downey, the composition of procopius, de aedificiis

8/17/2019 Downey, The Composition of Procopius, De Aedificiis

1/14

merican Philological ssociation

The Composition of Procopius, De Aedificiis

Authors(s): G. Downey

Source: Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, Vol. 78

(1947), pp. 171-183Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/283492

Accessed: 27-03-2016 15:58 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted

digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about

JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

American Philological Association, The Johns Hopkins University Press are collaboratingwith JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions and Proceedings of the AmericanPhilological Association

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 146.155.94.33 on Sun, 27 Mar 2016 15:58:53 UTCAll use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms


2/14

V o x xv P ro co p us D e a e d f c s 1 71

XV-TheComposton ofProcopus Deaedfc s

G DOWNEY

HARVARDUNVERS TY

DUMBARTONOAKS RESEARCHLBRARY ANDCOLLECTON

WASHNGTOND C

1TheDe a ed fc s n t s p re sentforms unfns hed The exs tence o fma o r

dfferences nthetextofthetwoprnc pasurvvngMSS gvesreasontosuspect

thatthereweretworedactonsofthetreatse2 Thetreatsewaswrtten n

anefforttooffsetthempressonproducedbythecaamt eswhchmarkedthe

astyearsofJustnansregn andn ordertobostertheEmperorsprestge

1

TheDeaedfc sofProcopusa panegyrcadescrptonofthe

bud ngactvt esoftheEmperorJustnan ssuchatransparent

peceoff atterythatathough t sa sourceofconsderabe vaue

forthearchaeoogstandfortheeconomcandsoca hstorant

hasrecevedreatvey tteattentonn otherrespectsThere

arehowever certanaspectsofthe teraryformandcomposton

o fthe tre a t sewhchw repa y s tud y and w enab eus t o r e acha

moreustevauatonofthework nanear erstudythepresent

wrtersummarzedtheprncpa featuresofthepanegyrcaaspect

ofthetreatseandanayzedonepassagetheaccountofthere-

b ud ng o fAnto cha ft er t s s ackb y thePer s ans n5 4 0 nwhch

Procopus descrptoncanbeevauatedonthebassof ndependent

evdence Thsanayss ustratedthefashon nwhch Procopus

"ProcopusonAntochA StudyofMethodn theDeaedfc s"Byzanton14

1939 361-378Seea sothentroductonto theedtonof theDeaed ntheLoeb

Ca s s c a Lb r ary 1 9 40 ed a nd tra ns b y H BDewngwththe co a b or a t ono f

thepresentwrterTheb b ographyofProcopusthrough1940s coectedby

GMoravcsk De byzQue enderGeschchtederTrkvd5kerBudapest 1942302-

3 10 a dd L WDay " Echno s a nd Justna ns Fo r tfc at o ns nG r e ec e " AJA 46

1942500-5080 Wuff "DasRaumerebnsdesNaosmSpege derEkphrass"

ByzZ301929/30 531-539andtheRussantransatonoftheDeaed byS P

Kondratev Vestnk Drevne stor Moscow 1939fasc4 203-298whch have

no t s een A us efub r ef a c counto fPro cop us fe a nd wo rks s g v enby J BBury

HstoryoftheLaterRomanEmpreLondon19232 419-430Referencesn thepres-

ent study a r e t o JHa ury s Teub ner t extPr oco p o p era omna 2 Lep z g 1 91 3

Thepassagesstudedherearectedn transaton oftenthatoftheLoebedton

bothforreasonsofeconomyandbecausethereaderw needn anycasetohave

Haurysedt onathand amndebtedtoMssSrarpeDerNersessanforvauabe

crtc smofths study



3/14

172G Downey1947

seectedandmanpuatedhsmatera nordertomagnfythe

Emperorsw sdomandaccomp shments

Furtherexamnatonofthetextw maket pan thatthe

t r e at s e ntheformn whchtha s r e ached us s unfns hed n

thefrstpace Procopus etst beunderstood atthebegnnngof

theworktha thew d e scrb e a thebu d ng a c tv t e s o fJus tna n

yethedoesnotdescrbeanyoftheEmperorsworksn tay

thoughhs conqueststherearementonedn1 1016Ths of

coursesuggestsatoncethatthework n tspresentstates un-

fn shedThesameconcusonseems ndcatedbytheformand

contentsofBook6 whch stheconcudngbookn thepresent

stateofthetext AttheopenngofBook5 Procopuswrtes

511-3 p 149Haury "ThebudngserectedbytheEmperor

Justnan na Europehavebeenrecordedas faraspossbe nthe

precedngbook Wemustnowgoontotheremanngpartsof

Asa nfacta thefortfcatonsofct esandthefortresses as

we astheotherbudngswhch heerectedthroughouttheEast

fromtheboundaryofPersaasfarasthe ctyofPa myrawhch

chancestobe nPhoencaby Lebanonhave thnk beensuff-

centydescrbedbymeabove nBooks2and3 Soatpresent

s ha t e a s o o f a thatwa s d oneb y hm nther e st o fA s a a nd n

Lbya "Afterths ntroductonthereaders surprsedto

fndthatBook5 sentrey occupedwththeEmperorsactvt es

nAsa Mnor SyraandPaestne andcontansnothngconcern-

ng Lb y a Lb y a nd eed s t r ea t ed o ny nBo ok6 whcho pens

wthan accountofJustnansundertakngs nEgyptandcon-

tnueswtha descrpton progressngwestward ofthe mpera

bud ngactvt esaongthesouthernshoreoftheMedterranean

end ngwththeP a r s ofHer cue s Ths p a r t t o no fthema t er a

suggeststhatwhatsnowBook6 orgna yformedtheatterpart

ofBook5 andthatProcopusatermadetheatterpartofBook5

aseparatebookw thoutmakngthenecessaryateratonn the

orgna ntroducton ustquoted toBook5 Thsconcusonmay

fndsupportn thepresentengthsofthebooks whchareasfo ows

1 Constantnope40Teubnerpages

2 Per s a nfro nt er 3 7 " "

3 A rmena Euxner eg o ns 2 0 " "

4 Euro pe4 7 " "

5 " As a a nd Lb y a" 2 2 " "

6 Eg yp tNo r thA fr c a 1 5 " "



4/14

Vol lxxviii Procopius, De aedificiis 173

Book 6, then, is the shortest of the books If it were combined

with 5, the resultant book would be of the same length as 2, and

shorter than 1 and 4 If Procopius intended to describe Justinians

activities in Italy (as he certainly must have done), he would pre-

sumably (in view of the geographical arrangement of the present

books) have treated these in a final book If, however, he found

that he would be unable to write this book, he might then have

decided to divide his original Book 5 into two (the present 5 and 6),

thus producing the unusually brief final book which we have

That Book 6 was not originally a sepatate book is suggested also

by the lack of reference in it to the preceding book Procopius

begins Book 2 with the remark (21 1, p 45 Haury) "All the new

churches which the Emperor Justinian built both in Constantinople

and in its suburbs have been described in the preceding book"

At the opening of the third book he writes (311, p 82 Haury)

"Thus the Emperor Justinian strengthened the territory of the

East with fortifications, as I have set forth in the preceding book"

His similar remark at the opening of Book 5 has been quoted above

(172) These remark are of course a literary device for providing

a smooth transition from book to book there is no similar remark

at the opening of Book 4, but that book has a special introduction,

more elaborate than those of the others At the opening of Book 6,

however, Procopius merely writes (61 1, p 171 Haury), "Thus

were these things done by the Emperor Justinian," a phrase which

actually could have been intended simply to provide a suitable con-

clusion for the classified list of buildings with which Book 5 now

closes2 This lack of reference to the preceding book, or, alter-

nately, of a special introduction such as stands at the head of 4,

gives further reason to suspect that 6 was not originally designed

as a separate book Moreover, Books 2, 4 and 5 open with general

considerations on the importance and extent of Justinian s work,

andthere snothngofths attheopenngof6

Further understanding of the method of composition of the

treatise may be gained from study of the schematic lists of building

activities which Procopius gives in three places (44, pp 116-124

4 11, pp 145-149 5 9, pp 169-171 Haury) At least the first two

of these lists evidently reproduce the contents of government

2 Procopius frequently uses similar brief phrases to indicate the conclusion of one

topic and the introduction of another. To cite only a few examples, see 1.8.1; 1.10.1;

2 5 11 2 6 1 1 2 7 1 2 8 1



5/14

174G Downey1947

archvestowhch Procopuswasgvenaccessforhsworkthe thrd

whe tmayrepresentanoffca source coud fromtsformrepre-

sentProcopusownworkngnoteswhch hemayhaventended

eventua y towr t e o utn fu n ntro ducng thefr s t s the

wr t es 4 4 3 p 1 1 6Ha ury tha t tw b ep refer a b e t o s t a

theseactvt es"n cataogueformsothatmynarratvemaynot

becomeutteryrksomebythenterspersonofa crowdofp ace-

name s n t " Cer ta ny ths s t s mo r e c ar efu y comp ed tha n

thesecond nthef rst st Procopuscarefu ydstngushesbe-

tweennewfortfcatonsabdrebut fortfcatonsths dstncton s

notmade nthesecond st Asmghtbeexpected nthec rcum-

stances the stscontana certan numberofdupcatonsand

apparenterrorswhchshoudhavebeenremovedfthetreatsehad

beenedtedwthanycare thebarbarannamesespecay must

havebeenvexngforProcopusaswe asforthempera offcas

whocompedthe stswhchhemusthaveused andhenodoubt

woudnothavepadcoseattentontothemwhenhefrstprepared

hs ststhoughaterstudywoudhaveremovedsomeofthe

naccuraceswhchnowappeartoexstThus t ooksasthough

the t ownca ed Ko v E6a a a n4 1 3 2 p 1 0 6 2 0Haury were the

s ame a s theKo v u4o 5ef3c a ncud ed nthefr s t s t 4 4 p 1 2 3 2 9

HauryThesecond stenumeratesKovUKa63LpLandKofVKovXLS n

successveentres p 14532-33Haury wthKoVOKavpLand

KofvKovXLevdentythesamepaces nsuccessveentresatp 148

25-26HauryBaKOv-ac4 4 p 1176 Haury andBaKOvov-r bd

p 1172 Hauryarevery keythesamepace asareBeoatava

b d p 1 2 0 4 2Ha ury a nd Be a a va b d p 1 1 9 5 4Haury a nd

p erhap s Kaa cowr as b d p 1 1 9 9 Ha ury a nd Ka aaw7r e s b d p 1 1 9

30Haury

Thethrd st5 9 pp169-171Haury ashasbeensuggested

mayrepresentnotesmadebyProcopuswhchhed dnotwrte up

a s he o rg na y nt end ed to d o Ths s nd c a t ed b y the cr cum-

stancethatthe sts notacassf edcataogue asarethefrsttwo

stsbut sareadypartyn teraryformandbythefactthatn

thesectonontheprovnceofPhoencehe hasentresforDaphne

nearAntochandforLaodceap 17015-16Haury Thesetwo

pacesofcoursewerenot nPhoencebut ntheprovnceofSyra

Procopusapparenty stedthemhereetherbym stakeorbecause

3Thsdfferencebetweentheformsofthe stscoudaso ndcatethatthearchves

whchProcopusconsutedweredfferentycomped



6/14


hedd notconsderJustnans actvtes nthesepacesverym-

portant

Anotherndcatonthatthetreatseddnotrecevedefn tve

revsonbytheauthors thedupcatonofthe accountoftherepar

o f the cr cut -wa o fCha c s nSy r a n2 1 1 1 p 8 0Ha ury we

readthat"nthesamemannerheasoreparedthecrcut-wa of

the c ty o fCha c s whchha d b eenfa uty b u t nthefr s tp a ce

andhadbeenwreckedbytheyearshe restoredthsaongw ththe

outworksandrenderedtmuchmoredefensbe thanbeforeand

g av e t theformwhchwenows e e "A t t e a t e r n2 1 1 8 p 8 1

aury weaganreadthat"Asoherestoredtheentrec rcut-wa

ofthecty ofChacs whchhadfa endowntothegroundandany-

howwasunsutabefordefencebymeansofexceptonaystout

masonryandhestrengthened tw thoutworks"

Hauryprntedbothpassagesnh stext butconsderedthatthe

attershoudbedeetedasa repetton oftheformer Thssugges-

onhoweverseemstohavebeena hastyone forconsderatonof

theprobemndcatesthatthetwopassagescanhardyrepresent

mereyacareessrepettonTheyaresoc osetogetherthat t

hardyseemspossbethatProcopusdupcatedtheaccountsmpy

byanoversght Nordoes tseempossbethatthetwopassages

refertothetwopacesnamedChacs vz Chacsad Beum

modernKnnesrn about35km southofA eppo andChacsof

LebanonnearmodernMedda Anarabout65km fromBeyrouth

neartheBeyrouth-Damascusroad Chacsad Beumwasan

mportantpace nJustnans tme whe theotherChacs sank

ntoobscurtyafterthemddeofthef rstcenturyofourera

Moreover there san nscrptonofChacs adBeum datedAD

5 5 0whchr efer s t o ther ebu d ng o fawa whchs ev d enty the

ctywa whe there snosuchevdencepreservedfortheother

Chacs tseemsmuchmore keythatbothpassageswere

wrttenbyProcopus ntheform nwhch theyappearn theMSS

becauseProcopuswasnotabeto decdeorg nay nwhch ofthe

twopaceshewshedtorecordtheworkatChacs Hemayhave

wr t tenthe a ccount twce s mp y no rder t o s ee nwhchp a c e t

4Cf. Benzinger in RE s.v. "Chalkis" nos. 14 and 15; R. Dussaud, Topographie

historique de la Syrie (Paris, 1927) 400-401, 476-477; W. K. Prentice, Greek and Latin

Inscriptions (Publications of an American Archaeological Expedition to Syria, 3 [New

York, 1908]) no. 305 = L. Jalabert and R. Mouterde, Inscriptions grecques et latines

de la Syrie (Paris, 1929 -in progress) no. 348; R. Mouterde and A. Poidebard, Le

limes de Chalcis (Paris, 1945) frontispiece (map), 3-7, 17, 19-23, 35-36, 229-240.



7/14

176G Downey1947

ookedmoreapproprate fths werethecase hewoudhave

ntendedeventuay toexpungethe esssatsfactorypassageHe

mayhowever havebeenunabeforsomereasontosette theques-

t onandmayhavehadtoa owbothpassagestostand

Thedecsveevdencefortheunfnshedstateofthetreatse s

s hasbeennoted theabsenceofanyaccountofJustnansbu d-

ngs n t a y Jus tna nev enfhed d no t command thewr tng

ofthetreatseknewthatt wasbengwrttenforProcopusafter

havngdescrbedtheEmperorschurchesofChrstatConstant-

nope saysthattocontnuetheaccount 131 p 20Haury"we

mustbegnwththechurchesofMarytheMotherofGodForwe

nowthat ths s thews ho ftheEmp ero rhms ef " Fr omths

tappearsthatJustnanmadeateast"suggestons"concernngthe

p anofthetreatse andwecanscarceysupposethathewoud have

approvedthepannngof anaccountofh sbu dngactvt eswhch

faedto contana descrptonofh sworkn tay TheEmperor

coudhardyhavebeencontenttohaveStApo naren Casse

andStV taeat Ravenna5omttedfromatreatseonthebu dng

actvtesof hs regn eventhoughhemayactuaynothavehad

asmuchtodowth therconstructonashed dwth HagaSopha

andtheChurchoftheApostesatConstantnope

t thus se ems qut e c e rt a nthat theDe a ed fc s a t e a s tnthe

formnwh ch thasreachedus sunfn shedTheresfurther

evdencewhch maysuggestthatthereexstedtworedactonsofthe

treatse oneofwhchconsstedofaverson nwhch theauthor

hmsefhadrevsedanear erdraftwhchhadareadygotnto

crcuaton Therevsedbutapparentyst unfnshedverson

woudhavebeenssuedetherdurngProcopus feorafterhs

deathTheevdenceforthshypothess whe senderandnot

co ncus v ew r epa y examnato n

nestabshngh stextoftheDeaedf c s Hauryperceved

thatofthetwoprncpa survvngMSSthatwhch heca edVwas

superortothatwhch heca edA6Haurydd nothowever

reazethepossbe sgnfcanceofsomeofthedfferencesbetween

thesetwoMSS hesawonythatV s ngeneramorecorrectsome-

tmes moreeegant n anguageandgrammatcaconstructon

thanA Wheths s t r ue a s a g a nce thr oug hHaury s cr t c a

5Ch Deh Manue dartbyzantn Pars 1925-19261 186-190

6Seethestemman thentroductonofHaurystextV -codVatcanusgr

1065saec13 A=cod Ambrosanusgr182sup saec14



8/14


apparatusw showfurtherstudyofsomeofthepassages nques-

tonw suggestthatsomeofthed fferencesaremores gnfcant

thanHaurysupposed

Themos t s trkng o ccur s n1 1 2 2 -2 6 p 9Ha ury nthe

accountofthebu dngofSt SophaV reads

" So thewho e chur cha t that tme a fte r theNka r o t a y a

charredmassofruns ButtheEmperorJustnanbu tnot ong

afterwardsachurchsofney shapedthat fanyonehadenqured

oftheChrstansbeforetheburnng f twoudbe therw shthat

thechurchshoudbedestroyedandone keths shoudtakets

pace showngthemsomesortofmode ektyp6maofthebu dng

wenowsee tseemstomethattheywoudhaveprayedthatthey

m ghtseetherchurchdestroyedforthwth norderthatthebud-

ng mghtbeconvertednto tspresentformAtanyratethe

Emperordsregardnga questonsofexpenseeagerypressedon

tobegntheworkofconstructon andbegantogathera the

artsansfromthewhoe wordAndAnthemusofTraes the

most earnedmann thesk edcraftwhchs knownastheartof

bud ng notonyofa hscontemporaresbutaso whencompared

wththosewhohad vedongbeforeh m mnsteredtotheEm-

perorsenthusasmduy reguatngthetasksofthevarousartsans

andpreparngn advancedesgnsofthefutureconstructonand

assocatedwthh mwasanotherarchtect7 sdorusbyname a

M esanbybrth amanwhowas nte gentandworthytoassst

theEmperorJustnan ndeedths asowasan ndcatonofthe

honorn whchGodhedtheEmperorthatHehadareadyprovded

themenwhowoudbemostservceabeto hm nthetaskswhch

werewat ngtobecarredout Andonemghtwth goodreason

marveatthe dscernmentoftheEmperorhmsef nthatoutof

thewhoewordhe wasabetoseectthe menwhoweremostsut-

be forthemost mportantofhs enterprses"

nA thepassagefrom" fanyonehad nqured"totheend

ofthequotatonsrepresentedbythefoowng ratherexguous

sentences

"fprevousyanyonehadnqured showngsomesortof

mode ofthatwhchwenowsee theywoudwshthatths church

shoudbedestroyedsothatt mghtbeseentransformedto ts

presentformAndtheEmperorbegantogathera theartsans

fromthewhoeword Hebrought AnthemusofTra es the

most ngenousman nthesk edcraftwhchs knownastheart

o fb ud ng no tony o fa hs co ntempo ra r e s b ut a s owhencom-

Onthemeanngofmechanopoos seeG Downey "ByzantneArchtectsTher

TranngandMethods"to bepub shedn Byzanton18 and"PappusofA exandra

onArchtecturaStudes"to bepubshed n ss38 nos113-114



9/14

178G Downey1947

paredwth thosewhohad vedongbeforeh m nordertoreguate

thetasksoftheartsanspreparngn advancedesgnsofthefuture

constructon Heasobrought sdorusofMetus anarchtect"

Whe Asversons adequateasafactuaaccount theasttwo

sentencesarenotgrammatca ycorrect andthewhoepassage

acksthecharacterstca yProcopanfusomenessofVs verson

ComparsonoftheGreekorgnasw showseverapaces nwhch

thetextasrepresentedn V hasbeentouchedupandmproved

eg Vssubsttutonp 9 10Hauryof ogotatosfortheawkward

mgchankbtatonof A

Asm ardvergenceoccurs nthe ntroductontothetreatse n

whchJustnan scomparedwththePersanCyruswho Pro-

copuswrtes sthebestruerofwhomknowedges preserved

Her e 1 1 1 5 - 16 p 7 1 8 f Ha ury Vr e a ds

"Butn thecaseofthekngof ourtmes Justnan whomone

wo ud rg hty thnkca a kng b y na tur e a s we a s b y nher t a nce

s ncehe s a s Homer sa ys a s g ent e a s a f a ther fo ne s ho ud

examnehs r eg nwthca r ehew r ega rd therue o fCy rus a s a

s or t o fchd s p a y Thepr o ofo fths w b e that theRoman

Empreas haveustsad hasbecomemorethandoubedbothn

areaandnpowergenera y whe ontheotherhandthosewho

reacherousyformedthepotagansth m gongsofarevenasto

panh sassassnaton arenotony vngupto thepresentmoment

andn possessonoftherownpropertyeventhoughther gut

wasprovedwthabsoutecertantybutareactuay st servngas

generasof theRomans andarehodngtheconsuarranktowhch

theyhadbeen apponted"

Fo r thewo rds " But nthe c a se np owerg enera y "A r e a ds

smpy "AndatokenoftheEmperorsbenevoenceph an-

thr6pa

Abrefpassagen whchtheres strkngdvergencebetweenV

andA na ratherdffcu tpontof technca descrptonoccursn

theaccountofthebu dngoftheeasternarchofHaga Sopha

Here 1 1 6 8 -6 9 p 1 5 2 3 ff Ha ury Vr e a ds

"Oneofthearcheswhch ustnowmentoned 1rothearch-

tects8ca them theonewhchstandstowardtheeasthadaready

beenbut upfromethersde butt hadnotyetbeenwho ycom-

p e t ed n themd d e a nd wa s st wa tngAnd thep ers a b ov e

whchthestructurewasbengbu t unabetocarrythemasswhch

boredownuponthemsomehoworothersuddenybegantocrack

andtheyseemedonthepontofco apsng"

8Seetheprecedngnote



10/14


Forthewordsfromthebegnnngofthequotatonthrough"whch

boredownuponthem"Areads

"Oneofthearches orothearchtectsca them theone

towardtheeast whchwasnotyetfn shedwegheddownthe

persbytsmassandthey

Aga nthev ers o no fAwh eco rr e ct s nfer o r a s a t e chnc a

descrpton tothatofV whch ooksasthought hadbeenrewrtten

fromAwth somecare

Thefna peceofevdencetobeconsdered nths connectons

theong stoffortfcatonswhch Procopuswrtes theEmperor

constructedorrebut nNewEprus 44 pp116-124Haury

Ths s t s g v eno ny b y Va nd s comp etey a ckng nA The

othertwosm ar stsofpace-names411 pp145-149 59

pp169-171Hauryarepresent nbothMSSThepresenceofthe

r s t s t 4 4 nVa o nemay s ug ge s t tha t ths s twas no tncud ed

nProcopusorg nadraftrepresentedbyA butwasaddedwhen

hemayhavemadethechangesand mprovementsoverA whch

theversons nV appeartorepresent

Further ndcatonthatthefrst stwasater nsertedntoan

areadywrttentextmaybefoundn thefactthatthe asttwo sts

standattheendofBook4andattheendofBook5 respectvey

npostonsn whchther prosaccharacterwoudnotbe soobvous

Ontheo therha nd thefr s t s t s ns er t ed n themd d eo fBoo k4

whchm ghtmeanthat twasaddedn thsp acewhenProcopus

decdedtoexpandthsbook Wthths stBook4 comprses

47Teubnerpages seethetabeabove 172and sthe ongestof

thebooksw thoutthe stBook4 woudcomprse39Teubner

pagesandwoudbemorenearycomparabe n engthw thBooks1

a nd 2 a nd wthBoo k5 a s we f6 o rg na y fo rmed a p ar t o f5

tseemsdffcut tofnda whoy satsfactoryandconvncng

expanatonof thedfferencesbetweenAandV whchhavebeen

pontedout fthedvergencesweremorenumerous wemght

thnk thatArepresentsaneptome butthscanhardybethecase

whenthedfferencesnotedoccur na reatveysma numberof

passages tcanbesupposedthatsuchdfferencesaretheworkof

aned tororscrbewhosoughttoabbrevatea tedoustextor

conversey wshedtotryhs handatexpandngthetextwhch

hefoundHowever taso seemspossbe at easttothepresent

wrterthat nvew ofthestyeandcontentsofthepassages



11/14

180G Downey 1947

examnedthedfferencesrepresentrevsonsmadebytheauthor

sothatnthepassagesn questonA woudrepresentanearer

draftofthetreatsewhchwas aterworkedoverand mprovedby

Procopushmsef

fths werethecase andt mustberepeatedthatths sa

hypothesswh chcannotbedemonstrated weshoudhaveto

supposethatanearydraftoftheDeaedf c s representedbyA

gotntoc rcuatonandcontnuedtobereproducedndependenty

oftherevsedbutst unfnsheddraftrepresentedbyV9 tmay

bes gnfcantthattheprncpa dfferencesbetweenAandV occur

nthefr s tb oo kwhch b eng concerned wththemp er a b u d ng s

atConstantnope wasthemost mportantportonof thetreatse

andwoudnaturaybe theparttowhchProcopuswoudgve

mostcarefuattentonf herevsedhswork nanydeta Whether

thepubcatonofthesupposedear erdraftwoudhavebeen

authorzedornotbyProcopus weofcoursecannotsayPerhaps

bengpressedtopubsh hstreatsebeforehehadfnshed t

hepub shedtheversonnowcontanedn A butcontnuedtowork

overthetreatseandmadethechangesrepresentedn V thoughV

t s ef a s weha ve t s t d oe s not s e emto r epr e sent a o fthe

authorsorgna ntenton thasareadybeenshownthatPro-

copuswasunabeforsomereason tofn shtheworkAttheend

ofthepresentBook6 hewrtes 6718-20p 186Haury

"Asmany thenofthebu dngsoftheEmperorJustnanas

havesucceededn dscoverng etherbyseengthemmysefor

byhearngaboutthemfromthosewhohaveseenthem have

d es crbed n my a ccount to theb e st o fmy a b ty amfuy

aware howeverthattherearemanyotherswhch haveomtted

tomentonwhch etherwentunnotcedbecauseofther muttude

orremanedatogetherunknowntome So fanyonew takethe

panstosearchthema outandaddthemtomytreatse hew

havethecredtofhavngdoneaneededworkandofhavngwonthe

renownofa overoffar achevements"

Thesewordswou d accordngto thehypothess proposedhere

haveappearedorgna y nthe"frstedt on"presumabyasa

kndofapoogyfortheunfn shedcharacterofthetreatse nwhch

9 Compare the Hstory of George the Monk a word-chronce begnnng w th

Adam and comng down to the frst year of Mchae AD 842/3 t appears that

Georgehmsefwroteouths chronce twce Thefrstversonwh chwasroughand

perhaps ncompete, got nto crcu aton, and a ater copy of t exsts today Later

George prepared a revsed vers on now represented by severa MSS See J B Bury

HstoryoftheEasternRomanEmpre London 1912454



12/14


readerswoudhavebeensurprsedtofndno accountofJustnans

wo rk n t a y fthe s eco nd ed to nwerep ub s hed nPr o co p us

f e tme s t n t s unfns hed s ta t ehewo ud hav e a owed the

statementtostandforthesamereason f howevernosecond

edtonwerepub sheddurngProcopus fe hewoudhave eft

thsconcudng paragraphn hs manuscrpt ntendngtorevseor

r ep ac e t whenhefns hed thewho ewo rk a nd t s p o ss b e o f

course thathededbeforecarryngouths fna ntentonand

thattheversonofV waspubshedonyafterhs death

2

ThattheDeaedfc swaswrtten nresponsetoan mpera

ws hs s uffc enty ce a r 1 0 The cr cums t ances nwhcht wa s

wrttenhavenotyethowever beenrevewed sothatt w be

usefutoexamnebrefy thepot ca and terarybackgroundof

thecompostonof thework

Concernngthedateofcomposton ofthetreatsewe know

onythatProcopuswasatworkon tdurngtheyearAD 559/601"

ThswasnotthehappestperodofJustnansregn AsL Breher

pontsout12from527to533theemperorhadpannedandeab-

oratedhs programandhadacquredauthortyandprestgesothat

he years533-540werethoseofv ctorousactonbutthefna and

ongestperodofhs regn extendngfrom540to565wasf ed

wthd ffcutes andreversesn 558ahordeofseventhousand

Kutrgurssucceededn crossngtheWa ofAnastasusandspread

pancn ConstantnopeD scontentwththeadmnstratonwas

10Seethepassagen 131 onthechurchesoftheV rgn quotedabove 176

TheusewhchProcopusevdentymadeofoffca recordsn compng hsschematc

stsofbud ngsseeabove173 aso ndcatesthattheworkwascarredoutunder

ffc a patronage

11 nhs accountoftheconstructonofanewbrdgeovertheSangarusrver

Procopuswrtes 5310 p155Haurythat"theEmperorJustnanhasnowunder-

takentheproectofbu dnga brdgeovertherverHavngareadybegunthetask

he s nowmuchoccup ed wtht a nd knowwe thathew comp et e tno t o ng

hence"TheophanesAM 6052p 23415-18DeBoorstatesthatths workwas

carredoutdurngtheyearAD559/60S ncet seemsun keythattheworkof

brdgngsuchar vercanhavebeenbegunn theautumnorw nterwemaysuppose

thatoperatonswereactuay naugurated nthesprngorsummerof560Another

possbe ndcatonofthedateofProcopuswrtngunfortunateycannotbecon-

troed n18 15 p 35HauryProcopuswrtesthattheemperor"recenty"ded-

catedashrneofSt JohntheBaptstattheHebdomum butthereseemstobeno

ndependentevdenceforthedateofconstructonofths church

12Ve etmortdeByzancePars 194723



13/14

182G Downey1947

spreadng nSeptember560therewasa faserumorofthedeath

ofJustnanwhch causedrots andn 562apotwasmadeaganst

theEmperor thedscoveryofwhchcausedthedsmssa ofBe -

sarusWhentheEmperorded n565attheageofe ghty-two

hs deathwasgreetedwth reef byhs subects"3

AmongtheseverestmsfortunesofJustnans ateryearswere

theseresofaccdentssufferedbyhs greatchurchHaga Sopha

TheearthquakeofAugust553 weakenedthestructure andthe

venmorevoent shockof14 December557spt thecrownofthe

greateasternarchReparswerebegunbutony afewmonths

ateron7 May558theeasternarchpartoftheeasternsem-dome

a nd pr ob a b y a p ar t o fthemand omea fe 1 4 Ther ebu d ng

asnotcompetedunt 562whentheceebratonoftherestora-

ton wasbegunon24 December twasapparentyonths occa-

sonthatPauusS entarus on6January563 readhsceebrated

poemonthechurch15

n thesecrcumstances twoud appearthattheprncpa

motvebehndthecompostonofthe Deaedfc swasa desreon

thepartofJustnan orofProcopustoprovdeapanegyrca

treatsewhch woudserveateast nparttooffsetthsseresof

caamtesandto bostertheprestgeoftheemperorbysettngforth

hs achevementsasabu derProcopustheforemosthstoran

ofthedaywhohadareadydescrbedJustnanswars woudbe

theogca persontocontnuethetae oftheEmperorsachevements

bycataogunghsmagnfcentbu dngs16

1 3 Br eher o p ct 3 1 3 3Bury H s to ftheLat RomEmp 2 6 9 -7 0 3 5 9

1 4 EH SwftHa g a So pha N ewYork1 9 4 0 1 3There s a s g htd ffcuty n

he dateofthecoapseofthearchandthedomesMaaas acontemporarydates

t he c o a ps e p 4 8 9 1 9 f f B on n ed n t h e s xt h n d c t on c f n e 1 5 = 1 S ep t A D

557-31Aug 558Theophanes AM 6051p 23227ff edDe Boorstatesthatthe

coapseoccurredon7May ntheyear6051oftheAexandranera=7May559

Cedrenus 1676 20 ff Bonn ed dates the accdent n the 32nd year of Justn an

whocametothethrone1Aug 527= 558/9 Someschoarshaveadoptedthedate

ofMaa as othersthatofTheophanesandCedrenus nsuchad sagreement tseems

preferabetofo owMaaas whowasacontemporaryTheophanesmayhavecon-

fusedthedateoftheco apsew ththedateofthebegnnngoftherepar whchmay

havebeenstartedony nthefo owngyearofthe eraCedrenusseemss mpyto have

fo owedthe tradton representedby Theophanes

15p FredanderJohannesvonGazau PauusS entarus Bern 1912109-110

16SomeschoarshavesupposedthatProcopuswrotethetreatsen orderto

redeemh mseffromsupposeddsfavorwth theEmperor whomayhaveresentedthe

veedc rt c smswhch appearedn th ebookson th ewars orsmpytogan f avor

cf F Dahn Prokopus von Cdsarea Ber n 1865 356 361-362 J Haury Procopana

Progr Augsburg189128-31BuryHst of th eL at RomEmp2428adopts th e



14/14


vewthatprvatemotvesofgrattude mpeedProcopustowrtethetreatseWh e

somesuchconsderatonmayhavebeenpresentn Procopusm ndthe tmeatwh ch

theworkwaswrtten andthecrcumstancesofJustnans astyears seemtoprovde

amuchmoresgnfcantexpanatonfortheorgn andtoneofthetreatse Students

haveexercsedthemsevestoexpan whyProcopusdoesnotmentontheco apseof

thearchanddomesofHagaSopha Dahnnotknowngthepassagen Theophanes

whchshowsthatProcopuswaswrtng n559/60 seeabovenote11 arguedthat

thetreatsemusthavebeenwrttenbeforetheco apsewhchhe wrongydatesn

559seeabovenote14 becauseProcopuscoudhardyhavefa edtomentonso

mportantaneventn hsaccountofthechurchopc t 38 Haurysupposedthat

Procopuss enceshowedthatBook1 waswrttenbefore558theremandern or

after559/60Onthecontrary Procopus nthewrtersopn onwoud deberatey

omt thscatastrophe whchcoudscarceybedescrbedaongwththeaccountwhch

Procopuswasconstranedtogveof themaorroewh chJustnansupposedypayed

ntheorg naconstructonofthebu dng Procopus taskwastomagnfythe

Emperorsachevementsratherthantodescrbeaccdentswhchmarredthem

downey, the composition of procopius, de aedificiis

Documents