 (10th-11th

BN 3

century) Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Coislin 306 (16th century)

Bu

Bucharest, gr. 595 (13th century)

L

Athos, Lavra D 78 (11th century)

M

Monte Cassino, gr. 431 (11th century)

P

Patmos, gr. 257 (12th century)

T

Thessalonica, Vlatadon gr. 6 (12th century)

V

Vatican, gr. 504 (1105)

EDITIONS.

Gr

PG 87.3, col. 4061, line 19-col. 4064, line 25

Penn.

Pennacchini, 59, line 6-61, line 27

GH

Georgii Hamartoli Chronicon in: PG 110, col. 620, line 12- col. 621, line 25

DISCOVERY OF THE CROSS

25

TEXT

Metå taËta ép°steilen ı basileÁw tØn •autoË mht°ra El°nh n tØn éji°painon ka‹ yeofil∞ efiw ÑIerosÒluma metå grammãtvn ka‹ xrhmãtvn éfyon¤aw prÚw tÚn fer≈numon Makãrion, tÚn t∞w Afil¤aw §p¤skopon, §p‹ énazhtÆsei toË §ndÒjou

5

stauroË ka‹ ofikodomª t«n èg¤vn tÒpvn, aÈt∞w afithsam°nhw t∞w basil¤dow, faskoÊshw Ùptas¤an tinå ye¤an •vrak°nai, keleÊousan aÈtª tå ÑIerosÒluma katalabe›n ka‹ toÁw èg¤ouw tÒpouw efiw f«w égage›n xvsy°ntaw ÍpÚ t«n énÒmvn ka‹ éfane›w genÒmenouw, §p‹ tosoÊtouw xrÒnouw. MayΔn d¢ ı §p¤skopow

10

éfikom°nhn tØn basil¤da, sunagagΔn toÁw t∞w §parx¤aw §p¤skopouw metå t∞w deoÊshw tim∞w épÆnthsen aÈtª. EÈy°vw d¢ parek°leuse to›w §piskÒpoiw tØn zÆthsin toË poyoum°nou jÊlou poiÆsasyai. ÉAporoÊntvn d¢ pãntvn per‹ toË tÒpou ka‹ êllvn êllvw §j Ípoc¤aw dihgoum°nvn, ı t∞w pÒlevw §p¤skopow pãntaw

15

parekãlei ≤sux¤an êgein ka‹ spoudaiÒteron eÈxØn Íp¢r toÊtou

1. Metå] d¢ add. VGH | ép°steilen] ép°stilen M aneteilen T | tØn] om. BuGr |

•autoË] aÈtoË V || 2. tØn éji°painon ka‹ yeofil∞] om. GH | éji°painon] ajiepenon T

| yeofil∞] yeofile› AmT yeofhl∞ M yeÒsepton BN 1 || 3. éfyon¤aw] éfyon¤an BN 1

| fer≈numon] om. BuGr || 4. tÚn t∞w Afil¤aw §p¤skopon] tÚn t∞w pÒlevw §p¤skopon BN 1 ÑIerosolÊmvn MGr tÚn t∞w èg¤ou pÒlevw V || 4-5. toË §ndÒjou stauroË] toË tim¤ou stauroË B toË zvopoioË jÊlou toË §ndÒjou stauroË BN 1 BN 3 P toË zvopoioË jÊlou Gr || 5. aÈt∞w] toËto add. BN 1 BN 3 PGH toË add. T | afithsam°nhw] §thsam°nhw M traithsamenhw T || 6. basil¤dow] basile›dow M ka‹ add. V | faskoÊshw] fãskousan

M | tinå] om. AmBuGr post ye¤an trsp. BN 1 BN 3 | •vrak°nai] •orakenai M || 7. aÈtª] aÈtØn AmGH | katalabe›n] katå labe›n BN 1 || 8. xvsy°ntaw] xosy°ntaw M | énÒmvn] paranÒmvn M nom«n T || 9. genÒmenouw] genãmenouw M | §p‹ tosoÊtouw xrÒnouw] §p‹ tosoÊtou xrÒnou GH || 10. éfikom°nhn] éfhkom°nhn BLT BN 3 | basil¤da] basile¤da M || 10-11. sunagagΔn toÁw t∞w §parx¤aw §p¤skopouw] sÁn t∞w §parx¤aw §piskÒpoiw Gr | §parx¤aw] §parxe¤aw TV || 11. metå t∞w deoÊshw tim∞w] om. Gr | épÆnthsen] épÆnthsan M épÆnthse Gr ÍpÆnthsen GH | aÈtª] tª basil¤di BuBN 1 VGr

| EÈy°vw] Euyeow T || 12. parek°leuse] parek°leusen B parekeleÊsato BuBN 1 Gr

pareskeÊasen MT pareskeÊase V | to›w §piskÒpoiw] toÁw §piskÒpouw BVGH | poy-

oum°nou] pepoyhm°nou BN 1 poyeinoË GH || 13. poiÆsasyai] §p°trecen add. BN 1 | toË tÒpou] toÊtou GH || 13-14. êllvn êllvw] êllon êllo B êllou êllow M êllou êllo PTV êllou êlla GH | êllvn êllvw §j Ípoc¤aw] êllow éllaxØ ÍpÚ c¤aw BN 1 || 14. dihgoum°nvn] dihgoum°nou GH | pÒlevw] pÒleow M || 15. parekãlei] para¤nh M

| êgein] aghn T | spoudaiÒteron] spoudaivt°rvn B spoudeot°ran BN 3 MPTV spoudaiot°ran GH ||

26

JOHN W. NESBITT

t“ Ye“ prosf°rein. ToÊtou d¢ genom°nou eÈy°vw §de¤xyh yeÒyen ı tÒpow t“ §pikÒpƒ, §n ⁄ Âdruto t∞w ékayãrtou da¤monow ı naÚw ka‹ tÚ êgalma. TÒte ≤ bas¤lissa tª basilikª aÈyent¤& xrvm°nh, sunagagoËsa pl∞yow polÁ texnit«n ka‹ §rgat«n §k°leusen §k

20

bãyrvn énatrap∞nai tÚ musarÚn ofikodÒmhma ka‹ tÚn xoËn pÒrrv pou éporrif∞nai. ToÊtou d¢ genom°nou, énefãnh tÚ ye›on mn∞ma ka‹ ı tÒpow toË Kran¤ou ka‹ oÈ mÆkoyen tre›w stauro‹ kexvsm°noi. ÉEpimel«w d¢ §reunÆsantew eron ka‹ toÁw ¥louw. ÉEke›yen loipÚn émhxan¤a ka‹ yl¤ciw kat°labe tØn bas¤lissan,

25

§pizhtoËsan po›ow êra e‡h ı DespotikÚw staurÒw. ÑO d¢ §p¤skopow diå p¤stevw tØn diãkrisin ¶lusen. Gunaik‹ går érrvstoÊs˙ t«n §mfan«n ka‹ épegnvsm°n˙ ÍpÚ pãntvn ka‹ tå teleuta›a pneuoÊs˙ prosagagΔn •kãteron t«n staur«n, tÚn zhtoÊmenon eren: mÒnon går ≥ggisen ≤ skiå toË svthr¤ou stauroË tª

30

ésyenoÊs˙, eÈyÁw ≤ êpnouw ka‹ ék¤nhtow ye¤& dunãmei

16. prosf°rein] prÚw f°rein BN 1 | genom°nou] genam°nou MT | eÈy°vw] om. MV || 16-

17. ı tÒpow] ante yeÒyen trsp. GH post §piskÒpƒ trsp. BN 1 MV || 17. t“ §pikÒpƒ] t«n

§piskÒpvn M | Âdruto] ∏druto BL ¥druto BN 3 | da¤monow] ÉAfrod¤thw add. VGH ||

18. bas¤lissa] bas¤leissa M | basilikª] basileike› M basilhkh T | aÈyent¤&]

aÈyente¤& AmBBN 1 | xrvm°nh] maxom°nh P || 19. pl∞yow] pliyow T | polÁ] poll«n BuGr t«n add. M | texnit«n] te add. Am texnhtvn T || 20. énatrap∞nai] katå straf∞nai BN 1 anatrapinai T énaskaf∞nai V || 20-21. tÚ musarÚn-éporrif∞nai] tÚn t∞w da¤monow naÚn Gr | musarÚn] mussarÚn V | ofikodÒmhma] ”kodÒmhma BN 1 ||

21. pou] poË BMBN 1 | éporrif∞nai] épÚ rifÆnai BN 1 ka‹ add. BBuBN 3 Gr | d¢] om.

AmGr | genom°nou] genam°nou TGH | ye›on] ye›oon BN 3 || 22. oÈ] mØ BuGr | mÆkoyen] mÆkon M || 23. kexvsm°noi] kexosm°noi M kaixvsmenoi T §xvsm°noi GH | ÉEpimel«w] §pimelow T §p‹ mel«w BN 1 | §reunÆsantew] diereunÆsantew GH | eron] hron BMT | ¥louw] ilouw T || 24. §ke›yen] PrÚw oÂw BN 1 V | loipÚn] om. AmB post émhxan¤a trsp. BN 1 | émhxan¤a] pollØ add. GH | kat°labe] kat°laben B BN 1 MT | bas¤lissan] basil¤da BuMGr bas¤lleissan M | êra e‡h] ín e‡h AmB BN 1 ara hei T | e‡h] ∑n BuBN 3 Gr || 25. DespotikÚw] basilikÚw Am || 26. diå] metå GH | diãkrisin] émfi- bol¤an BuGr diãfisin V | ¶lusen] ¶luse AmBuBN 3 LTGr | Gunaik‹] GunaikØ T | érrvstoÊsª] arrvstousi T || 27. §mfan«n] §pifan«n AmBuGrGH | épegnvsm°n˙] apegnvsmen˙ T | teleuta›a] teleutea T || 28. prosagagΔn] prÚw agagΔn BN 1 | •kãteron] ßkaston Bu V Gr •kãtervn M | t«n staur«n] tÚn staurÚn M | staur«n] staurÒn P | tÚn] tÚ BN 3 PVGH || 29. eren] ere AmBN 3 PGH hren MT | mÒnon] …w add. BuGr | går] post ≥ggisen trsp. BuGr | ≥ggisen] ≥ggise BuGr | stauroË] om. BuGr || 30. ésyenoÊs˙] yanoÊs˙ BuGr | eÈyÁw] eÈy°vw BN 1 MTV om. BuGr | dunãmei] =vsye›sa add. M ||

DISCOVERY OF THE CROSS

27

paraxr∞ma énepÆdhse megãl˙ tª f≈n˙ bo«sa ka‹ dojãzousa tÚn YeÒn. ÑH d¢ bas¤lissa ÑEl°nh metå xarçw megãlhw ka‹ fÒbou énelom°nh tÚn zvopoiÚn staurÒn, m°row m°ntoi sÁn to›w ¥loiw énekÒmise prÚw tÚn pa›da: tÚ d¢ loipÚn glvssÒkomon érguroËn

35

poiÆsasa, par°dvke t“ §piskÒpƒ t∞w pÒlevw efiw mnhmÒsunon pãsaiw genea›w. Ka‹ yesp¤sasa §kklhs¤aw gen°syai §n t“ zvopoi“ mnÆmati ka‹ §n t“ èg¤ƒ Golgoyò ka‹ §n tª Bhyle¢m §n t“ sphla¤ƒ, ¶nya ı KÊriow ≤m«n ÉIhsoËw XristÚw tØn katå sãrka g°nnhsin Íp°meine, ka‹ §n t“ ˆrei t«n ÑElai«n ¶nya ı KÊriow eÈlogÆsaw toÁw

40

mayhtåw énelÆfyh. Ka‹ êlla pollå poiÆsasa §n ÑIerosolÊmoiw én°strece prÚw tÚn pa›da. ÑO d¢ metå xarçw aÈtØn Ípodejãmenow, tØn m¢n toË tim¤ou stauroË mer¤da §n xrusª yÆkh époy°menow par°dvke t“ §piskÒpƒ efiw tÆrhsin, §niausia¤saiw mnÆmaiw •ortãzein tØn énãdeijin toË stauroË prostãjaw. T«n d¢ ¥lvn

45

toÁw m¢n efiw tØn fid¤an perikefala¤an énexãlkeuse, toÁw d¢ én°mije t“ salibar¤ƒ toË ·ppou aÈtoË, ·na plhrvyª tÚ =hy¢n ÍpÚ toË Kur¤ou diå toË profÆtou l°gontow ÑEn tª ≤m°r& §ke¤n˙ ¶stai tÚ §p‹

tÚn xalinÚn toË ·ppou ëgion t“ kur¤ƒ Pantokrãtori (Zacharias 14: 20).

31. paraxr∞ma énepÆdhse] énepÆdhsen paraxr∞ma BN 1 V | énepÆdhse] énepÆdhsen

BMP anephdeisen T | tª] ti T om. GH | bo«sa ka‹] om. AmBuGr | ka‹] om. B ||

32. bas¤lissa] bas¤leissa M | ÑEl°nh] om. BuGr | megãlhw] om. Am Bu || 33.

énelom°nh] énelvm°nh M | zvopoiÚn] om. GH | m°ntoi] m°n ti AmV men ti T menti

BN 1 BN 3

énekom¤sato GH |

érgÊreon Am BN 1 MV érgurÚn BLT | par°dvke] par°dvken BBN 1 T par°doken M ||

36. pãsaiw] ta›w add. AmM | §kklhs¤an] §kklhs¤aw BN 1 || 37. t“] to T | Golgoyò]

Golgoyã M | tª] èg¤& add. BN 1 | Bhyle¢m] Biyle¢m MT | §n t“ sphla¤ƒ] en to sphlev

V om. BuGr || 38. ≤m«n ÉIhsoËw XristÚw] om. BuGr || 39. Íp°meine] Íp°meinen B BN 1

BN 3 MPV

énelÆfyh] énele¤fyh B | pollå] ple›sta A | pollå kalå] katory≈mata BN 1 | §n ÑIerosolÊmoiw] om. BuVGr || 41. én°strece] én°strecen BMTV | tÚn] •aut∞w add. B | Ípodejãmenow] épodejãmenow BN 1 || 42. §n] om. GH | époy°menow] yemenow T || 43. par°dvke] par°dvken BBN 1 MV | §niausia¤saiw] §niausia›sew (corr.: §niausia›aiw) B

§niausi°aiw BN 3 L eneausieaiw T | mnÆmaiw] mnhmew T || 44. énãdeijin] anadijin T ||

45. perikefala¤an] per‹ kefala¤an BN 1 perikefalhan T | énexãlkeuse] §xãlkeuse

AmBGH énexãlkeusen BN 1 MPV exalkeusen T | én°mije] én°mijen BBN 1 MTV || 46. salibar¤ƒ] silibariv T xalin“ V salbar¤ƒ GH || 46-47. =hy¢n-profÆtou] ÍpÚ toË profÆtou Zaxar¤ou diå toË Kur¤ou GH || 47. ÑEn tª ≤m°r& §ke¤n˙] om. T | §p‹] ÍpÚ M || 48. tÚn] om. BuGr | tÚn xalinÚn] tÚn xalin«n M t“ xalin“ GH | Pantokrãtori] Pantokrãtvri BM

40.

tÚ d¢ loipÒn] t“ d¢ loip“ Am tv d¢ lupon T | érguroËn]

¥loiw] hluw T || 34. énekÒmise] énekÒmhsen BM anekomisen T

|

upeminen T

|

§t°xyh BuGr

|

ˆrei] ˆri

M

|

ÑElai«n] Ele«n T

||

28

JOHN W. NESBITT

TRANSLATION

Afterwards the emperor [Constantine] despatched his praiseworthy and God-beloved mother Helena to Jerusalem with letters and money in abundance for the bishop of Ailia, by name Makarios, in order to search for the glorious cross and erect buildings upon the holy sites, the empress herself having made the request, asserting that some divine vision appeared, commanding her to go to Jerusalem and to bring to light the holy places buried by the impious and become hid- den from sight, up to her own day. The bishop, learning of the com- ing of the empress, assembling the bishops of his province, met her with due honor. At once she ordered the bishops to make a search for the longed-for wood. Since all were at a loss concerning the place [of its burial] and from feelings of uneasiness began describing an array of different things, the bishop of the city ordered all to affect silence and in earnest offer prayer to God on behalf of this. Upon doing so the place by the will of God was revealed to the bishop, in which was sit- uated a temple and cult statue of the unclean daimon. Then the empress, using imperial authority, gathering together a very great quantity of builders and workers, ordered the foul building to be over- thrown to its foundations and to cast away the dust far off from there. Upon this being done, there came to light the divine monument and the place of Golgotha and not far off three buried crosses. Diligently searching they also found the nails. From whence therefore despair and anxiety gripped the empress, who demanded which was the cross of the Lord. The bishop through faith resolved the problem. For there was a woman (one of the leading citizens) in ill-health and all despaired of her chances. And while she was breathing her last [the bishop], bringing each of the crosses, found the answer. For it required only the shadow of the salvific cross to approach the sickly woman for the motionless and limp patient at once through divine power to jump up, crying with a great voice and glorifying God. Empress Helena with great joy and fear having taken up the lifegiv- ing cross carried off a portion with the nails for her son. She had made for the remainder a silver casket that she gave to the bishop of the city for a remembrance to all generations. And she decreed that churches be built in the form of lifegiving remembrances on Holy Golgotha and in Bethlehem in the cave where our lord Jesus Christ submitted to a birth according to the flesh, and on the Mount of Olives where the Lord upon blessing his disciples ascended. And so after doing many other good things in Jerusalem she returned to her son. Having received her with joy, he placed the piece of the precious cross in a

DISCOVERY OF THE CROSS

29

gold box; this he gave to the bishop for safekeeping, decreeing that the appearance of the cross be celebrated with annual commemora- tions. Some of the nails he had forged for his helmet, whereas others he had added as studs to his horse bridle, in order that he might fulfill what was said by the Lord through his prophet, to wit “On that day shall there be holiness upon the horse bridle unto the all-powerful Lord” (Zachariah 14: 20).

Before we can set this text into an historical context, we must first try to fix the date at which Alexander the Monk was active. 6 We begin by not- ing that Alexander the Monk may have authored two extant texts: the Historical Treatise and an Encomium of the Apostle Barnabas. The edi- tor of the latter work, Peter van Deun, observes that in the manuscripts the text “is attributed to a certain Alexander, monk at the monastery of St. Barnabas near Salamis.” 7 It was written at the urging of the priest and “keeper-of-the-keys” of the saint’s sanctuary and was read out in the presence of the metropolitan of Salamis. In van Deun’s opinion, based upon internal references, the Encomium was written sometime about the middle of the sixth century. 8 The Encomium is relatively easy to date, the Treatise is difficult to date. And so one would like to use the Encomium to date the Treatise, but one may do so only if there is com- pelling evidence that the two texts derive from the hand of the same author. Such a pre-condition is lacking, but it is nonetheless worthwhile to note one parallel. I do not refer to the obvious fact that both works detail the invention of relics: the Encomium with the invention of the remains of St. Barnabas during the reign of Zeno (474-491) and the Treatise with the discovery of the wood and nails of the cross during the reign of Constantine the Great. I am alluding to opening statements. In the introduction to the Encomium, the author, Alexander the Monk, observes that the priest who asked him to write the Encomium was the scion of a well-educated family. In contrast Alexander is of very humble origins (“the poorest of men”) and must balance his want of education against the proposal that he compose a panegyric of Barnabas. For this reason he has been inclined to request exemption from obedience, “shrinking from this duty.” He asks, rhetorically, “How can such a sorry wretch as I, drowned by countless afflictions, swim across the apostolic sea?” 9 Let us now compare these statements with the proem of the

6 For a discussion of the various dates proposed for Alexander’s career see the Introduction to Peter van Deun’s edition of Laudatio Barnabae apostoli 16.

7 Laudatio Barnabae apostoli 15.

8 Laudatio Barnabae apostoli 21.

9 In my opinion the phrase, which I have translated as “by countless afflictions” (ÑÍpÚ mur¤vn pay«n), is to be understand in the sense of “countless illnesses”.

30

JOHN W. NESBITT

Treatise. As in the case of the Encomium, the writer has received a

request from an ecclesiastical superior to write a composition, in this case an historical essay on the finding of the life-giving cross. Upon

receipt of the request the author “was exceedingly agitated

from the undertaking as it is way beyond my ability; such a work is bet- ter realized through others than through me. For we do not possess the educational grounding and lack experience of such pursuits from our training. Truthfully we are ignorant not only in language but also in knowledge on account of the lengthy hold on us of diseases (pay«n).” Although Byzantine authors were fond of self-deprecation, it seems to me that the similarity of phraseology in the two introductory statements is too close to be a matter of coincidence and may be an indication that the author of the Encomium and the author of the Treatise were one and the same person. I am suggesting that, like Mozart, Alexander the Monk plagiarized himself. It is doubtful that someone else plagiarized him, for who would want to appear as an ignorant hypochondriac? Are there any references in the Treatise which either support or con- tradict a sixth-century date? As Father M. van Esbroeck has pointed out, one finds a terminus post quem in a passage where the author castigates Origen in terms which reproduce virtually word for word the first of fif- teen anathemas pronounced against Origen slightly before the council of 553 concerning belief in the pre-existence of souls. 10 In all honesty, one can not point to another passage and say that here is the terminus ante quem. In order to establish an upper date one needs to begin by examin- ing the whole of the text which Gretser printed and determining which parts are to be attributed to Alexander’s pen. In his Introduction the author states that it is his intention “to compose a historical narrative on the finding of the life-giving cross, the all-holy and all-revered cross on which our lord Jesus Christ allowed himself to be stretched out, where- by he destroyed the power of the devil and the tyranny of death and bestowed on those believing in Him unknowable salvation.” I accept the

shrank

I

10 Esbroeck (1979) 107. The text of the anathema, published by Diekamp (1899) 90, reads:

E‡ tiw tØn muy≈dh proÊparjin t«n cux«n ka‹ tØn taÊt˙ •pom°nhn terat≈dh épokatãs-

tasin presbeÊei, énãyema ¶stv. The text of the Treatise, as published by Gretser (4020A),

ÉVrig°nhw §blasfÆmhsen oÈsi≈dh tinå proÊparjin cux«n ka‹ tØn

taÊt˙ •pom°nhn terat≈dh épokatãstasin gravd«w

instead of oÈsi≈dh, muy≈dh. Cf. Cyril of Scythopolis’s Life of Euthymios (E. Schwartz, Kyrillos von Skythopolis [Leipzig: 1939] 39-40: diemãxeto genna¤vw tØn parÉ aÈto›w muyeuom°nhn t«n no«n proÊparjin ka‹ tØn taÊt˙ •pom°nhn terat≈dh épokatãstasin diasÊrvn panto¤vw én°trepen). Price (1991) 36 has translated this section, which deals with Cyril’s struggles with a group of Origenists in the region of Caesarea, as follows: “he [Cyril] combated courageously their myth of a preexistence of minds, he completely refuted, and with ridicule, the consequent monstrosity of a general restoration.”

A number of manuscripts have,

reads:

mani≈dhw

DISCOVERY OF THE CROSS

31

author at his word and therefore reject the notion that he copied out and appended to his composition Cyril of Jerusalem’s letter to Constantius about the appearance of the cross over Jerusalem. Alexander was not concerned with the post-Constantinian history of the cross and indeed the

opening lines of Cyril’s narration (at 3.1-4) totally contradict portions of Alexander’s story of Helena’s adventures in Jerusalem. The relevant sec- tion of Cyril’s letter reads as follows: ÉEp‹ m¢n går toË yeofilestãtou ka‹ t∞w makar¤aw mnÆmhw Kvnstant¤nou toË soË patrÚw, tÚ svtÆrion toË stauroË jÊlon §n ÑIerosolÊmoiw hÏrhtai, t∞w ye¤aw xãritow t“ kal«w zhtoËnti tØn eÈs°beian t«n épokekrumm°nvn èg¤vn tÒpvn

the days of your Imperial Father,

Constantine of blessed memory, the saving wood of the cross was found in Jerusalem (divine grace granting the finding of the long hidden holy ”

11 In Cyril’s account,

there is no mention of the identity of the person who found the cross, but it is specified that the person who discovered “the long hidden holy places” was a man. Additionally, Alexander was not a mere copyist. He was an historian. He was not a great historian, but he told his story in his own way and for this reason I submit that Cyril’s letter represents noth- ing more than a later addition to Alexander’s original text. The same, I think, can be said of the concluding portion of the text which Gretser printed, the Encomium of the Cross. The author does not say in his open- ing statement that he includes an Encomium and, again, if we take the author at his word, we must assume that Alexander’s Treatise properly ends with Constantine’s death. As in the case of Cyril’s letter, the Encomium is a later addition and I submit that what Gretser’s text repre- sents (the Treatise, the Letter, and the Encomium) is a festal dossier. At some date, a cleric or monk brought the three pieces together in order to have available a small library of pertinent sources for quotation in ser- mons delivered on the feastday of the Elevation of the Cross and the feastday of Saints Constantine and Helen. 12 In sum, the Encomium plays no role in the task of determining the date at which Alexander was active. To fix the date of Alexander’s text we must rely solely on the materials which extend from the Introduction to Constantine’s demise.

places to the one who nobly aspired to piety)

parasxoÊshw tØn eÏresin: “For

in

11 I quote here, with minor modifications, the translation of McCauley and Stephenson (1970) 232. For the Greek text see Bihain (1973) 287.

12 A. Kazhdan (1987) 229 has written: “Were we to assume that Alexander the Monk wrote

pane-

well the trends of this time.”

Were we to assume that Alexander wrote the Encomium of the Cross, one would have reason- able grounds for advancing a date of circa 800. Without it the best evidence for a ninth-centu- ry date of composition falls away. On the other hand its presence suggests that the period when the festal dossier was compiled might be as early as circa 800.

around 800

gyric of the life-giving cross and of its cosmic ubiquity

his

opuscule would be a natural culmination of

interest

in the cross

his

matches

32

JOHN W. NESBITT

Within these confines, does the author develop topics which better reflect a sixth-century milieu than a later one? I would say most emphat- ically “yes”. There is nothing in this text which involves arguments for or against Iconoclasm. There is nothing which leads one to suspect that the Arabs have seized the Christian East. On the contrary, there is good

reason to believe that the author lived in a period before the rise of Islam. Alexander’s overall theme is Salvation and accordingly some of the spe- cific topics which he takes up are of a theological bent; but since he is writing an historical treatise, the main focus is on historical events, par- ticularly events which unfolded in the Holy Land. “For us and for our Salvation Christ made the heavens slope and he descended and

dwelling in the womb of the holy, glorious and ever-virgin Mary

Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.” 13 The author then commences to narrate the events of Christ’s life on earth: His birth in Bethlehem, the journey of the Magi, the flight of the Holy Family into Egypt, the return to Nazareth, and Christ’s baptism by John. 14 Passing over Christ’s miracles the narrator proceeds directly to the crucifixion. “For our Lord Jesus Christ willingly suffered for us, true God and true man, there being two natures in Him, admitting of no separation or divi- sion. For on the cross and in the grave the economy of the two natures remained undivided, in which is known our one and only Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son and Word of the living god.” 15 He further states that “the Lord died truthfully for us and he was crucified in the ”

16 The author interweaves into his account

flesh, and not make-believe

the

of biblical history events of a political order. He alludes to Pompey the Great and discusses the careers of two members of the Hasmonean Dynasty: Aristobolus II, and Hyrcanus II. He speaks of Antipater, Herod the Great, Archelaus and Cleopatra. Although Alexander’s discussion of theology and history is admittedly banal, it nonethless allows us to form an idea of the author’s intention and audience. His readers (or listeners) are, I suggest, humble pilgrims. For their sake the author has incorporat- ed into his Treatise materials which provide a brief regarding the history of Palestine and the theology of the crucifixion. In this manner he sup- plies the background necessary for a full appreciation of the holy sites at Jerusalem. If this view is correct, then it would seem to me quite reason- able to propose as terminus ante quem the occupation of the Holy Land

13 Gr 4025C.30-35 (and John 1: 14).

14 Gr 4032B-4033B.

15 Gr 4034D.

16 Here at Gr 4036B.13-14 I have read the Greek somewhat differently. The passage seems to depend on Cyril of Jerusalem’s Catechesis XIII.37.

DISCOVERY OF THE CROSS

33

by the Persians and Arabs during the reign of Heraclius (610-641), a con- clusion which accords quite well with the dates proposed for the compo- sition of the Encomium of Barnabas. Let us now conclude by examining in some detail Alexander’s narra- tive regarding Helena’s finding of the cross. The purpose here is to com- pare Alexander’s narration with prior accounts, to see in what ways it is similar or varies and, following that, to suggest what purpose Alexander had in mind in writing his specific version of Helena’s invention. We shall proceed with the first task by summarizing each section of the Treatise’s version and listing within the section the versions of earlier writers regarding the same events.

SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION: THE IMPETUS FOR FINDING THE CROSS.

Alexander the Monk: Constantine and Helena share joint responsiblity for initiative. Constantine sends his mother to Jerusalem to identify the location of the cross and build churches; Helena is inspired to the same task by a divine vision. V(ita) C(onstantini): Constantine orders the construction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Helena visits the Holy Land and initiates con- struction of various churches. No mention of cross. 17 Ambrose of Milan: Helena goes to Jerusalem and visits. The Spirit inspires her to search for the wood of the cross. 18 Gelasius of Caesarea (reconstruction): (Spurred by divine visions), Helena travels to Jerusalem (“in order to lay hold of the holy places and seek out the venerable wood of the Cross”). 19

alerted by divine visions and traveled to

Rufinus:

Jerusalem (divinis admonita visionibus, Hierusolyma petit).” 20 Socrates: Helena, summoned by dreams, goes off to Jerusalem. 21 Theodoret: Helena, now aged, travels to Jerusalem with letters for Bishop Makarios from Constantine. 22 In these letters Constantine

“Helena

was

17 Eusebius, De vita Constantini at III.25 and at III.42-3. See the translation and remarks of Cameron and Hall (1999) 132, 137, 291-292.

18 For Ambrose’s account, see his De obitu Theodosii, cap. 40-51.

19 Under the rubric Gelasius of Caesarea I either paraphrase or directly quote Borgehammar’s own paraphrase of Gelasius’s narration, as set forth on pages 54-55. The parentheses are Borgehammar’s (see Borgehammar, 53) and indicate places “which may

” Borgehammar’s reconstruction rests on

derive from Gelasius, but are poorly attested

Rufinus’s Church History, Socrates’s Church History, Gelasius of Cyzicus’s Church History, and Theodoret’s Church History.

20 The translation is from Amidon (1997) 16. We have quoted Amidon’s translations throughout. For the text see Rufinus, p. 969.13-14.

21 Sokrates Kirchengeschichte, p. 55.13-14.

22 Theodoret, Kirchengeschichte, p. 63.20-21.

34

JOHN W. NESBITT

directs Makarios to clear the area of Christ’s tomb and to erect on the spot a church.

SECTION 2. THE INQUIRY.

Alexander the Monk: Helena, met by Makarios, orders the bishops to search for the wood. Gelasius of Caesarea (reconstruction): Helena inquires of inhabitants of the town where Christ was crucified. Rufinus: “[Helena] traveled to Jerusalem, where she asked the inhabi- tants where the place was where the sacred body of Christ had hung fastened to the gibbet (atque ibi locum, in quo sacrosanctum corpus Christi patibulo adfixum pependerat, ab incolis perquirit).” 23 Socrates: Helena searches zealously for the tomb of Christ, where buried, he arose. 24

SECTION 3. THE DISCOVERY.

Alexander the Monk: God reveals the place to dig, an area where there was situated a pagan temple and cult statue. She gathers workmen and they clear the site. Three crosses are found and the nails. No mention of the titulus. Ambrose: Helena goes to Golgotha and has the ground opened where three gibbets are found, the nails and the titulus. Gelasius of Caesarea (reconstruction): the location is revealed, a place where there was a statue of Venus; workmen topple “the polluted structures” and, upon excavating, bring to light three crosses. Rufinus: the location is “indicated to her by a sign from heaven (locum caelisti sibi indicio designatum)”; beneath a statue of Venus set there (simulcrum in eo Veneris fuerat defixum) are uncovered, in a jumble, three crosses and the titulus. 25 Socrates: those opposed to Christianity had covered with earth the site of Christ’s passion and established a temple there with a cult statue. The situation becomes clear to Helena. She has the statue toppled and the earth cleared. The cross is uncovered in the tomb, along with the crosses of the two thieves, and the titulus composed by Pilate. 26 Theodoret: “When [Helena] saw the area where the passion had occurred, she immediately commanded that the abominable temple be knocked down and the statue be carted off”. 27

23 Rufinus, p. 969.14-15. Amidon (1997) 16.

24 Sokrates Kirchengeschichte, p. 55.15-16.

25 Rufinus, p. 969.16-22. Amidon (1997) 16.

26 Sokrates Kirchengeschichte, p. 55.18-21; and p. 56.1-7.

27 Theodoret, Kirchengeschichte, p. 64.3-6.

DISCOVERY OF THE CROSS

35

SECTION 4. THE CONUNDRUM AND THE SOLUTION.

Alexander the Monk: confronted by three crosses Helena wonders which cross was the one on which Christ was crucified. Makarios solves the problem. He approachesa lady of rank who is close to death. It requires only the shadow of one (the true) cross to fall near the woman and at once she is cured (see Acts 5: 15: the sick await Peter, hoping that at the least his shadow will fall upon them). Ambrose: the identity of the true cross is guaranteed by the presence of the titulus attached to it. Gelasius of Caesarea (reconstruction): With the empress, Makarios visits a noble lady who is gravely ill. He brings all three crosses. He prays and then touches the woman in vain with two crosses. As soon as the shadow of the third draws near she is cured. Rufinus: the titulus is of no help. Accompanied by the empress, Makarios, bringing along all three crosses, visits a woman of distin- guished position who is near death. He touches her with all three crosses, but only the true cross cures her. Socrates: the titulus plays no role. Makarios seeks a sign from God and God sends one. “And the sign was such”. A certain woman of the dis- trict was near death. Makarios arranges that she receive the touch of all three crosses. When touched by the first two she shows no improvement but when she receives the touch of the third cross, she is healed. 28 Theodoret: confusion reigns over the identity of the true cross. Makarios solves the problem. He has a woman who is near death touched by the three crosses: it requires only the approach of the true cross and the lady is cured. 29

SECTION 5: AFTERMATH. THE CROSS FRAGMENTS AND THE NAILS.

Alexander the Monk: Helena reserves a portion of the true cross and the nails for Constantine. She has a silver casket made for the remainder and gives it to Makarios. She has churches built on Golgotha, in Bethlehem, and on Olivet. Constantine places the piece of cross in a gold box and gives the box to the bishop, ordering the day of the cross’s discovery to be annually commemorated. Some of the nails are added to his helmet and others to his bridle. Ambrose: Helena finds the nails: from one she has made a bridle and from the other a diadem.

28 Sokrates Kirchengeschichte, p. 56.10-18.

29 Theodoret, Kirchengeschichte, p. 64.12-17.

36

JOHN W. NESBITT

Gelasius of Caesarea (reconstruction): Helena builds a church at the find- spot of the cross. She searches for the nails and finding them she has several inserted into Constantine’s helmet, and others are smelted and mixed with metal of his bridle. She returns with a portion of the cross for Constantine, but leaves behind the remainder, which is placed in a silver casket and given to Makarios. Rufinus: Helena has a church built at the site of the discovery of the cross. The nails still adhered and these she brought to Constantine. From some he has made a bridle and with othershe outfitted himself with a helmet. “As for the healing wood itself, part of it she present- ed to her son, and part she put in silver reliquaries and left in the place; it is still kept there as a memorial with unflagging devotion (ligni vero ipsius salutaris partem detulit filio, partem vero thecis argenteis conditam dereliquit in loco, quae etiam nunc ad memoriam sollicita veneratione servatur).” 30 Socrates: “The mother of the emperor had a splendid house of prayer

She left

behind there a portion of the cross enclosed in a silver casket (yÆk˙ érgurò) as a memorial for those wishing to observe [it] (to›w flstore›n boulom°noiw), the remainder she despatched to the emper- or.” Helena also finds the nails and sends them to Constantine. He has them fashioned into bridlebits (plural: xalinoÊw) and a helmet. Helena has other churches built: one at Bethlehem and another on the mount of the ascension. 31 Theodoret: mention of the nails and their disposition. Helena has some nails placed in the imperial helmet; the remainder she had made into a horse bridle in order to fulfill the ancient prophecy of Zacharias. She has a portion of the cross sent on to Constantinople and the rest placed in a silver casket which is given to the bishop of the city, requesting that he watch over these “memorials of salvation”. She has churches of great workmanship constructed. 32

built on the site of the sepulchre (called “New Jerusalem”)

The invention of the cross involves three different traditions. We have been following only one, and so before we proceed, we might take a moment and reflect upon the other two. As Drijvers observes, the begin- ning of the fifth century saw the emergence of two new versions of the finding of the cross. Both are of Syrian origin and are reworkings of the

30 Rufinus, p. 970.24-25. Amidon (1997) 17.

31 Sokrates Kirchengeschichte, p. 56.19-23, p. 57.1-15.

32 Theodoret, Kirchengeschichte, p. 64.18-23, p. 65.1-9.

DISCOVERY OF THE CROSS

37

older Helena version. 33 One is the “Protonike” legend: a story in which the central character, Protonike, said to be the wife of emperor Claudius (41-54), converts to Christianity and visits Jerusalem where she discov- ers the true cross in the sepulchre, hands it over to James, and builds a church over the tomb. This version was known at first only in Syriac, then later in Armenian. The second is the“Judas Cyriacus” legend: a ver- sion in which Helena goes to Jerusalem and orders an assembly of the Jews. Among them is a certain Judas who is brought before her and inter- rogated. He asks God to show him the place where the cross is buried. God gives him a sign and he uncovers three crosses, one of which restores a dead man. Helena provides the cross with a mount and encas- es it in a casket. She builds a church on Golgotha and Judas converts. Judas, now Cyriacus, finds the nails for her; she has bridles made from them. This retelling, popular in the Middle Ages because of its anti- Jewish flavor, was read in many languages, the earliest versions of which are in Syriac, Greek, and Latin. 34 The fifth-century Byzantine historian, Sozomen, knew of the Judas Cyriacus legend: “Some say that a certain Hebrew who lived in the East had prior knowledge [of the location of the ”

35 Sozomen rejects the legend, declaring

cross] from paternal records

it more likely that divine matters are revealed through “signs and dreams”, than through records of the past. We may reasonably assume that Alexander the Monk had knowledge of this legend. Borgehammar has observed that two unusual words are to be found in Alexander’s text:

a) glvssÒkomon (the silver casket in which Helena has the cross encased); and b) salibãrion (the bridle fashioned from the nails of the cross). Both these words are found in a Greek manuscript of Sinai relat- ing the legend of Judas Cyriacus. 36 Like Sozomen, Alexander rejected the Judas Cyriacus tradition. It is not difficult to understand why: one of his objectives is to give full and sole credit for the discovery of the cross to Constantine and his mother. We see this in the way Alexander has crafted his narration. In the Introduction he has Constantine send his mother to Makarios with letters

33 J. W. Drijvers (1992) 147.

34 For the latest edition in Syriac of the Judas Cyriacus legend and translation into English, see Drijvers and Drijvers (1997). Recently Feiertag (2000) has affirmed the Syrian origin (Antioch?) of the Judas Cyriacus legend, based upon its anti-Jewish elements.

35 Sozomenus, Kirchengeschichte, p. 48.5-9. Sozomen wrote about the middle of the 5th century. He relied on Rufinus’s Church History and for this reason we have not listed his work in the summaries above.

36 Borgehammar (1991) 24 and note 56. For the Greek text see E. Nestle (1895) p. 330.18 and p. 331.17. The word salibãrion also occurs in Romanos the Melode’s Cantica, Hymn 39, section 22, line 5.

38

JOHN W. NESBITT

and money for the purpose of uncovering the cross and erecting church- es on holy places. Alexander has borrowed the phrase “with letters” (metå grammãtvn [Alexander]; ToÊtoiw grãmmasin [Theodoret]) from Theodoret (p. 63.20), as well as the notion of Constantine’s participation in the cross’s discovery. The latter states that Constantine had a letter composed in which he directs Makarios to clear the area where Christ was entombed and to build on the site a church. In a second letter he speaks of the financial arrangements for the construction. In other words, Constantine knows where Christ’s tomb is located and hence, by impli- cation, where the cross is to be found. All that is required is for Helena to go to Jerusalem and seek it. On the other hand, there was a strong tra- dition, beginning with Ambrose (395), that Helena, aroused to action by dreams, traveled to Jerusalem on her own initiative. To accommodate this version, Alexander simply grafted it on (though awkwardly) to his initial statement: “the queen herself, having made the request, asserting that some divine vision appeared, commanding her to go to Jerusalem ” From this point until almost the very end, Helena occupies center stage. She finds and identifies the cross and is reponsible for the building of churches on Golgotha, in Bethlehem, and on Olivet. Constantine reap- pears in an interesting context. Helena returns to her son and Constantinople bearing a piece of the true cross. Upon placing it in a gold box and giving the relic to the bishop of the city, Constantine decrees that the appearance of the cross be celebrated with annual commemorations. Since the geographical setting of Alexander’s remark is Constantinople, we may reasonably infer that Alexander is attesting that in his own day (the sixth century) the feast of the Cross was being celebrated at the capital. At base Alexander’s Treatise is a work of pilgrimage literature. If any- one doubts the validity of Scriptures—of Christ’s birth, crucifixion, and ascension—they need only visit Jerusalem and its environs. All the important sites connected with the unfolding of salvation are marked by holy structures. 37 The cross exists. It was prefigured in the Old Testament. It became hidden after Christ’s death. Pagan rulers came and went. But now, through the efforts of Constantine and Helena, it can be seen, if not touched. 38 But the miracle of the infirm woman, related in the various accounts of Helena’s discovery, including Alexander the Monk’s,

37 I briefly touch here on aspects of pilgrimage which have been well and fully exploited by others: see e. g. Hunt (1982) 83-106.

In the days of the pilgrim Egeria (381-384), it was possible on Good Friday to approach the cross, observe it directly, and kiss it. See Egeria, p. 137: “Thus all the people go past one by one. They stoop down, touch the holy Wood first with their forehead and then with their

eyes, and then kiss it

38

DISCOVERY OF THE CROSS

39

makes it clear that one may expect benefits (a cure of physical afflic- tion?) from “only the shadow of the salvific cross”. Propinquity is sufficient. In concluding I would observe that Alexander’s Treatise differs from previous accounts of Helena’s discovery of the True Cross in length. Nevertheless the Treatise is a coherent example of pilgrim propoganda. It is clearly meant to entice people to undertake a trip to Jerusalem and to explore the sites where the drama of Salvation occurred and where tes- timony in Gospel accounts can be visually affirmed. In the same visit the infirm might find physical, as well as spiritual, comfort. Since it is pil- grimage-driven, I would say it is reasonable to postulate that the Treatise was written before the reign of Heraclius and the disruptions to pilgrim- age traffic which his rule witnessed. Alexander’s emphasis on the joint responsibility of Constantine and Helena for the discovery of the cross raises an interesting possibility about the date of their sainthood. Some thirty years ago Laurent pub- lished a seal (poorly known) of the seventh century depicting on the obverse a representation of a saint holding a globus cruciger who is iden- tified on the reverse as St. Constantine. 39 The seal indicates that by at least the late seventh century Constantine had become a saint. In my opinion, one of Alexander’s goals was to promote the cult of Saints Constantine and Helena and it was for this reason that he joins the two together and emphasizes their equal credit for the discovery of the cross.

39 Laurent (1972), no. 1922.

This page intentionally left blank

CHAPTER FOUR

This page intentionally left blank

ELIAS THE MONK, FRIEND OF PSELLOS

George T. Dennis

Some years ago Nikos Oikonomides showed me an early fifteenth centu- ry Greek text he was preparing for publication, a scurrilous bit of writ- ing, very earthy and very amusing, directed against an individual whose name was downgraded from Katablattas to Skatablattas. Professor Oikonomides believed that, if we are to understand the Byzantine people, we should read more than their religious, literary, or legal writings. We should find out what made them angry and, perhaps more important, what made them laugh. And so, the slanderous little pamphlet was pub- lished, together with a French translation and commentary. 1 In the course of our conversation I referred to some letters of Michael Psellos which featured a wandering monk named Elias and which, albeit under a more pedantic veneer, were also very earthy and amusing. He strongly encour- aged me to translate and publish them. And that is exactly what I present in these pages, although I regret that it is in a memorial volume rather than a living Festschrift. Of the letters of Psellos presented below, nine mention the monk Elias by name; the tenth portrays an unnamed friend who so resembles the wandering monk that it seems reasonable to include it. Since older edi- tions of the Letters are still available and a new, critical edition is in the first stages of preparation, I have not, with the exception of Letter 10, reprinted the Greek text here. 2 Limitations of space also had to be con- sidered. Still, I have read through the manuscripts again and have made a few, minor changes, to be noted suo loco. Translating these letters, written in the eleventh century of our era but in an idiom dating to fifteen hundred years before that, can be daunting. I think I have more or less correctly rendered his often convoluted thought and expression into pre- sentable English, but I am still uncertain about several passages. 3 I have appended some notes to aid the reader in understanding the letters, but I have left a more extended commentary to a future publication of his entire correspondence. In the meantime, though, I think it important, as

1 Canivet and Oikonomidès (1982-3).

2 About a projected new edition, see Papaioannou (1998).

3 I am indebted to Professors E. Papaioannou and P. Magdalino for their helpful sugges- tions concerning the translation.

44

GEORGE T. DENNIS

did Professor Oikonomides, that these few letters be made available to scholars and to everyone interested in the civilization we refer to as Byzantine. The central figure in these letters is a monk, Elias, probably his monastic name. All that we know about him is contained in these letters. His surname seems to have been Kroustalas (Krystalas), which is rare in the extant sources. It is found, coincidentally, as the family name of another monk, John Kroustalas, a popular public reader for whom Psellos has the highest praise, but there is no indication that the two were relat- ed. 4 In reading any work of Psellos, of course, we must always be aware of his love of hyperbole and his subordination of fact to literary effect. This is obviously the case with his presentation of Elias. Nonetheless, this monk is not a fictitious character. 5 He is clearly a real person for whom Psellos has a great deal of affection and whose company he gen- uinely enjoys. The letters must be read with that in mind; we must, as it were, stand next to the addresees as they received these letters, presum- ably, from the hands of Elias himself. Psellos does not name the monastery, if any, in which Elias was ton- sured and to which community he belonged. He was, simply put, a wan- dering monk with no fixed abode, of which there were not a few in Byzantium. He wandered, so these letters tell us, to Syria, through Asia Minor and down into Greece and the Peloponnesos, as well as the streets of Constantinople. The purpose of his journeys, so it seems, was to raise money to support himself, his mother, and a large number of relatives. To assist him Psellos wrote letters of introduction commending him to important personages, particularly several thematic judges. In exchange for a financial contribution, they will, so Psellos assures them, be great- ly entertained by this gifted monk, a talented musician, comedian, and mimic with a very broad and diversified repertoire. Psellos cannot resist comparing this Elias with his biblical namesake. 6 The fiery chariot conveyed the prophet to heaven, whereas this Elias can- not get off the ground, so strong are his earthly ties. This Elias does not appear to be running away from some Jezabel and he dines more bounti- fully than the widow with her oil and barley meal. In fact, he does not seem to be imitating the prophet at all. Moreover, his understanding and practice of the monastic virtues, especially chastity, greatly amuse Psellos and, presumably, those to whom he addressed these letters. It has been pointed out that the prime characteristic of Elias is earthiness and

4 Gautier (1980-82). Psellos also wrote to a protonotary named Elias, but there is no con- nection with our Elias: Karpozilos (1980).

5 Ljubarskij (1978) 74-79.

6 1 Kings: 17 - 2 Kings:

2.

ELIAS THE MONK

45

he has been called a Rabelaisian monk. 7 How much of what Psellos wrote about Elias is based on fact and how much on talk is not clear, but it does make for an interesting and, despite some exaggeration, credible story. Elias, however, was much more than a convivial extrovert and con- noisseur of bordellos. Psellos valued his scribal skills; he could write rapidly and beautifully as well as correctly. One would expect him, like all known friends of Psellos, to have been well educated. He could hard- ly have copied the letters, much less understood them, with their classi- cal allusions and literary affectations, had he not received some educa- tion. Still, in Letter 9, Psellos recalls that he employed circumlocutions in dictating the letter so that Elias would not understand what he was saying. The dating of these letters can only be approximate. If Letter 1 was written about 1067 or soon thereafter, we can assert that the monk was well into his wandering career at that time, but that is about all we can assert. More thorough research on all the letters and their addressees is needed before we can propose any dates. Our knowledge of the men to whom these letters were addressed is also limited. Letter 1 is addressed to the judge of Thrakesion. In the eleventh cen- tury the chief administrative officer of a theme (province) was the judge, but the extent of his authority is not clear; apparently it was concerned with civilian matters, not military. 8 The judges to whom Psellos wrote were, like himself, well educated members of the civil aristocracy. Thrakesion was a very prosperous theme in Western Asia Minor, named after a body of troops from Thrace settled there. 9 Its capital and, pre- sumably, residence of the judge may have been Chonai, perhaps Ephesus. Letter 1 gives Sergios as the name of the judge. Letter 5, also addressed to the judge of Thrakesion, does not give a name. Other letters sent to that official, although no name is given, are K-D 61, 66, 150, 151, 248, and one ed. by Karpozilos (see n. 4). In two letters (Sathas 47, 51) the name of the judge is recorded as Xeros. The Lower or Southern Themes (tå Katvtikã) included the themes of the Peloponnesos and Hellas, as is clear from other letters (Sathas 32, K-D 154). 10 Other letters sent to that official are Sathas 26, 32, 33, 34, 134, 135, 141, 147, K-D 55, 69, 70, 74, 86, 93, 154. Letter 4 was addressed to Nikephoros, who held the high dignity of sebastophoros, but who cannot be identified any more closely.

7 Ljubarskij (1978) 79.

8 ODB 1078.

9 De Thematibus 124-6; ODB 2080.

10 Eustathii Thess., 316.10; LBG (2001), s.v.

46

GEORGE T. DENNIS

The judge of Opsikion was the recipient of Letters 7 and 8. Opsikion, whose name is derived from Latin obsequium, was one of the four orig- inal themes set up in Asia Minor, but subsequently limited to the north- western area with its capital at Nicaea. 11 Two letters (Sathas 29, 190) give the name of the judge as Zoma (Zvmç, Zvm∞). Other letters sent to the judge of Opsikion are: Sathas 29, 43, 77, 190, K-D 81, 99, 100, 107, 108, 116-120, 140, 142-144, 155, 187, 200, 243, 258. Two versions of Letter 9 are preserved in the Barberini manuscript (cod. Vat. Barb. gr. 240). The first is addressed to a frequent correspon- dent of Psellos, the Caesar John Doukas, brother of the emperor Constantine X Doukas (1059-67). 12 The second was dictated by Psellos and written down by Elias who, so it seems, personally handed it to the sebastos Constantine, the nephew of the patriarch (Michael Keroularios) and a close friend and correspondent of Psellos. 13 Constantine held a number of influential offices as well as prestigious titles: droungarios, megas droungarios, proedros, protoproedros, magistros, sakellarios, epi ton kriseon, sebastos, genikos. Letters addressed to him are: Sathas 1, 45, 46, 83-86, 117, 157, 174, 184, 186, K-D 31, 211, 214. The anonymous addressee of Letter 10 was obviously a close friend of Psellos who entertains him with an account of the conversation, or monologue, provided by a mutual friend, perhaps the monk Elias. Since the vocabulary may be of some interest, the Greek text is presented in an Appendix.

EDITIONS.

Kurtz and Drexl (1941) = K-D: Letters 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Sathas (1876) = Sathas: Letters 2, 3. Westerink (1951) 43-5 = Westerink: Letter 1. Gautier (1986) = Gautier: Letter 1.

11 De Thematibus 127-30; ODB, s.v.

12 See Polemis (1968) 34-41.

13 See Ljubarskij (1978) 62-69.

ELIAS THE MONK

47

TRANSLATION

1. To Lord Sergios, Judge of Thrakesion.

This new Elias, my most illustrious and beloved brother, is not being sent on a journey up to heaven. For he is not so reckless as to try the fiery chariots, but he does travel around every place under heaven in hopes of finding repose for his soul. 1 He has divided the whole inhab- ited world into two parts. By his reckoning, half of it consists of mountains, caves, and deserts. The rest contains groves, meadows, pleasant gardens, and open spaces for riding horses. He first tried out the first half. But, since he did not feel comfortable there, he moved to the other half. Still, he did not get there without a struggle. Even here he had to pass over the wooded glens and first descend into deep chasms but, with his eyes fixed upon his goal, he paid no heed to whatever stood in his way. He has left behind the villages cowering in fear after experiencing the weapons of the enemy or, rather, which barbarian hands had plundered. 2 He makes his way to Thrakesion, not yet under siege. It is not so much your Eden that he loves as you who cultivate and protect it. Neither is it the beauty and gracefulness of Thrakesion that he prizes, for the man is not a lover of graceful objects but of those made of gold. If the summer were somehow suddenly to sprout gold, then show the crop to the man so he might reap his beloved harvest. But if this cannot be done, then open up your golden soul to him. It is indeed pure gold and has never sounded a false note as if mixed with baser metal; it has been rubbed alongside many gold testing stones and has always been proven pure, very pure. 3 This much I enjoin upon you — a teacher has the right to give orders to his student — do not accord him special reverential treat- ment because of his habit. If, however, he maintains his self respect, you in turn would not be wrong in accommodating yourself to his grave demeanor. But if he should change his behavior, then you should change your tune. Do not be afraid of this Elias. He cannot call down fire from heaven or, after pouring on water, can he miraculous- ly ignite a fire, even though he may himself be cheerfully consumed by another sort of fire. 4

1 Elias is said to have been taken up to heaven in a fiery chariot: 2 Kings 2: 11. ‘Repose’ recalls Matthew 1: 29 and 12: 43.

2 This probably refers to Turkish raids in eastern Asia Minor in 1067: Psell.Chron. 7.67;

7.Eud.6-7.

3 See Herodotus 7.10.1.

4 See 1 Kings 18: 31-38; 2 Kings 1: 10.

48

GEORGE T. DENNIS

I swear by your holy soul that he is very clever and can do any- thing, more noble deeds as well as worse ones. He is not totally sunny nor is he totally cloudy. But he gives the impression of being both. He is a man with two faces. He can be Dorian and Phrygian at the same time, diatonic and enharmonic. 5 He can be Greek and barbarian, a real gentleman and, at the same time, quite indecorous. Right now he chants the songs of David, but on the flip side he may suddenly take up the flute of Timothy. 6 He speaks with every voice, in keeping with the riddle of the Sphinx, and he changes into every shape as did Proteus the Pharian. 7 He is a creature who assumes every kind of form, more complicated than Typhon. 8 He is an enchanting melody, adapting himself to the times and the events. At one moment he is a lion who has relaxed his shaggy frown; at another he dances off with the apes. At one time he will cast his eyes down like Heraclitus and bewail human vanity; at another he will pretend to laugh like Democritus. 9 And, if you ask him, he will alter the appearance of his garments and transform himself into any shape at all. This great good fortune, then, is yours. The man for whom you would have gone about hunting and searching has invited himself and you now have him with you. For my sake get to know this multifac- eted man.Human nature is not unrelenting and untiring in facing every trial, but it requires some cheer and playfulness. Indeed, when you feel the need to come down to this level, you ought not to cast about for the players of the lyre or the flute, but before all else enjoy this multiform man. If you pay a little something as a harbor fee, you will find anchorage for the ship of your soul and, after a nice rest, you may once again put out to sea.

[Ed. Westerink (1951) 8; Gautier (1986) 27; from cod. Laur. San Marco 303, f. 209 v -210].

5 Dorian and Phrygian were types of flute music. From one to the other was a proverbial expression for change of tone.

6 The songs of David are the Psalms, which monks were obliged to recite daily. Timothy, a favorite of Alexander the Great, was a famous flutist and composer of secular songs.

7 The Sphinx asked travelers: What creature first uses four feet, then two feet, then three feet? Oedipus gave the correct answer: man. The legendary Proteus was noted for his ability to change shape.

8 Typhon was the hundred-headed giant struck by a thunder bolt from Zeus: Iliad 2.782.

9 Heraclitus despised the body and human activity. Democritus was noted for laughing at human frivolity.

ELIAS THE MONK

49

2. To the Judge of the Lower Themes.

This monk Elias had no desire to possess any earthly thing or to be concerned about such, just as his namesake also owned nothing. 1 This Elias wanted to liberate himself from the practical virtues, to pass through the whole rational universe and to journey through the air to God and to find anchorage in the ineffable harbors. This is what our Elias wanted and he struggled very hard for it. But there was the body he was tied to. There was his heavy burden. There was his earthly tab- ernacle.There was the weight he was dragging. No matter how many times he started up, they held him down. When he flew up they forced him down again. When he jumped up they dragged him back down. Twice he attempted it, many times in fact, but the same constraints pulled him down. His ascent to heaven is not easy. But neither is he able to maintain himself on earth. For he does not have only himself to support — that would be a simple enough problem for him — but he has his mother who relies on him and a whole tribe of relatives. This is what motivates him to undertake long journeys. Now he heads up north. Now he heads down south. He is split between the ris- ing of the sun and its setting. His purpose is not to learn how far Thule is from the British Isles or how the fabled Ocean flows around the earth, or which Ethiopians dwell to the east and which ones are off to the west. 2 But his goal is to find safe anchorage in your harbor and there perhaps to obtain some provisions. His life is that of a rover. Let me also add a philosophical note. Plato is reported to have taken the measure of Charybdis three times and to have sailed that many times through the narrow strait of Sicily. 3 But Plato ended up encountering the Dionysiuses. He not only purchased nothing with his philosophy, but barely escaped being sold himself and was ransomed by Annikeris of Aegina. 4 May our wanderer not meet up with that sort of hospitali- ty but with such as Odysseus received among the Phaeacians. 5 May he return bearing in his hands guarantees from your hand so his mother may be brought back to life and the throng of his relatives may join in the festive dance.

[Ed. Sathas 153; from cod. Paris. gr. 1182, f. 223 v (P); a shorter and less reliable version is found in cod. Laur. gr. 57-40, f. 44 v -45 (L); but the title of the addressee is found in L, not in P].

1 Cf. 2 Kings 1: 5 et alibi.

2 See Strabo, Geographica 1.4.2.6.

3 Philostratus, Vita Apollonii 1.35.5-7.

4 Cf. Diogenes Laertius, Vitae philosophorum 2.86 and 3.20.

5 Homer, Odyssey 5.35 ff.

50

GEORGE T. DENNIS

3. <Untitled.> Our Elias does not come down from the sky or go up to the sky. 1 He does not come to you from Mount Carmel, but from a stage prop, rough and ready, wearing the tunic of a rower or a slave. Only he would know whether he might be running away from some Jezabel. 2 At any rate, up to now he has given the impression of fleeing from some horrible Erinys and heading for the furthest reaches of the earth. 3 He took my advice about which people he should visit first and what guides he should follow to the ends of the earth. And so he comes to you. At the same time, he will see Coele-Syria and indeed your holy self governing it. 4 You know what you will do. As long as you have the man with you, hold on to him, as Aeolus did to the man from Ithaca. 5 Then, after sewing up the western winds in a bag and presenting them to him, send him off to Libya or Asia. Because you are busy with very serious tasks, you need some relaxation such as he provides. Let me describe the man to you in a more philosophical vein. There are two extremes of virtue and of wickedness. The first is characterized by the monastic life, I mean the monastic life which is the solitary life at its best. At the other extreme — please do not reproach me for what I say — is the way of life asso- ciated with taverns. This man, so as not to leave any part of these extremes untouched, has taken the middle road. He undergoes a com- plete transformation from both sides. Whichever of the two he wish- es that is what he is. He will arise early in the morning with you and sing the sacred songs. Then he will change and join you in a dance. From the Dorian melody his voice will change to the Phrygian. 6 If you should be angered at such a transformation, he will immediately shift back to the first mode. His eyes will remain fixed; his hands will be gently folded on his chest. You will observe that his feet are not mov- ing back and forth but stay together. Once again, as the tides change in the Euripus, he will start going against the current. 7 His ambition is

1 2 Kings 2: 11.

2 Cf. 1 Kings 18: 20.42.

3 The Erinys were fearsome female demons.

4 Coele-Syria designated the Roman province in northwest Syria with its capital at Antioch; in the late 10th and 11th centuries it was a Byzantine province under a duke. The addressee of this letter may well be the Caesar, John Doukas, who held authority in Antioch for several years: see Laurent (1962) 252-53); Polemis (1968) 34-39; Ljubarskij (1978) 69-74.

5 Homer, Odyssey 10.20-26.

6 See Letter 1, n. 5.

7 The narrow strait between Boeotia and Attica where the current was reported to change direction seven times a day.

ELIAS THE MONK

51

to be able to change shapes like the legendary Proteus. Instead, he is taken over by lower creatures. What an imitation he can do of the roaring of the lion, while the leaping about, so to speak, of the mon- keys is part of his inborn nature. Therefore, since we are downcast by nature and need something to soothe our spirits, when your ship is just about to sink, you will find

refuge in his harbor. While it is not completely free of the sea’s swells,

securely

joined together nor anything short

focused and how long beforehand he prepares to repel assaults and lets nothing get in his way. 8 Gently, then, I set the man before you. I have shown you his serious side and clued you in on his less serious one. But if he should step outside the bounds, then it will be up to you to bring him back within them. Here is a riddle. I declare that he is the one who has written this letter. May this declaration now, in accord with Aristotle’s dictum, be made public and not be made public. 9 Just as Aeschylus, therefore, may this man compose a drama with many new elements and, in turn, you will find even more that is new.

how his thoughts are very

it will not crush the ship. But if

the ship’s timbers and

[Ed. Sathas 154; from cod. Paris. gr. 1182, f. 223 v -224].

8 The manuscript has several small blank spaces.

9 Aristotle, Epistle 6, to Philip of Macedon.

52

GEORGE T. DENNIS

4. To the Sebastophoros Nikephoros.

If your spirits are lifted up by the mere mention of the famous names of Greece: the Piraeeus, Sounion, Schoinous, the Gardens of the Philosophers, Rion, Antirrion, the Thriasian Plain, Krommyonia, the rocks of the Skeironides, other places and, for your total gratification, going to Phaleron and returning from Phaleron and — there is no need to list any more — it means nothing to you that this earthbound Elias has been elevated to such great distances. 1 While he may not know how to explain the names to you, he can convey the reality. Let him personify that famous epigram for you: “Here is the Peloponnesus, not Ionia” or the contrary. 2 He may indeed not know how to compose epigrams, such as those of Archilochus or Simonides, but he would be content, if someone might wish to do this, to have inscribed every- where, instead of on a public monument: “He is turned in both direc- tions, toward the rising sun and toward evening. Not only is he under the regular signs of the zodiac but also the very unusual ones and, for that matter, with those at the solstice”. Get to know him, therefore, in whatever direction you may pre- fer. Only, may you have a pleasant laugh and may you come to love the man.

[Ed. K-D 8; from cod. Vat. gr. 712, f. 73-73 v ].

1 Most of these names occur in Strabo, Geographica.

2 Strabo 9.1.6.7.

ELIAS THE MONK

53

5. To the Judge of Thrakesion.

This monk, acclaimed for his virtue and not unknown to you, has set for himself the goal of traveling about the entire inhabited world. He is even anxious to prowl about your Thrakesion and to become acquainted with your illustrious and most excellent self and to receive something from you as well as to give something. He would con- tribute a glib tongue, a pleasant disposition, and the service he knows how to render. In exchange, he would receive something from your keen mind or, if you will, also from your hand. I am well aware that there is a frown on your face, that you are refraining from laughing, and that your soul is unmoved. But may this man make you feel com- pletely relaxed and make you laugh and fill you with every pleasure and delight. People like yourself who are preoccupied about very weighty matters frequently need some humor and relaxation. This man will provide you with an abundance of occasions for such things and he will do so while clad in the venerable habit of a monk.

[Ed. K-D 270; from cod. Heidelberg. Palatin. 356, f. 46 v ]

6. <To a thematic Judge.> 1

There is a certain Elias here with us, but this Elias is just the opposite of that one who was ‘taken up’. 2 This one is attached to the earth and incapable of flying up above it. Still, he often kept pace with the char- ioteers in the spectacles and was bold enough to climb up in the same chariot with them so he could himself learn exactly how to maneuver it and to fly up in the air. But the chariot of the Thesbite still runs behind the Lydian and offers absolutely no competition. 3 This Elias has no fear at all of Jezabel, but bravely stands up to her and, as the old saying goes, counterattacks with his own sallies. 4 He does not try to avoid the forty-day journey and he does not need a widow to take him in, for he knows how to get along with married couples. 5 Think of him simply as an ogler of maidens, with magnificent hair after the fashion of Priam’s son Alexander, at least his hair if not his beard. 6

1 In the manuscript this letter is addressed ‘To the same’(t« aÈt«), which K-D conjecture as a reference to the Judge of the Lower Themes, but the preceding letter is inscribed: ‘to the Judge of the Boukellarioi’ (t« krit∞ t«n Boukellar¤vn).

2 See 2 Kings 2: 11.

3 Elias was called the Thesbite (Tishbite): 1 Kings 17: 1. Comparison with the Lydian char- iot was a proverbial expression for falling far behind.

4 1 Kings 19: 3.

5 1 Kings 17: 9-16; 19: 8; cf. Luke 4: 25-26.

6 Homer, Iliad 11.385.

54

GEORGE T. DENNIS

The bread which nourishes this man is not a small measure of roasted barley meal baked in the ashes, rather, he dines on barley cakes at a bountiful table. 7 It is not a mere flask of oil which pours for him, but he very generously draws from a barrel. 8 Even more marvelous! Because he is not concerned about closing and opening heaven, he searches out the remote corners of the earth; he quickly crawls down into them and just as quickly comes up again, in the manner of those giants who were originally planted there. 9 Not once but many times he raises up that nature which he had put to death. 10 To sum it up, this Elias is quite earthbound and not at all ‘taken up’.

[Ed. K-D 93; from cod. Laur. gr. 57-40, f. 45-45 v ].

7 1 Kings 17: 12-16; 18: 45.

8 Above the word for barrel (piynãkhw, sic in the ms.), the scribe has added: mikrÚn ÍpolÆnion, ‘a small vat’(for wine or oil).

9 The giants were fierce monsters born from the union of Tartarus and Earth. Anna Komnene alludes to the same myth: Alexiad 12.5.1.2.

10 Monastic profession was regarded as putting one’s worldly nature to death.

ELIAS THE MONK

55

7. To the Judge of Opsikion.

After putting out from Trigleia, we sailed along the mountainous promontory and sailing with us was the great ascetic Elias. 1 For this reason, the sea flowed smoothly under the ship and all was full of calm. Because of him the sea refrained from becoming rough. But he rode the crest of many waves; his heart was throbbing and, at the same time, his soul was swelling with rushing passions. At that moment, to put it mildly, it was not Mount Carmel that he recalled or some other place of retreat, but all the brothels in the city, all the taverns. 2 He recalled how many courtesans were exercising their craft in a profes- sional manner and how many were not so professionally qualified. 3 He was also commenting about whether a certain barmaid might not also be making her debut on the street or a courtesan might not also be pandering or a pimp might not also want to act as a consort. He also compiled a catalogue of how many might be campaigning out in the open and how many were secretly lying in ambush. Most people found this discourse of his to be marvelous. At that moment, in fact, the oarsmen from Syke were just about worshipping him and so were many of the passengers, especially when he went through the names of the courtesans at some length and ran his tongue glibly through the catalogue. 4 As for myself, I was greatly amazed that a terrible tempest did not fall upon the sea or that it did not become stirred up. When Jonah disregarded a small call of Providence, the water rose up and the wild beasts of the sea opened their jaws wide before him. 5 But nothing at all terrible confronted this man even when he was so outrageous in what he was thinking and saying. He did, however, offer a good solu- tion to my problem and solved the riddle by stating that his fornica- tion was limited to words and he denied that it ever went as far as deeds. If, therefore, he is telling the truth, he would be evil only half way. But if he should be lying, may the sea monster not swallow him, for he would not spit him out again.

[Ed. K-D 97; from cod. Laur. gr. 57-40, f. 46 v -47].

1 Trigleia (modern Tirilye) is on the Bithynian (Asiatic) coast of the Sea of Marmara. See Janin (1975) 185-87.

2 Cf. 1 Kings 18: 42.

3 Courtesan: the Greek text has ‘female companion’.

4 Syke (Syge) must refer to a location on the Bithynian coast near Trigleia: see Janin (1975) 183.

5 Jonah 1: 3-15.

56

GEORGE T. DENNIS

8. To the Same Person.

A certain portion belongs to God and another to Mammon. 1 To the

first belong pure spirits and to the second natures full of passion. And

up to the present there has not been any third class. 2 This monk Elias,

however, has recently invented one. He does not simply give to God what belongs to God or to Mammon what belongs to Mammon, but he has donated a fitting portion to both. To God he gives the monastic habit, our holy anchor, and to Mammon he gives the powers of his

soul and the organs of his body. And so it is that while singing songs

to God he fornicates in his thoughts, behaving outrageously all day

long. Then he will turn to acts of deep piety; he weeps and straight- way repents of his passion. Then he changes place again. He knows only two residences, the brothel and the monastery. Going from the

former to the latter he seems like Philoktetes. From the latter to the former he becomes another Achilles. The first has his legs incapaci- tated while the second is described by the poet as swift footed. 3 Now, if God were actually to apportion a third lot to humans, this would be neither the kingdom of heaven or gehenna, but it would

be something else beside these, quite distinct and independent, truly a

suitable place for him. But if no such place exists, let him stand between paradise and the river of fire, scorched on one side, soothed on the other. Otherwise, the division could be on alternate days, on one day absolutely delightful but on the next all chains and scourging. This is just how he has been accustomed to behave here. During the day he gives himself to God but he allots the night to Satan.

[Ed. K-D 98; from cod. Laur. gr. 57-40, f. 47-47 v ].

1 See Matthew 6: 24; Luke 16: 13.

2 ‘The present’: the ms. has ‘a certain point’ (tinÒw), but the scribe has erased two words before that which may well have read: toË nËn, ‘now’.

3 Homer, Iliad 2.718-725; 1.21 et passim.

ELIAS THE MONK

57

9. To the Sebastos Constantine, the Nephew of the Patriarch, by

the Monk Elias Krystalas. 1 The Greeks marvel at the Muses and at the Graces, the former because they dance in chorus around Helicon, sing hymns to their father Zeus, and take the lead in the veneration and the love of wisdom, and the Graces inasmuch as they are the cause of joy and pleasure for men. 2 For these reasons they likened the more venerable men to the Muses and those more attuned to pleasure to the Graces. Now, if a person were to possess the distinctive features of both, that is, the nature of the Muses as well as that of the Graces, that individual would be the most perfect and advanced in virtue. Such a person in our own generation is this most admirable monk. 3 He displays sublime musical talent, singing a great deal and delighting in rhythms and melodies, only not in Pieria and Helicon but in his favorite place — for now let it remain without a name. 4 He both bubbles over with the qualities of the Graces and showers fountains of pleasure on those people he cares for — neither should they be men- tioned by name in a letter. In either manifestation of both lives, I mean that of the Muses and that of the Graces, he appears more distin- guished than anyone else. If, then, you are interested in the Muses, he will immediately assume a solemn mien, in accord with the images of Xenocrates, and will play the role of the most dignified personages, the evangelist, the bishop, and anyone else of the same status. 5 But if you sacrifice to the Graces and are in the mood for something witty, a pleasant laugh, some game playing, then you will marvel at this man. He will set up his tragic stage and for hours on end will transform himself. Now he appears as Ajax the Telemonian, now as Mithaikos and Pataikos or the tavern keeper Sarambos. 6 There are so many facets to the man that he is not inferior to Proteus in his changes. I myself have often stood in admiration of the man and I swear by your holy soul that I have greatly loved him. How else would you

1 B is addressed: ‘To the same’, i.e. to the Caesar John Doukas. At the bottom of f. 138 v another hand has added: diå tÚn monaxÚn ±l¤an tÚn krustalãn, followed by some illegible writing. B 2 is addressed: toË aÈtoË t« sebast« kvnstant¤nv ka‹ énec¤v toË patriãrxou diå tÚn monaxÚn ±l¤an tÚn krustalçn. The Greek, dia, with the accusative, as here, usually means ‘by’, ‘with the help of’, which best seems to fit the context. It can also convey the idea of ‘about’, ‘concerning’, ‘for’.

2 Hesiod, Works and Days 2; Theogonia 1-7.

3 t∞ kayÉ ≤mçw geneç ı yaumasi≈tatow B 2 to›w kayÉ ≤mçw ı yaumãsiow B.

4 Pieria in Thessaly and Helicon in Boeotia were sites sacred to the Muses. ‘His favorite place’and the unnamed people in the next sentence must be some sort of private joke.

5 Xenocrates 70-71.

6 See Plato, Gorgias 518b.6.

58

GEORGE T. DENNIS

phrase it? He has just now performed a much needed service for me with his exquisite and rapid handwriting. He then turned about and switched to songs and harmonious tunes. And next — how could I not be amazed at this?— he clothed himself in a tunic and other garments and assumed a great variety of roles with his posturing and mimicry. By your holy soul, this man is fully deserving of your attention and favor. For since human life takes so many forms and, as Euripides reminds us, we are moved and preoccupied according to our fortunes, so that on some days we are downcast and on others more cheerful, this man will present himself to you in the guise suitable for every shape and circumstance of life. 7 He will serve you not only in the most exalted matters but just as readily in lowly and base ones. Not only will he be prepared to write, but he will also bathe you, gather up your bedding, saddle your horse and bring it to you, and he will do all the other chores which may please his lord. Such is the man who comes to you. If he should find you in a gloomy mood, he will right away display such dejection of soul as to rival yours. But if he finds you laughing and joking, he will laugh and joke with you. Allow yourself to be transformed, then, along with this individ- ual, changing your personality the way he changes his. March straight ahead when he marches straight ahead. Go off to the side when he goes off to the side. If my words strike you as mysterious and very imaginative, do not wonder. 8 I have been speaking in a veiled manner. For he was listening with both ears while I was dictating this letter. For my part, though, I spoke like a Cretan to Cretans, at the same time employing intricate circumlocution, but I have still made clear what I had in mind. 9

[Ed. K-D 212; from cod. Vat. Barb. gr. 240, f. 138 v -139 (B). Another ver- sion is found on f. 185 v -186 (B 2 ); since it seems closer to the archetype, I have followed the second version in my translation, noting only the more important variant readings].

7 Euripides, Hippias 701. The words, ‘We are moved’ and ‘This man will present’, are omitted in B.

8 Instead of ‘You as mysterious’, B has ‘mythical’.

9 In antiquity the Cretans had a reputation for telling lies, thus this proverbial expression. Instead of ‘In mind’, B has ‘on my tongue’.

ELIAS THE MONK

59

10. <Untitled.> Our good friend has arrived here, my most beloved and illustrious brother, as though coming from Egypt, as though from Ethiopia, as though from India itself. 1 His travels have taken him to every city, every country, every language. Instead of a large shipment of mer- chandise he arrived with a full cargo of emotion and high spirits; instead of a lot of baggage he brought his tongue brimming over with amazing tales. How he found lodging in the village of Byridoi. 2 How, settling in the place for a few days, he learned all about it, everything in the place, everything surrounding it, the vineyards, the vast fields of wheat, the rivers flowing into it, the vapors arising from them, what the air above your head is like, how the village is adjoined, how it is divided. What the men are like.What the women are like. Which ones twist the wool and which ones use the shuttle on the loom. Then, as I was just barely applying the brakes to his tongue, he slipped away and moved off to Herakleia and, as though contemplat- ing the Heraklean mouth of the Nile, he inundated me with a stream of words. 3 How the fortress has been relocated and about the metrop- olis in it. How it drinks from marvelous fountains. How it is soothed by the westerly wind more than by the others. This is how he diverts himself. Unable to deal with this torrent of words, I pretended to fall asleep. But all of a sudden he thundered from the earth. He would not let me miss hearing even about Rhaidestos. 4 And so, if he has filled your ears with such urbane discourse, you may deal with it. For me, though, he has completely sated my soul with all his tales. He took me on a tour throughout the west. He crossed verbally over the Adriatic itself to the land of the Italians, the plains of Campania, the twofold Alps, the Apennine mountains, the Ligurian Sea. 5 Then, having left these behind and having stood me by the pillars of Hercules and Dionysius, he moved his discourse around to you. 6

1 The ‘good friend’is not named but the remarks about his travels and incessant talking remind one of Elias. The ‘friend’gives the appearance of having journeyed to distant lands whereas, in fact, he has merely been visiting places very close to Constantinople. But he describes them in admiring detail as though they were far off, exotic cities. As if that were not boring enough, he goes on to discuss the personality and even the kitchen utensils of the addressee.

2 Byridoi (tå Bur¤dou, tå Bur¤dvn) was a small port a few kilometers southwest of Constantinople: Janin (1964) 444.

3 Herakleia (modern Eregli) was a city on the Sea of Marmara not far from Constantinople. On the Herakleian mouth of the Nile, see Heliodorus, Aethiopica 1.1.1.

4 Rhaidestos (modern Tekirdag) was a small city on the north shore of the Sea of Marmara.

5 See Strabo, Geographica 4.1.1.21.

6 The straits of Gibraltar and Sicily.

60

GEORGE T. DENNIS

As amazing as the thundering, as the crashing falls, as the cataracts of the Nile may be, he did not leave one detail about you unrecorded. 7 How your right hand was completely immune to bribes. Your nobility of mind, your generosity and upright way of life. Then he stepped down and described your table, your manners, your behav- ior, your laughter. What kind of large pot you have, what kind of gob- let, what kind of platter, the pot stand, the soup ladle. Among your cups one finds the beaker, the ivory one, the so-called adolescent, the one fashioned of horn, the one with finger-like handles, the pitcher shaped one, the cube shaped one, the rustic wooden one. Your manner of drinking and toasting your friends. And the wines! How you decline the Phalerian because it stuffs the head and you prefer the Chian which sets the liver on fire. 8 How the servant mixing the bowl pours your cup and gently places it in your hands. After he furnished me with a minute account of your drinking party, he was all set to provide more details about the activities which followed it. I realized what a swarm of words that would produce. And so, I feigned a deep sleep and in that way got rid of the man. But may he show up again, even many times, and say more than he has already said. And for you, may all else be well. But do not extend your right hand so far that your left hand is not aware of it. 9 Do not harvest in a way so fruitless that you cannot have some barley grains left over for yourself. 10

[Ed. K-D 9, and in Appendix below; from cod. Vat. gr. 712, f. 73 v -74 (K)]

7 On the cataracts and falls of the Nile, see Herodotus 2.17.

8 See also Psell. Or. min.14.143; 16.54.

9 Cf. Matthew 6: 3.

10 Cf. Luke 12: 18-20.

ELIAS THE MONK

61

APPENDIX

10.

<énep¤grafow> ÉAf¤keto ≤m›n ı kalÒw, f¤ltate ka‹ per¤blepte édelf°, …w §j AfigÊptou, …w §j Afiyiop¤aw, …w §j ÉInd¤aw aÈt∞w, pãsaw m¢n pÒleiw, pãsaw d¢ x≈raw, pãsaw d¢ gl≈ssaw §mporeusãmenow. éf¤keto g°mvn yumoË ka‹ fronÆmatow ént‹

5

megãlhw fort¤dow, ént‹ poll«n égvg¤mvn tØn gl«ttan aÈtoË kom¤zvn plÆrh yaumas¤vn dihghmãtvn, …w kat°luse m¢n efiw tÚ xvr¤on Burid«n, …w ≤m°raw tinåw t“ tÒpƒ §naulisãmenow ±kr¤bvse pãnta, ˜sa §n toÊtƒ, ˜sa p°rij, tåw émp°louw, tå purofÒra ped¤a, toËw efisbãllontaw potamoÊw, tåw §ke›yen énapnoãw, ıpo›ow Íp¢r kefalØn <ı> éÆr, ˜p˙ tÚ xvr¤on sun∞ptai, ˜p˙

10

mem°ristai, ¥tiw t«n éndr«n ≤ fÊsiw, ¥tiw t«n gunaik«n, t¤new m¢n afl tÚ ¶rion pl°kousai, t¤new d¢ afl tª kerk¤di xr≈menai prÚw fistÒn. ÑVw dÉ oÔn mÒliw aÈt“ tØn gl«ttan §p°sxomen, eÈyÁw §jolisyÆsaw aÈtomole› prÚw ÑHrãkleian. ka‹ Àsper tÚ ÑHraklevtikÚn stÒma toË Ne¤lou fidΔn kat°klus° me t«n lÒgvn t“ =eÊmati, …w én–kistai tÚ pol¤xnion, ¥tiw

15

≤ §n toÊtƒ mhtrÒpliw, …w p¤nei yaumas¤vn phg«n, …w éne›tai zefÊrƒ mçllon dØ t«n én°mvn t«n êllvn ka¤ §stin aÈt“ paidikã. §gΔ d¢ mØ f°rvn tØn =Êmhn t«n lÒgvn Ípn≈ttein prosepoihsãmhn: ı d¢ brontÆsaw éyrÒon épÚ t∞w g∞w oÈd¢ t∞w ÑRaidestoË me éf∞ken énÆkoon. Efi m¢n oÔn ka‹ tØn sØn ékoØn t«n éstik«n dihghmãtvn peplÆrvken, aÈtÚw

20

ín efide¤hw: §mo‹ d¢ tØn cuxØn proskor∞ pantÚw épe¤rgastai dihgÆmatow. §pe‹ d° me pantax∞ periÆgage t∞w •sp°raw, diabibãsaw t“ lÒgƒ tÚn ÉAdr¤an aÈtÒn, tØn ÉItal«n x«ran, tå Kampan«n ped¤a, tåw dittåw ÖAlpeiw, tå ÉAp°nnina ˆrh, tÚ LigustikÚn p°lagow, toÊtvn éf°menow ka‹ prÚw ta›w stÆlaiw me stÆsaw ta›w ÑHhrakl°ow ka‹ Dionus¤ou, §p‹ s¢ tÚn lÒgon perikuklo›.

25

Baba‹ t«n bront«n, t«n KatadoÊpvn, t«n toË Ne¤lou katarrakt«n. oÈd°n soi t«n èpãntvn katal°loipen émnhmÒneuton: tØn dejiån …w pantãpasin édvrÒlhptow, tØn t∞w gn≈mhw eÈg°neian, tÚ filÒtimon, tØn genna¤an proa¤resin. e‰ta dØ kataba¤nvn §j°fras° soi tØn trãpezan, tÚ t∞w dia¤thw e‰dow, …w diait–hw, …w gel–hw, potapÚw m°n soi ı fipnol°bhw, ıpo›on d° soi tÚ

30

kupell¤on, ıpo›ow ı pinak¤skow, ı xutrÒpouw, ≤ §tnÆrusiw, …w t«n pothr¤vn sou tÚ m¢n ¶kpvma, tÚ d¢ §l°faw, tÚ d¢ ¶fhbow, tÚ d¢ =utÒn, tÚ d¢ daktulvtÒn, tÚ d¢ kãlpiw, tÚ d¢ kuboeid°w, tÚ d¢ kissuboeid°w, …w p¤noiw, …w prop¤noiw to›w f¤loiw ka‹ …w t«n o‡nvn tÚn m°n Faler›non paraitª plhroËnta tØn kefalÆn, tÚn d¢ X›on proairª tÚ ∏par §pixeil¢w poioËnta purÒw, p«w §pixe› soi tÚ

35

kÊpellon ı tÚn krat∞ra kirn«n, p«w ±r°ma to›w daktÊloiw §nt¤yhsin.

9. ı add. Kurtz || 14. kat°kluse K-D kat°luse K || 16. K-D K || 22. kampan«n K-D kapan«n K | ép°nnina K-D ép°nina K || 31. dak- tulvtÚn K-D daktulvgÒn K || 34. soi K-D s‹ K ||

62

GEORGE T. DENNIS

ÉEpe‹ d° soi §leptolÒghse tÚ sumpÒsion, §boÊleto d¢ ka‹ tØn metå taËta §jakrib«sai diatribÆn, sm∞now §gΔ lÒgvn §nteËyen ır«n bayÁn Ïpnon ÍpokrinÒmenow oÏtvw éphllãghn toË éndrÒw. éllÉ otow m¢n ka‹ aÔyiw ≤m›n parag°noito ka‹ pollãkiw toËto, ka‹ e‡poi ple¤ona œn efirÆkei: so‹ d¢ tå m¢n

40 êlla ¶xoi kal«w, tØn d° ge dejiån mÆte tosoËton §kte¤noiw Àste mØ laye›n tØn éristerån mÆyÉ oÏtvw sunagãg˙w Àste mãthn mØ dÊnasyai kénteËyen §pilipe›n soi tå êlfita.

mØ dÊnasyai kénteËyen §pilipe›n soi tå êlfita. 40. §kte¤noiw K-D §nte¤noiw K 4 1 3 2

40. §kte¤noiw K-D §nte¤noiw K

4

13

25

cf. Plato. Resp. 411c.6.

cf. Heliod. Aeth. 1.1.1.

Herod. 2.17.

CHAPTER FIVE

This page intentionally left blank

FIVE MIRACLES OF ST. MENAS

John Duffy and Emmanuel Bourbouhakis

The cult of St. Menas, an Egyptian martyr whose feastday is celebrated on November 11, led to the development of one of the most popular pil- grimage centers of the early Middle Ages. It was located in the Egyptian desert southwest of Alexandria and Lake Mareotis and consisted of a large complex of buildings whose full extent was brought to light by the excavations of C. M. Kaufmann in the opening decade of the last centu- ry. 1 Sophronius of Jerusalem in the early seventh century described the saint’s shrine as “the pride of all Libya”. 2 Many examples of St. Menas flasks, image-bearing clay ampullae for carrying blessed water from the shrine, have been found throughout the territories of the Byzantine Empire and further afield, thus bearing witness to the far-flung fame of the saint and his influence. 3 In addition to the physical traces of the cult we have a collection of miracle accounts, attributed in part of the Greek tradition to Patriarch Timothy of Alexandria (380-384), though there is not a shred of evidence to support the ascription apart from a manuscript title, and it hardly deserves to be taken seriously. 4 Alongside Greek, the miracles of Menas survive in one form or another in various other languages including Coptic, Ethiopian, and Slavic. As far as the Greek text is concerned, there is essentially only one serviceable printed version of thirteen miracles, namely that published in 1900 on the basis of a single Moscow manu- script by the Russian scholar I. Pomjalovskij. 5 Writing some ten years

1 Kaufmann (1910).

2 In the Miracles of Cyrus and John, no. 46: TÚ Mhnç toË mãrturow t°menow ka‹ tÚ prÚ toË tem°nouw domãtion pãshw LibÊhw kay°sthke frÊagma. In the edition of N. F. Marcos (1975), the text is on p. 351.

3 See the article “Menas Flasks” in vol. 2 of the ODB 1340.

4 A sentiment expressed long ago by H. Delehaye in an article of considerable importance for Menas studies: Delehaye (1910) 117-150 (present point 127-8).

5 Zhitie prepodobnago Paisija Velikago i Timofeja patriarkha Aleksandrijskago povestvo - vanie o chudesakh Sv. velikomuchenika Miny (St. Petersburg: 1900) 62-89. The manuscript in question is Moscow Sinod. gr. 379 dated to the eleventh century. We should also mention another, rather strange, printing of the first five miracles from a different Greek manuscript of similar date. In “De Wonderverhalen van den Heiligen Menas,” R. Miedema (1918) 212-21 provides from Vaticanus gr. 866 a transcription that not only omits accents entirely but also reproduces the myriad orthographical peculiarities of the copyist. The transcription does help us, however, in one place; see below n. 20.

66

JOHN DUFFY AND EMMANUEL BOURBOUHAKIS

later Delehaye remarked how that Russian edition continued to remain unnoticed. 6 He also drew attention to the fact that there were quite a few other manuscripts in existence which would be worth examining. After the lapse of a century, however, the groundwork of collecting and com- paring all the surviving witnesses has still not been carried out and the absence of much basic information, therefore, imposes limits on the ongoing discussion of these documents. On the other hand, Delehaye himself had looked at a sufficient num- ber of the manuscripts to determine that not all offered the same number of miracles, noting that in some the collection was confined to the first five. This was also the case, he added, in the menaia for November 11, whose texts were “notablement abrégés”. 7 It is our purpose here to publish the first account, consisting of text, translation and notes, of one of these abridged versions that were spe- cially tailored for use in liturgical books. The manuscript witness is a lit- tle-known synaxarion of the 12th century, formerly housed in the monastery of St. John the Theologian on the island of Lesbos, but pur- chased by an American bibliophile from a dealer in New York in 1947 and bequeathed to Harvard College in 1984. It is now in the Houghton Library at Harvard University and carries the designation Ms. Typ 243H. 8 The text of this six-month synaxarion, covering the feastdays of saints from September to February, is severely truncated in its present state, having suffered the loss of its first eleven quires. The surviving part begins with the commemorations for November 11, i.e. with a brief account of the martyrdom of St. Menas, followed by the short collection of miracles. The five miracles of St. Menas found in the Harvard copy are a rep- resentative selection of one of the oldest and most popular genres of Christian literature, the beneficial tale. These versions are interesting examples of the final installment of the story of such beneficial tales and religious literature of this type more generally. For by the tenth century much of it was being gathered, abridged, and having its language adjust- ed (usually up, but occasionally down) to more canonical forms and vocabulary. In the process the original verve was often dampened and even extinguished. One need only compare the miracle of the crippled man and the mute woman (no. 4) with the longer, earlier version that we have reprinted from Pomjalovskij’s edition and translated here for the

6 Delehaye (1910) 128.

7 Delehaye (1910) 128.

8 See John Duffy (forthcoming). For a very brief and incomplete description see also Bond and Faye (1962) 26.

FIVE MIRACLES OF ST. MENAS

67

first time into English. Not only has a kind of Byzantine bowdlerization taken place, a fact quite significant in itself, since it tells us something about what was deemed appropriate for the audience of a twelfth-centu- ry commemorative service, but the extreme distillation of this and the other stories into their most salient elements has put them on the margins of narrative; they appear less and less as vivid accounts of singular events and rather more as illustrations of important lessons. 9 Nevertheless, they are still quite revealing, both for the changes they have undergone and for what they preserve. Indeed a significant core of motives and values survives from the longer into the abridged versions. The mercantile community of lower Egypt portrayed here, with its ser- vants, horses, and purses of gold, remained familiar to a middle Byzantine audience. Theft and trickery amongst this class must not have been so foreign as to render the stories implausible, at least not in the eyes of some. Finally, the intervention of the saint in such situations, resulting in one story at least in a sizeable donation to his shrine, reflects the role which an immanent spiritual world was believed to play in the daily lives of Byzantine Christians. The stories published here represent the continued efforts to ensure the recognition of that role and the con- sequences for those who failed to heed its lessons.

9 It is no surprise that the eye-catching original version of no. 4 drew comments from mod- ern scholars. Delehaye (1910) 131 characterizes it as a “plaisante et peu édifiante histoire” and Karl Krumbacher, in a short review of Pomjalovskij’s work ( BZ 10 [1901] 343-4) must sure- ly have had it uppermost in his mind when he referred to the “zum Teil sehr sonderbaren und zur Lektüre von Comtessen wenig geeigneten Wunder des hl. Menas”!

68

JOHN DUFFY AND EMMANUEL BOURBOUHAKIS

TEXT.

I

Pot¢ d° tiw éperxÒmenow proseÊjasyai §n t“ na“ aÈtoË, §d°xyh parã tinow efiw monÆn. ka‹ §pe‹ ı ÍpodoxeÁw ¶gnv tÚn Ípodexy°nta §gkÒlpion f°rein xrusÒn, énaståw §n m°sƒ t∞w nuktÚw fone¤& xeir‹ toÊtƒ §p°yeto: ka‹ melhdÚn katakÒcaw efiw spur¤da §n°bale ka‹ éph≈rhse, tØn ßv §kdexÒmenow. ka‹ ∑n loipÚn §nag≈niow …w pÒte ka‹ poË épagãgoi §n éfane› tÒpƒ katakrËcai boulÒmenow. Ka‹ …w §n toÊtoiw ∑n ≤ mel°th, ı ëgiow toË XristoË mãrtuw ¶fippow …w §n tãjei strati≈tou énafane‹w per‹ toË §ke›se katalÊsantow ±reÊna j°nou. toË d¢ fon°vw mhd¢n gin≈skein dia- bebaioum°nou, toË ·ppou épobåw efis∞lyen §n t“ §ndot°rƒ ofikÆmati, ka‹ katagagΔn tØn spur¤da ka‹ t“ fone› blosurÚn §mbl°caw, t¤ §sti toËto;fhs¤n. ı d¢ Àsper ¶kplhktow genÒmenow ÍpÚ d°ouw to›w pos‹ toË èg¤ou pt«ma deinÚn •autÚn kat°bale. Tå goËn katatmhy°nta m°lh ı ëgiow sunarmologÆsaw ka‹ proseujãmenow én°sthse tÚn nekrÚn efipΔn dÚw dÒjan t“ ye“.ı d¢ …w §j Ïpnou énaståw ka‹ katanoÆsaw ˜sa ka‹ oÂa pãyoi parå toË Ípodejam°nou §dÒjase tÚn yeÒn, ka‹ t“ fainom°nƒ strath- lãt˙ eÈxaristÆsaw tØn proskÊnhsin §d¤dou. énastãntow te toË fon°vw ı ëgiow tÚn xrusÚn épÚ toÊtou labΔn doÁw aÈt“ ¶fh tØn ıdÒn sou poreÊou.tÚn d¢ fon°a §pistrafe‹w tÊcaw …w efikÚw ka‹ kathxÆsaw pros°ti, ka‹ tØn êfesin toË §gklÆmatow xarisãmenow, ka‹ Íp¢r §ke¤nou proseujãmenow, toË ·ppou §pibåw ép°pth épÚ t«n Ùfyalm«n aÈtoË.

FIVE MIRACLES OF ST. MENAS

69

TRANSLATIONS.

I

There was a man once who having gone to pray at the saint’s church was given a place to stay by a certain individual. And because the man who received him realized that the guest was carrying gold on his person, 10 he got up in the middle of the night and set upon him with a murderous hand. And cutting his body into pieces he put him in a bas- ket, suspended it, and waited for morning. And then he was filled with anxiety about when and where he might take (the remains) to hide them in some remote place. Now while his mind was preoccupied with these things, Christ’s saintly martyr appeared on horseback dressed as a military man 11 and began to inquire about the stranger who had spent the night there. And although the murderer assured him he knew nothing, the saint dis- mounted from his horse, went into the inner part of the building and bringing down the basket and fixing a fearsome stare on the murder- er, he said “What is this?” And the man, going into a state of shock from fright, cast himself at the feet of the saint like a wretched corpse. The saint then reassembled the severed limbs and, having prayed, he raised up the dead man, saying “Give glory to God.” While he, rising as if from sleep and realizing the extent of his sufferings at the hands of the man who had given him lodging, praised God, and thanking the per- son dressed as a military officer he made obeisance to him. And when the murderer got up from the ground, the saint took the gold from him and gave it to the other saying “Continue your journey.” And turning to the murderer he chastised him as was fitting and lectured him as well, granting him pardon for the crime. Then he offered a prayer on the man’s behalf, got on his horse and disappeared from his sight.

10 The Greek phrase §gkÒlpion f°rein could possibly be interpreted to mean that the man was wearing a gold cross or some other type of phylactery. However, later in the story we are told that the saint returned “the gold” to its owner, and that also agrees with the longer version published by Pomjalovskij (1900) 63-5, in which the coveted object was money carried in a purse or money-bag (balãntion).

11 This may be a reflection of some accounts of the saint’s earlier career which make him a soldier. Beyond that Delehaye (1910) 135 draws attention to the fact that St. Menas as horserider fits into a general pattern for Egyptian saints.