Volume 110, Issue 3

Three notes on the letters of Jakob Haury to Karl Krumbacher edited by Peter Schreiner: 1. An identification of the book Krumbacher offered to Haury for review. 2. An identification of Braun’s note on textual criticism against which Haury argued. 3. A correction of a misleading typo in Schreiner’s edition.

Following A. Wifstrand, scholars made some speculations regarding the epigram IX, 198 of the Anthologia Palatina and its relationship with Nonnus’ Dionysiaca. Instead, a comprehensive analysis of the data to our disposal leads to the following conclusions: 1. the epigram hides the title, that is the precise topic (= Dionysus) of Nonnus’s work; 2. it gives information about the author, his provenance and his activity in Alexandria; 3. it contains three precise references to three strategic points of the Dionysiaca: the beginning, the middle and the end of the work, that is canto I, XXV, XLVIII; 4. therefore, the connection between the epigram and Nonnus’ work could only be understood by those who were either already familiar with the Dionysiaca or had the complete text at their disposal. The authorship of the epigram still remains uncertain.

John Boswell has attempted to make a case based on AP 9.686 that the ἀρρενο- in ἀρρενοκοῖται describes the subject of the word: ἀρρενοκοῖται are males (ἀρρενο‐) who bed with (κοῖτ‐) others, be they male or female. This note debunks Boswell’s claim, demonstrating that ἀρρενο- is the object of the word, ἀρρενοκοῖται being males (the word being taken as masculine plural) who bed with other males (ἀρρενο‐).

In 1196 three messengers were sent by the Byzantine emperor Alexios III to the monarchs of Norway, Denmark and Sweden, to request military assistance. In this article, an attempt is made to place this request in a historical context, to determine what the intentions of the emperor were and how the three kings of Norway, Denmark and Sweden would have interpreted it on their part. The mission is examined in the context of the journeys of Scandinavian dignitaries to Constantinople in the twelfth century. An important feature in all these descriptions is the continued presence of Scandinavian soldiers in the service of the Emperor, the Varangian Guard. The Varangians are portrayed as countrymen and natural allies of the new arrivals. It is argued that, although medieval Byzantium did not have a formal institution such as vassalage, the emperor certainly regarded the Scandinavian monarchs as his oath-bound “liegemen”, and that the mission of 1196 a part of that established Byzantine trend.

This article contains new palaeographical observations that in the Latin uncial of ms. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Laud. gr. 35 (VI-VIIth Centuries) recognise the characteristic features of the Roman uncial, which was typical of those manuscripts produced in Rome during the Pontificate of Gregory the Great (590-604). There are several arguments, in historical and cultural terms, that are in conflict with the alleged Sardinian origin of this bilingual Greco-Latin codex of Acts of the Apostles and confirm that probably it was made in a monastery of Rome (maybe in S. Andrea al Celio) in order to be used as glossary, useful to learn Greek language.

Theodore’s encomium for his uncle, Plato of Sakkoudion, is the most important source for the latter’s life. This article identifies Theodore’s extensive use of Gregory of Nazianzus’s Funeral Oration for Basil of Caesarea to characterize both Plato’s activities as well as Theodore’s own role as his uncle’s closest associate. From his upbringing and ascetic virtues, to his work as a scribe and calligrapher, to his role in founding monastic institutions, Plato is made to recall the example of Basil the Great, with Theodore playing the part of Gregory. The authority of the Cappadocians had been invoked by both Iconoclasts and Iconophiles, and Theodore’s encomium constitutes a claim to the contested legacy of the Fathers.

This letter was written by Symeon Magistros on behalf of the unnamed bishop of Eumeneia in Phrygia in Asia Minor, presumably in the 980s. It is essentially a petition addressed to the patriarch of Constantinople, probably Nikolaos II Chrysoberges, complaining about the infringements of certain “neighbours”. These “neighbours” are probably neighbouring land-owners in the bishopric of Eumeneia maintaining military units who comitted these infringements or even crimes. These troops were obviously not units of the imperial field army but thematic troops levied and put in stand-by by the land-owners who also were their commanders. Probably in search of provisions these troops did not behave properly, so the author on behalf of the bishop of Eumeneia complains about this and asks the patriarch of Constantinople to turn to the emperor Basil II in order to reprimand the commanders and their troops and to end the infringements. This shows that not only incursions by the Arabs posed a problem to the inhabitants of Asia Minor at that time, but the frequent presence and maintenance of thematic troops was sometimes also a burden and an annoyance for the local population.

From October 1884 to May 1885 Karl Krumbacher (1856-1909) undertook a journey to Greece and Turkey with the aim of studying the Modern Greek dialects. He describes his trip in the book Griechische Reise (Berlin 1886), which has been the only source about Krumbacher’s travel so far. The present article offers the edition and commentary of six hitherto unknown letters addressed by Karl Krumbacher to his friend and colleagueWilhelm Meyer between October 1884 and January 1885. These letters, preserved in the University Library of Göttingen, shed light on the importance of the Greek journey for Krumbacher’s research not only in the field of Greek linguistics, but also of Byzantine hymnography.

The surname of a Nikolaos πρωτοσπαθάριος καὶ πριμικήριος τῶν συνηγόρων resp. πρωτοσπαθάριος, θεσμογράφος καὶ πριμικήριος τῶν συνηγόρων on his lead seals from the time between 1040 and 1110 had been interpreted in the past with mistakes (Karichala, Katichael). Now we know three exemplars of each type and are able to correct to Κατιχανᾶς / Κατηχανᾶς. One more seal mentions an Ioannes Katechanas as β. κληρικός for a time between 1050 and 1110.The surname Katechanas is not documented elsewhere but has probably a Greek origin.

The article re-examines the thorny question of the authenticity of Anastasius Sinaita’s Hexaemeron, which has been recently debated again by K.- H. Uthemann. A critical discussion of old and new arguments against the authenticity permits, on one hand, to reject the allegedly late dating and the inaccurate title appended to the Hexaemeron, and on the other hand, to express serious doubts about the cited theological differences between the Hexaemeron and the two Homilies on the making of man which are securely attributed to Anastasius. Moreover, a reassessment of the undeniable connection between the aforementioned texts provides strong evidence in support of the Anastasian authorship of the Hexaemeron.