Definition.
By "Byzantine literature" is generally meant the literature, written in
Greek, of the so-called Byzantine period. There is no justification
whatever for the inclusion of Latin works of the time of the East Roman
empire. The close of the Byzantine period is clearly marked by the year
1453, at which date, with the fall of the Eastern empire, the peculiar
culture and literary life of the Byzantines came to an end. It is only
as regards the beginning of the Byzantine period that any doubts exist.
There are no sufficient grounds for dating it from Justinian, as was
formerly often done. In surveying the whole development of the
political, ecclesiastical and literary life and of the general culture
of the Roman empire, and particularly of its eastern portion, we arrive,
on the contrary, at the conclusion that the actual date of the beginning
of this new era--i.e. the Christian-Byzantine, in contradistinction to
the Pagan-Greek and Pagan-Roman--falls within the reign of Constantine
the Great. By the foundation of the new capital city of Constantinople
(which lay amid Greek surroundings) and by the establishment of the
Christian faith as the state religion, Constantine finally broke with
the Roman-Pagan tradition, and laid the foundation of the
Christian-Byzantine period of development. Moreover, in the department
of language, so closely allied with that of literature, the 4th century
marks a new epoch. About this time occurred the final disappearance of a
characteristic of the ancient Greek language, important alike in poetry
and in rhythmic prose, the difference of "quantity." Its place was
henceforth taken by the accent, which became a determining principle in
poetry, as well as for the rhythmic conclusion of the prose sentence.
Thus the transition from the old musical language to a modern
conversational idiom was complete.
Transitional period.
The reign of Constantine the Great undoubtedly marks the beginning of a
new period in the most important spheres of national life, but it is
equally certain that in most of them ancient tradition long continued to
exercise an influence. Sudden breaches of continuity are less common in
the general culture and literary life of the world than in its political
or ecclesiastical development. This is true of the transition from pagan
antiquity to the Christian middle ages. Many centuries passed before the
final victory of the new religious ideas and the new spirit in public
and private intellectual and moral life. The last noteworthy remnants of
paganism disappeared as late as the 6th and 7th centuries. The last
great educational establishment which rested upon pagan foundations--the
university of Athens--was not abolished till A.D. 529. The Hellenizing
of the seat of empire and of the state, which was essential to the
independent development of Byzantine literature, proceeds yet more
slowly. The first purely _Greek_ emperor was Tiberius II. (578-582); but
the complete Hellenizing of the character of the state had not been
accomplished until the 7th century. We shall, therefore, regard the
period from the 4th to the 7th century as that of the transition between
ancient times and the middle ages. This period coincides with the rise
of a new power in the world's history--Islam. But though, in this
transitional period, the old and the new elements are both to a large
extent present and are often inextricably interwoven, yet it is certain
that the new elements are, both as regards their essential force and
their influence upon the succeeding period, of infinitely greater moment
than the decrepit and mostly artificial survivals of the antique.
Mixed character of Byzantine culture.
In order to estimate rightly the character of Byzantine literature and
its distinctive peculiarities, in contradistinction to ancient Greek, it
is imperative to examine the great difference between the civilizations
that produced them. The Byzantine did not possess the homogeneous,
organically constructed system of the ancient civilization, but was the
outcome of an amalgamation of which Hellenism formed the basis. For,
although the Latin character of the empire was at first completely
retained, even after its final division in 395, yet the dominant
position of Greek in the Eastern empire gradually led to the Hellenizing
of the state. The last great act of the Latin tradition was the
codification, in the Latin language, of the law by Justinian (527-565).
But it is significant that the _Novels_ of Justinian were composed
partly in Greek, as were all the laws of the succeeding period. Of the
emperors in the centuries following Justinian, many of course were
foreigners, Isaurians, Armenians and others; but in language and
education they were all Greeks. In the last five centuries of the
empire, under the Comneni and the Palaeologi, court and state are purely
Greek.
In spite of the dominant position of Greek in the Eastern empire, a
linguistic and national uniformity such as formed the foundation of the
old Latin _Imperium Romanum_ never existed there. In the West, with the
expansion of Rome's political supremacy, the Latin language and Latin
culture were everywhere introduced--first into the non-Latin provinces
of Italy, later into Spain, Gaul and North Africa, and at last even into
certain parts of the Eastern empire. This Latinizing was so thorough
that it weathered all storms, and, in the countries affected by it, was
the parent of new and vigorous nationalities, the French, the Spaniards,
the Portuguese and the Rumanians. Only in Africa did "Latinism" fail to
take root permanently. From the 6th century that province relapsed into
the hands of the native barbarians and of the immigrant Arabs, and both
the Latin and the Greek influences (which had grown in strength during
the period of the Eastern empire) were, together with Christianity,
swept away without leaving a trace behind. It might have been expected
that the Hellenizing of the political system of the Eastern empire would
have likewise entailed the Hellenizing of the non-Greek portions of the
empire. Such, however, was not the case; for all the conditions
precedent to such a development were wanting. The non-Greek portions of
the Eastern empire were not, from the outset, gradually incorporated
into the state from a Greek centre, as were the provinces in the West
from a Latin centre. They had been acquired in the old period of the
homogeneous Latin _Imperium_. In the centuries immediately following the
division of the empire, the idea of Hellenizing the Eastern provinces
could not take root, owing to the fact that Latin was retained, at least
in principle, as the state language. During the later centuries, in the
non-Greek parts, centrifugal tendencies and the destructive inroads of
barbarians began on all sides; and the government was too much occupied
with the all but impossible task of preserving the political unity of
the empire to entertain seriously the wider aim of an assimilation of
language and culture. Moreover, the Greeks did not possess that enormous
political energy and force which enabled the Romans to assimilate
foreign races; and, finally, they were confronted by sturdy Oriental,
mostly Semitic, peoples, who were by no means so easy to subjugate as
were the racially related inhabitants of Gaul and Spain. Their
impotence against the peoples of the East will be still less hardly
judged if we remember the fact already mentioned, that even the Romans
were within a short period driven back and overwhelmed by the North
African Semites who for centuries had been subjected to an apparently
thorough process of Latinization.
The influence of Greek culture then, was very slight; how little indeed
it penetrated into the oriental mind is shown by the fact that, after
the violent Arab invasion in the south-east corner of the Mediterranean,
the Copts and Syrians were able to retain their language and their
national characteristics, while Greek culture almost completely
disappeared. The one great instance of assimilation of foreign
nationalities by the Greeks is the Hellenizing of the Slavs, who from
the 6th century had migrated into central Greece and the Peloponnese.
All other non-Greek tribes of any importance which came, whether for
longer or for shorter periods, within the sphere of the Eastern empire
and its civilization--such as the Copts, Syrians, Armenians, Georgians,
Rumanians, Serbs, Bulgarians, Albanians--one and all retained their
nationality and language. The complete Latinizing of the West has,
accordingly, no counterpart in a similar Hellenizing of the East. This
is clearly shown during the Byzantine period in the progress of
Christianity. Everywhere in the West, even among the non-Romanized
Anglo-Saxons, Irish and Germans, Latin maintained its position in the
church services and in the other branches of the ecclesiastical system;
down to the Reformation the church remained a complete organic unity. In
the East, at the earliest period of its conversion to Christianity,
several foreign tongues competed with Greek, i.e. Syrian, Coptic,
Armenian, Georgian, Gothic, Old-Bulgarian and others. The sacred books
were translated into these languages and the church services were held
in them and not in Greek. One noticeable effect of this linguistic
division in the church was the formation of various sects and national
churches (cf. the Coptic Nestorians, the Syrian Monophysites, the
Armenian and, in more recent times, the Slavonic national churches). The
Church of the West was characterized by uniformity in language and in
constitution. In the Eastern Church parallel to the multiplicity of
languages developed also a corresponding variety of doctrine and
constitution.
Roman influence.
Though the character of Byzantine culture is mainly Greek, and Byzantine
literature is attached by countless threads to ancient Greek literature,
yet the Roman element forms a very essential part of it. The whole
political character of the Byzantine empire is, despite its Greek form
and colouring, genuinely Roman. Legislation and administration, the
military and naval traditions, are old Roman work, and as such, apart
from immaterial alterations, they continued to exist and operate, even
when the state in head and limbs had become Greek. It is strange,
indeed, how strong was the political conception of the Roman state
(_Staatsgedanke_), and with what tenacity it held its own, even under
the most adverse conditions, down to the latter days of the empire. The
Greeks even adopted the name "Romans," which gradually became so closely
identified with them as to supersede the name "Hellenes"; and thus a
political was gradually converted into an ethnographical and linguistic
designation. _Rhomaioi_ was the most common popular term for Greeks
during the Turkish period, and remains so still. The old glorious name
"Hellene" was used under the empire and even during the middle ages in a
contemptuous sense--"Heathen"--and has only in quite modern times, on
the formation of the kingdom of "Hellas," been artificially revived. The
vast organization of the Roman political system could not but exercise
in various ways a profound influence upon Byzantine civilization; and it
often seemed as if Roman political principles had educated and nerved
the unpolitical Greek people to great political enterprise. The Roman
influence has left distinct traces in the Greek language, Greek of the
Byzantine and modern period is rich in Latin terms for conceptions
connected with the departments of justice, administration and the
imperial court. In literature such "barbarisms" were avoided as far as
possible, and were replaced by Greek periphrases.
Christianity.
The Orient.
But by far the most momentous and radical change wrought on the old
Hellenism was effected by Christianity; and yet the transition was, in
fact, by no means so abrupt as one might be led to believe by comparing
the Pagan-Hellenic culture of Plato's day with the Christian-Byzantine
of the time of Justinian. For the path had been most effectually
prepared for the new religion by the crumbling away of the ancient
belief in the gods, by the humane doctrine of the Stoics, and, finally,
by the mystic intellectual tendencies of Neoplatonism. Moreover, in many
respects Christianity met paganism halfway by adapting itself to popular
usages and ideas and by adopting important parts of the pagan
literature. The whole educational system especially, even in Christian
times, was in a very remarkable manner based almost entirely on the
methods and material inherited from paganism. Next to the influences of
Rome and of Christianity, that of the East was of importance in
developing the Byzantine civilization, and in lending Byzantine
literature its distinctive character. Much that was oriental in the
Eastern empire dates back to ancient times, notably to the period of
Alexander the Great and his successors. Since the Greeks had at that
period Hellenized the East to the widest extent, and had already founded
everywhere flourishing cities, they themselves fell under the manifold
influences of the soil they occupied. In Egypt, Palestine and Syria, in
Asia Minor as far inland as Mesopotamia, Greek and oriental
characteristics were often blended. In respect of the wealth and the
long duration of its Greek intellectual life, Egypt stands supreme. It
covers a period of nearly a thousand years from the foundation of
Alexandria down to the conquest of Egypt by the Arabs (A.D. 643). The
real significance of Egyptian Hellenism during this long period can be
properly estimated only if a practical attempt be made to eliminate from
the history of Greek literature and science in pagan and in Christian
times all that owed its origin to the land of the Nile. The soil of
Egypt proved itself especially productive of Greek literature under the
Cross (Origen, Athanasius, Arius, Synesius), in the same way as the soil
of North Africa was productive of Latin literature (Tertullian, Cyprian,
Lactantius, Augustine). Monastic life, which is one of the chief
characteristic elements of Christian-Byzantine civilization, had its
birth in Egypt.
Syria and Palestine came under the influence of Greek civilization at a
later date than Egypt. In these, Greek literature and culture attained
their highest development between the 3rd and the 8th centuries of the
Christian era. Antioch rose to great influence, owing at first to its
pagan school of rhetoric and later to its Christian school of exegesis.
Gaza was renowned for its school of rhetoric; Berytus for its academy of
law. It is no mere accident that sacred poetry, aesthetically the most
valuable class of Byzantine literature, was born in Syria and Palestine.
In Asia Minor, the cities of Tarsus, Caesarea, Nicaea, Smyrna, Ephesus,
Nicopolis, &c., were all influential centres of Greek culture and
literature. For instance, the three great fathers of Cappadocia, Basil,
Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus all belonged to Asia Minor.
If all the greater Greek authors of the first eight centuries of the
Christian era, i.e. the period of the complete development of Byzantine
culture, be classified according to the countries of their birth, the
significant fact becomes evident that nine-tenths come from the African
and Asiatic districts, which were for the most part opened up only after
Alexander the Great, and only one-tenth from European Greece. In other
words, the old original European Greece was, under the emperors,
completely outstripped in intellectual productive force by the newly
founded African and Asiatic Greece. This huge tide of conquest which
surged from Greece over African and Syrian territories occupied largely
by foreign races and ancient civilizations, could not fail to be fraught
with serious consequences for the Greeks themselves. The experience of
the Romans in their conquest of Greece (_Graecia capta ferum victorem
cepit_) repeated itself in the conquest of the East by Greece, though to
a minor extent and in a different way. The whole literature of Egypt,
Syria and Asia Minor cannot, despite its international and cosmopolitan
character, disavow the influence of the Oriental soil on which it was
nourished. Yet the growth of too strong a local colouring in its
literature was repressed, partly by the checks imposed by ancient Greek
tradition, partly by the spirit of Christianity which reconciled all
national distinctions. Even more clearly and unmistakably is Oriental
influence shown in the province of Byzantine art, as Joseph Strzygowski
has conclusively proved.
Language.
The greater portion of Greek literature from the close of ancient times
down to the threshold of modern history was written in a language
identical in its principal features with the common literary language,
the so-called Koine, which had its origin in the Alexandrian age. This
is the literary form of Greek as a universal language, though a form
that scintillates with many facets, from an almost Attic diction down to
one that approaches the language of everyday life such as we have, for
instance, in the New Testament. From what has been already said, it
follows that this stable literary language cannot always have remained a
language of ordinary life. For, like every living tongue, the vernacular
Greek continually changed in pronunciation and form, as well as in
vocabulary and grammar, and thus the living language surely and
gradually separated itself from the rigid written language. This gulf
was, moreover, considerably widened owing to the fact that there took
place in the written language a retrograde movement, the so-called
"Atticism." Introduced by Dionysius of Halicarnassus in the 1st century
before Christ, this linguistic-literary fashion attained its greatest
height in the 2nd century A.D., but still continued to flourish in
succeeding centuries, and, indirectly, throughout the whole Byzantine
period. It is true that it often seemed as though the living language
would be gradually introduced into literature; for several writers, such
as the chronicler Malalas in the 6th century, Leontius of Neapolis (the
author of _Lives of Saints_) in the 7th century, the chronicler
Theophanes at the beginning of the 9th century, and the emperor
Constantine Porphyrogenitus in the 10th century, made in their writings
numerous concessions to the living language. This progressive tendency
might well have led, in the 11th and 12th centuries, to the founding in
the Greek vernacular of a new literary language similar to the promising
national languages and literature which, at that period, in the Romance
countries, developed out of the despised popular idiom. In the case of
the Byzantines, unfortunately, such a radical change never took place.
All attempts in the direction of a popular reform of the literary
language, which were occasionally made in the period from the 6th to the
10th centuries, were in turn extinguished by the resuscitation of
classical studies, a movement which, begun in the 9th century by Photius
and continued in the 11th by Psellus, attained its full development
under the Comneni and the Palaeologi. This classical renaissance turned
back the literary language into the old ossified forms, as had
previously happened in the case of the Atticism of the early centuries
of the empire. In the West, humanism (so closely connected with the
Byzantine renaissance under the Comneni and the Palaeologi) also
artificially reintroduced the "Ciceronian" Latin, but was unable
seriously to endanger the development of the national languages, which
had already attained to full vitality. In Byzantium, the humanistic
movement came prematurely, and crushed the new language before it had
fairly established itself. Thus the language of the Byzantine writers of
the 11th-15th centuries is almost Old Greek in colour; artificially
learnt by grammar, lexicon and assiduous reading, it followed Attic
models more and more slavishly; to such an extent that, in determining
the date of works, the paradoxical principle holds good that the more
ancient the language, the more recent the author.
Owing to this artificial return to ancient Greek, the contrast that had
long existed with the vernacular was now for the first time fully
revealed. The gulf between the two forms of language could no longer be
bridged; and this fact found its expression in literature also. While
the vulgarizing authors of the 6th-10th centuries, like the
Latin-writing Franks (such as Gregory of Tours), still attempted a
compromise between the language of the schools and that of conversation,
we meet after the 12th century with authors who freely and naturally
employed the vernacular in their literary works. They accordingly form
the Greek counterpart of the oldest writers in Italian, French and other
Romance languages. That they could not succeed like their Roman
colleagues, and always remained the pariahs of Greek literature, is due
to the all-powerful philological-antiquarian tendency which existed
under the Comneni and the Palaeologi. Yet once more did the vernacular
attempt to assert its literary rights, i.e. in Crete and some other
islands in the 16th and 17th centuries. But this attempt also was foiled
by the classical reaction of the 19th century. Hence it comes about that
Greek literature even in the 20th century employs grammatical forms
which were obsolete long before the 10th century. Thus the Greeks, as
regards their literary language, came into a _cul de sac_ similar to
that in which certain rigidly conservative Oriental nations find
themselves, e.g. the Arabs and Chinese, who, not possessing a literary
language suited to modern requirements, have to content themselves with
the dead Old-Arabic or the ossified Mandarin language. The divorce of
the written and spoken languages is the most prominent and also the most
fatal heritage that the modern Greeks have received from their Byzantine
forefathers.
General character of Byzantine literature.
The whole Byzantine intellectual life, like that of the Western medieval
period, is dominated by theological interests. Theology accordingly, in
literature too, occupies the chief place, in regard to both quantity and
quality. Next to it comes the writing of history, which the Byzantines
cultivated with great conscientiousness until after the fall of the
empire. All other kinds of prose writing, e.g. in geography, philosophy,
rhetoric and the technical sciences, were comparatively neglected, and
such works are of value for the most part only in so far as they
preserve and interpret old material. In poetry, again, theology takes
the lead. The poetry of the Church produced works of high aesthetic
merit and enduring value. In secular poetry, the writing of epigrams
especially was cultivated with assiduity and often with ability. In
popular literature poetry predominates, and many productions worthy of
notice, new both in matter and in form, are here met with.
Theology.
The great classical period of Greek theological literature is that of
the 4th century. Various factors contributed to this result--some of
them positive, particularly the establishment of Christianity as the
official religion and the protection accorded to it by the state, others
negative, i.e. the heretical movements, especially Arianism, which at
this period arose in the east of the empire and threatened the unity of
the doctrine and organization of the church. It was chiefly against
these that the subtle Athanasius of Alexandria directed his attacks. The
learned Eusebius founded a new department of literature, church history.
In Egypt, Antonius (St Anthony) founded the Greek monastic system;
Synesius of Cyrene, like his greater contemporary Augustine in the West,
represents both in his life and in his writings the difficult transition
from Plato to Christ. At the centre, in the forefront of the great
intellectual movement of this century, stand the three great
Cappadocians, Basil the Great, the subtle dogmatist, his brother Gregory
of Nyssa, the philosophically trained defender of the Christian faith,
and Gregory of Nazianzus, the distinguished orator and poet. Closely
allied to them was St Chrysostom, the courageous champion of
ecclesiastical liberty and of moral purity. To modern readers the
greater part of this literature appears strange and foreign; but, in
order to be appreciated rightly, it must be regarded as the outcome of
the period in which it was produced, a period stirred to its depths by
religious emotions. For the times in which they lived and for their
readers, the Greek fathers reached the highest attainable; though, of
course, they produced nothing of such general human interest, nothing
so deep and true, as the _Confessions_ of St Augustine, with which the
poetical autobiography of Gregory of Nazianzus cannot for a moment be
compared.
The glorious bloom of the 4th century was followed by a perceptible
decay in theological intellectual activity. Independent production was
in succeeding centuries almost solely prompted by divergent dogmatical
views and heresies, for the refutation of which orthodox authors were
impelled to take up the pen. In the 5th and 6th centuries a more copious
literature was called into existence by the Monophysites, who maintained
that there was but _one_ nature in Christ; in the 7th century by the
Monothelites, who acknowledged but _one_ will in Christ; in the 8th
century by the Iconoclasts and by the new teaching of Mahomet. One very
eminent theologian, whose importance it has been reserved for modern
times to estimate aright--Leontius of Byzantium (6th century)--was the
first to introduce Aristotelian definitions into theology, and may thus
be called the first scholastic. In his works he attacked the heretics of
his age, particularly the Monophysites, who were also assailed by his
contemporary Anastasius of Antioch. The chief adversaries of the
Monothelites were Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem (whose main
importance, however, is due to his work in other fields, in hagiography
and homiletics), Maximus the Confessor, and Anastasius Sinaites, who
also composed an interpretation of the _Hexaemeron_ in twelve books.
Among writers in the departments of critical interpretation and
asceticism in this period must be enumerated Procopius of Gaza, who
devoted himself principally to the exegesis of the Old Testament;
Johannes Climax (6th century), named after his much-read ascetic work
_Klimax_ (Jacob's ladder); and Johannes Moschus (d. 619), whose chief
work _Leimon_ ("spiritual pasture") describes monastic life in the form
of statements and narratives of their experiences by monks themselves.
The last great heresy, which shook the Greek Church to its very
foundations, the Iconoclast movement, summoned to the fray the last
great Greek theologian, John of Damascus (Johannes Damascenus). Yet his
chief merit lies not so much in his polemical speeches against the
Iconoclasts, and in his much admired but over-refined poetry, as in his
great dogmatic work, _The Fountain of Knowledge_, which contains the
first comprehensive exposition of Christian dogma. It has remained the
standard work on Greek theology down to the present day. Just as the
internal development of the Greek Church in all essentials reached its
limit with the Iconoclasts, so also its productive intellectual activity
ceased with John of Damascus. Such theological works as were
subsequently produced, consisted mostly in the interpretation and
revision of old materials. An extremely copious, but unfruitful,
literature was produced by the disputes about the reunion of the Greek
and Roman Churches. Of a more independent character is the literature
which in the 14th century centred round the dissensions of the
Hesychasts.
Among theologians after John of Damascus must be mentioned: the emperor
Leo VI., the Wise (886-911), who wrote numerous homilies and church
hymns, and Theodorus of Studium (759-826), who in his numerous writings
affords us instructive glimpses of monastic life. Pre-eminent stands the
figure of the patriarch Photius. Yet his importance consists less in his
writings, which often, to a remarkable extent, lack independence of
thought and judgment, than in his activity as a prince of the church.
For he it was who carried the differences which had already repeatedly
arisen between Rome and Constantinople to a point at which
reconciliation was impossible, and was mainly instrumental in preparing
the way for the separation of the Greek and Latin Churches accomplished
in 1054 under the patriarch Michael Cerularius. In the 11th century the
polyhistor Michael Psellus also wrote polemics against the Euchites,
among whom the Syrian Gnosis was reviving. All literature, including
theology, experienced a considerable revival under the Comneni. In the
reign of Alexius I. Comnenus (1081-1118), Euthymius Zigabenus wrote his
great dogmatic work, the _Dogmatic Panoply_, which, like _The Fountain
of Knowledge_ of John of Damascus in earlier times, was partly positive,
furnishing an armoury of theology, partly negative and directed against
the sects. In addition to attacking the dead and buried doctrines of the
Monothelites, Iconoclasts, &c., to fight which was at this time a mere
tilting at windmills, Zigabenus also carried on a polemic against the
heretics of his own day, the Armenians, Bogomils and Saracens.
Zigabenus's _Panoply_ was continued and enlarged a century later by the
historian Nicetas Acominatus, who published it under the title _Treasure
of Orthodoxy_. To the writings against ancient heresies were next added
a flood of tracts, of all shapes and sizes, "against the Latins," i.e.
against the Roman Church, and among their authors must also be
enumerated an emperor, the gifted Theodore II. Lascaris (1254-1258). The
chief champion of the union with the Roman Church was the learned
Johannes Beccus (patriarch of Constantinople 1275-1282). Of his
opponents by far the most eminent was Gregory of Cyprus, who succeeded
him on the patriarchal throne. The fluctuations in the fortunes of the
two ecclesiastical parties are reflected in the occupation of the
patriarchal throne. The battles round the question of the union, which
were waged with southern passion, were for a while checked by the
dissensions aroused by the mystic tendency of the Hesychasts. The
impetus to this great literary movement was given by the monk Barlaam, a
native of Calabria, who came forward in Constantinople as an opponent of
the Latins and was in 1339 entrusted by Andronicus III. with a mission
to Pope Benedict XII. at Avignon. He condemned the doctrine of the
Hesychasts, and attacked them both orally and in writing. Among those
who shared his views are conspicuous the historian Nicephorus Gregoras
and Gregorius Acindynus, the latter of whom closely followed Thomas
Aquinas in his writings. In fact the struggle against the Hesychasts was
essentially a struggle between sober western scholasticism and dreamy
Graeco-Oriental mysticism. On the side of the Hesychasts fought
Gregorius Palamas, who tried to give a dogmatic foundation to the
mysticism of the Hesychasts, Cabasilas, and the emperor John VI.
Cantacuzenus who, after his deposition, sought, in the peaceful retreat
of a monastery, consolation in theological studies, and in his literary
works refuted the Jews and the Mahommedans. For the greatest Byzantine
"apologia" against Islamism we are indebted to an emperor, Manuel II.
Palaeologus (1391-1425), who by learned discussions tried to make up for
the deficiency in martial prowess shown by the Byzantines in their
struggle with the Turks. On the whole, theological literature was in the
last century of the empire almost completely occupied with the struggles
for and against the union with Rome. The reason lay in the political
conditions. The emperors saw more and more clearly that without the aid
of the West they would no longer be able to stand their ground against
the Turks, the vanguard of the armies of the Crescent; while the
majority of Byzantine theologians feared that the assistance of the West
would force the Greeks to unite with Rome, and thereby to forfeit their
ecclesiastical independence. Considering the supremacy of the
theological party in Byzantium, it was but natural that religious
considerations should gain the day over political; and this was the view
almost universally held by the Byzantines in the later centuries of the
empire; in the words of the chronicler Ducas: "it is better to fall into
the hands of the Turks than into those of the Franks." The chief
opponent of the union was Marcus Eugenicus, metropolitan of Ephesus,
who, at the Council of Florence in 1439, denounced the union with Rome
accomplished by John VIII. Palaeologus. Conspicuous there among the
partisans of the union, by reason of his erudition and general literary
merit, was Bessarion, afterwards cardinal, whose chief activity already
falls under the head of Graeco-Italian humanism.
Hagiography.
Hagiography, i.e. the literature of the acts of the martyrs and the
lives of the saints, forms an independent group and one comparatively
unaffected by dogmatic struggles. The main interest centres here round
the objects described, the personalities of the martyrs and saints
themselves. The authors, on the other hand--the _Acts of the Martyrs_
are mostly anonymous--keep more in the background than in other branches
of literature. The man whose name is mainly identified with Greek
hagiography, Symeon Metaphrastes, is important not as an original
author, but only as an editor. Symeon revised in the 10th century,
according to the rhetorical and linguistic principles of his day,
numerous old _Acts of the Martyrs_, and incorporated them in a
collection consisting of several volumes, which was circulated in
innumerable copies, and thus to a great extent superseded the older
original texts. These _Acts of the Martyrs_, in point of time, are
anterior to our period; but of the _Lives of Saints_ the greater portion
belong to Byzantine literature. They began with biographies of monks
distinguished for their saintly living, such as were used by Palladius
about 420 in his _Historia Lausiaca_. The most famous work of this
description is that by Athanasius of Alexandria, viz. the biography of
St Anthony, the founder of monachism. In the 6th century Cyril of
Scythopolis wrote several lives of saints, distinguished by a simple and
straightforward style. More expert than any one else in reproducing the
naive popular style was Leontius of Neapolis in Cyprus who, in the 7th
century, wrote, among other works, a life of St John the Merciful,
archbishop of Alexandria, which is very remarkable as illustrating the
social and intellectual conditions of the time. From the popular _Lives
of Saints_, which for the reading public of the middle ages formed the
chief substitute for modern "belles lettres," it is easy to trace the
transition to the religious novel. The most famous work of this class is
the history of BARLAAM AND JOSAPHAT (q.v.).
Religious poetry.
The religious poetry of the Greeks primarily suffered from the influence
of the ancient Greek form, which was fatal to original development. The
oldest work of this class is the hymn, composed in anapaestic monometers
and dimeters, which was handed down in the manuscripts with the
_Paedagogus_ of Clement of Alexandria (d. about 215), but was probably
not his work. The next piece of this class is the famous "Maidens' Song"
in the _Banquet_ of St Methodius (d. about 311), in which many striking
violations of the old rules of quantity are already apparent. More
faithful to the tradition of the schools was Gregory of Nazianzus. But,
owing to the fact that he generally employed antiquated versification
and very erudite language, his poems failed to reach the people or to
find a place in the services of the church. Just as little could the
artificial paraphrase of the Psalms composed by the younger Apollinaris,
or the subtle poems of Synesius, become popular. It became more and more
patent that, with the archaic metre which was out of keeping with the
character of the living language, no genuine poetry suited to the age
could possibly be produced. Fortunately, an entirely new form of
poetical art was discovered, which conferred upon the Greek people the
blessings of an intelligible religious poetry--the rhythmic poem. This
no longer depended on difference of quantity in the syllables, which had
disappeared from the living language, but on the accent. Yet the
transition was not effected by the substitution of accent for the old
long syllables; the ancient verse form was entirely abandoned, and in
its stead new and variously constructed lines and strophes were formed.
In the history of the rhythmic sacred poetry three periods are clearly
marked--the preparatory period; that of the hymns; and that of the
_Canones_. About the first period we know, unfortunately, comparatively
little. It appears that in it church music was in the main confined to
the insertion of short songs between the Psalms or other portions of
Holy Writ and the acclamations of the congregation. The oldest rhythmic
songs date from Gregory of Nazianzus--his "Maidens' Song" and his
"Evening Hymn." Church poetry reached its highest expression in the
second period, in the grand development of the hymns, i.e. lengthy songs
comprising from twenty to thirty similarly constructed strophes, each
connected with the next in acrostic fashion. Hymnology, again, attained
its highest perfection in the first half of the 6th century with
Romanos, who in the great number and excellence of his hymns dominated
this species of poetry, as Homer did the Greek epic. From this period
dates, moreover, the most famous song of the Greek Church, the so-called
_Acathistus_, an anonymous hymn of praise to the Virgin Mary, which has
sometimes, but erroneously, been attributed to the patriarch Sergius.
Canones.
Church poetry entered upon a new stage, characterized by an increase in
artistic finish and a falling off in poetical vigour, with the
composition of the _Canones_, songs artfully built up out of eight or
nine lyrics, all differently constructed. Andreas, archbishop of Crete
(c. 650-720), is regarded as the inventor of this new class of song. His
chief work, "the great Canon," comprises no less than 250 strophes. The
most celebrated writers of _Canones_ are John of Damascus and Cosmas of
Jerusalem, both of whom flourished in the first half of the 8th century.
The "vulgar" simplicity of Romanos was regarded by them as an obsolete
method; they again resorted to the classical style of Gregory of
Nazianzus, and John of Damascus even took a special delight in the most
elaborate tricks of expression. In spite of this, or perhaps on that
very account, both he and Cosmas were much admired in later times, were
much read, and--as was very necessary--much commentated. Later, sacred
poetry was more particularly cultivated in the monastery of the Studium
at Constantinople by the abbot Theodorus and others. Again, in the 9th
century, Joseph, "the hymn-writer," excelled as a writer of songs, and,
finally, John Mauropus (11th century), bishop of Euchaita, John Zonaras
(12th century), and Nicephorus Blemmydes (13th century), were also
distinguished as authors of sacred poems, i.e. _Canones_. The Basilian
Abbey of Grotta Ferrata near Rome, founded in 1004, and still existing,
was also a nursery of religious poetry. As regards the rhythmic church
poetry, it may now be regarded as certain that its origin was in the
East. Old Hebrew and Syrian models mainly stimulated it, and Romanos
(q.v.) was especially influenced by the metrical homilies of the great
Syrian father Ephraem (d. about 373).
Profane literature; historical accounts.
In profane literature the writing of history takes the first place, as
regards both form and substance. The Greeks have always been deeply
interested in history, and they have never omitted, amid all the
vicissitudes of their existence, to hand down a record to posterity.
Thus, they have produced a literature extending from the Ionian
logographers and Herodotus down to the times of Sultan Mahommed II. In
the Byzantine period all historical accounts fall under one of two
groups, entirely different, both in form and in matter, (1) historical
works, the authors of which described, as did most historians of ancient
times, a period of history in which they themselves had lived and moved,
or one which only immediately preceded their own times; and (2)
chronicles, shortly recapitulating the history of the world. This latter
class has no exact counterpart in ancient literature. The most clearly
marked stage in the development of a Christian-Byzantine universal
history was the chronicle (unfortunately lost) written by the Hellenized
Jew, Justus of Tiberias, at the beginning of the 2nd century of the
Christian era; this work began with the story of Moses.
Byzantine histories of contemporary events do not differ substantially
from ancient historical works, except in their Christian colouring. Yet
even this is often very faint and blurred owing to close adherence to
ancient methods. Apart from this, neither a new style nor a new critical
method nor any radically new views appreciably altered the main
character of Byzantine historiography. In their style most Byzantine
compilers of contemporary history followed the beaten track of older
historians, e.g. Herodotus, Thucydides, and, in some details, also
Polybius. But, in spite of their often excessive tendency to imitation,
they displayed considerable power in the delineation of character and
were not wanting in independent judgment. As regards the selection of
their matter, they adhered to the old custom of beginning their
narrative where their predecessors left off.
The outstripping of the Latin West by the Greek East, which after the
close of the 4th century was a self-evident fact, is reflected in
historiography also. After Constantine the Great, the history of the
empire, although its Latin character was maintained until the 6th
century, was mostly written by Greeks; e.g. Eunapius (c. 400),
Olympiodorus (c. 450), Priscus (c. 450), Malchus (c. 490), and Zosimus,
the last pagan historian (c. 500), all of whom, with the exception of
Zosimus, are unfortunately preserved to us only in fragments.
Historiography received a great impulse in the 6th century. The powerful
Procopius and Agathias (q.v.), tinged with poetical rhetoric, described
the stirring and eventful times of Justinian, while Theophanes of
Byzantium, Menander Protector, Johannes of Epiphaneia and Theophylactus
of Simocatta described the second half of the 6th century. Towards the
close of the 6th century also flourished the last independent
ecclesiastical historian, Evagrius, who wrote the history of the church
from 431 to 593. There now followed, however, a lamentable falling off
in production. From the 7th to the 10th century the historical side is
represented by a few chronicles, and it was not until the 10th century
that, owing to the revival of ancient classical studies, the art of
writing history showed some signs of life. Several historical works are
associated with the name of the emperor Constantine VII.
Porphyrogenitus. To his learned circle belonged also Joseph Genesius,
who at the emperor's instance compiled the history of the period from
813 to 886. A little work, interesting from the point of view of
historical and ethnographical science, is the account of the taking of
Thessalonica by the Cretan Corsairs (A.D. 904), which a priest, Johannes
Cameniata, an eyewitness of the event, has bequeathed to posterity.
There is also contained in the excellent work of Leo Diaconus (on the
period from 959 to 975) a graphic account of the bloody wars of the
Byzantines with the Arabs in Crete and with the Bulgarians. A
continuation was undertaken by the philosopher Michael Psellus in a work
covering the period from 976 to 1077. A valuable supplement to the
latter (describing the period from 1034 to 1079) was supplied by the
jurist Michael Attaliata. The history of the Eastern empire during the
Crusades was written in four considerable works, by Nicephorus
Bryennius, his learned consort Anna Comnena, the "honest Aetolian,"
Johannes Cinnamus, and finally by Nicetas Acominatus in an exhaustive
work which is authoritative for the history of the 4th Crusade. The
melancholy conditions and the ever increasing decay of the empire under
the Palaeologi (13th-15th centuries) are described in the same lofty
style, though with a still closer following of classical models. The
events which took place between the taking of Constantinople by the
Latins and the restoration of Byzantine rule (1203-1261) are recounted
by Georgius Acropolita, who emphasizes his own share in them. The
succeeding period was written by the versatile Georgius Pachymeres, the
erudite and high-principled Nicephorus Gregoras, and the emperor John
VI. Cantacuzenus. Lastly, the death-struggle between the East Roman
empire and the mighty rising power of the Ottomans was narrated by three
historians, all differing in culture and in style, Laonicus
Chalcocondyles, Ducas and Georgius Phrantzes. With them may be classed a
fourth (though he lived outside the Byzantine period), Critobulus, a
high-born Greek of Imbros, who wrote, in the style of the age of
Pericles, the history of the times of the sultan Mahommed II. (down to
1467).
Chronicles.
The essential importance of the Byzantine chronicles (mostly chronicles
of the history of the world from the Creation) consists in the fact that
they in part replace older lost works, and thus fill up many gaps in our
historical survey (e.g. for the period from about 600 to 800 of which
very few records remain). They lay no claim to literary merit, but are
often serviceable for the history of language. Many such chronicles were
furnished with illustrations. The remains of one such illustrated
chronicle on papyrus, dating from the beginning of the 5th century, has
been preserved for us by the soil of Egypt.[7] The authors of the
chronicles were mostly monks, who wished to compile handbooks of
universal history for their brethren and for pious laymen; and this
explains the strong clerical and popular tendency of these works. And it
is due to these two qualities that the chronicles obtained a
circulation abroad, both in the West and also among the peoples
Christianized from Byzantium, e.g. the Slavs, and in all of them sowed
the seeds of an indigenous historical literature. Thus the chronicles,
despite the jejuneness of their style and their uncritical treatment of
material were for the general culture of the middle ages of far greater
importance than the erudite contemporary histories designed only for the
highly educated circles in Byzantium. The oldest Byzantine chronicle of
universal history preserved to us is that of Malalas (6th century),
which is also the purest type of this class of literature. In the 7th
century was completed the famous _Easter_ or _Paschal Chronicle_
(_Chronicon Paschale_). About the end of the 8th or the beginning of the
9th century Georgius Syncellus compiled a concise chronicle, which began
with the Creation and was continued down to the year 284. At the request
of the author, when on his death-bed, the continuation of this work was
undertaken by Theophanes Confessor, who brought down the account from
A.D. 284 to his own times (A.D. 813). This exceedingly valuable work of
Theophanes was again continued (from 813-961) by several anonymous
chroniclers. A contemporary of Theophanes, the patriarch Nicephorus,
wrote, in addition to a _Short History_ of the period from 602 to 769, a
chronological sketch from Adam down to the year of his own death in 829.
Of great influence on the age that followed was Georgius Monachus, only
second in importance as chronicler of the early Byzantine period, who
compiled a chronicle of the world's history (from Adam until the year
843, the end of the Iconoclast movement), far more theological and
monkish in character than the work of Theophanes. Among later
chroniclers Johannes Scylitza stands out conspicuously. His work
(covering the period from 811 to 1057), as regards the range of its
subject-matter, is something between a universal and a contemporary
history. Georgius Cedrenus (c. 1100) embodied the whole of Scylitza's
work, almost unaltered, in his _Universal Chronicle_. In the 12th
century the general increase in literary production was evident also in
the department of chronicles of the world. From this period dates, for
instance, the most distinguished and learned work of this class, the
great universal chronicle of John Zonaras. In the same century Michael
Glycas compiled his chronicle of the world's history, a work written in
the old popular style and designed for the widest circles of readers.
Lastly, in the 12th century, Constantine Manasses wrote a universal
chronicle in the so-called "political" verse. With this verse-chronicle
must be classed the imperial chronicle of Ephraem, written in Byzantine
trimeters at the beginning of the 14th century.
Geography.
Geography and topography, subjects so closely connected with history,
were as much neglected by the Byzantines as by their political
forerunners, the Romans. Of purely practical importance are a few
handbooks of navigation, itineraries, guides for pilgrims, and
catalogues of provinces and cities, metropolitan sees and bishoprics.
The geographical work of Stephanus of Byzantium, which dates from
Justinian's time, has been lost. To the same period belongs the only
large geographical work which has been preserved to us, the _Christian
Topography_ of Cosmas Indicopleustes. For the topography of
Constantinople a work entitled _Ancient History (Patria) of
Constantinople_, which may be compared to the medieval _Mirabilia urbis
Romae_, and in late manuscripts has been wrongly attributed to a certain
Codinus, is of great importance.
Philosophy.
Ancient Greek philosophy under the empire sent forth two new
shoots--Neopythagoreanism and Neoplatonism. It was the latter with which
moribund paganism essayed to stem the advancing tide of Christianity.
The last great exponent of this philosophy was Proclus in Athens (d.
485). The dissolution, by order of Justinian, of the school of
philosophy at Athens in 529 was a fatal blow to this nebulous system,
which had long since outlived the conditions that made it a living
force. In the succeeding period philosophical activity was of two main
kinds; on the one hand, the old philosophy, e.g. that of Aristotle, was
employed to systematize Christian doctrine, while, on the other, the
old works were furnished with copious commentaries and paraphrases.
Leontius of Byzantium had already introduced Aristotelian definitions
into Christology; but the real founder of medieval ecclesiastical
philosophy was John of Damascus. Owing, however, to his having early
attained to canonical authority, the independent progress of
ecclesiastical philosophy was arrested; and to this it is due that in
this respect the later Byzantine period is far poorer than is the West.
Byzantium cannot boast a scholastic like Thomas Aquinas. In the 11th
century philosophical studies experienced a satisfactory revival, mainly
owing to Michael Psellus, who brought Plato as well as Aristotle again
into fashion.
Rhetoric.
Ancient rhetoric was cultivated in the Byzantine period with greater
ardour than scientific philosophy, being regarded as an indispensable
aid to instruction. It would be difficult to imagine anything more
tedious than the numerous theoretical writings on the subject and the
examples of their practical application: mechanical school essays, which
here count as "literature," and innumerable letters, the contents of
which are wholly insignificant. The evil effects of this were felt
beyond the proper sphere of rhetoric. The anxious attention paid to the
laws of rhetoric and the unrestricted use of its withered flowers were
detrimental to a great part of the rest of Byzantine literature, and
greatly hampered the development of any individuality and simplicity of
style. None the less, among the rhetorical productions of the time are
to be found a few interesting pieces, such as the _Philopatris_, in the
style of Lucian, which gives us a remarkable picture of the times of
Nicephorus Phocas (10th century). In two other smaller works a journey
to the dwellings of the dead is described, after the pattern of Lucian's
_Nekyomanteia_, viz. in _Timarion_ (12th century) and in Mazaris'
_Journey to the Underworld_ (c. 1414). A very charming representative of
Byzantine rhetoric is Michael Acominatus, who, in addition to
theological works, wrote numerous occasional speeches, letters and
poems.
The sciences.
In the field of scientific production, which can be accounted literature
in the modern acceptation of the term only in a limited sense, Byzantium
was dominated to an extravagant and even grotesque extent by the rules
of what in modern times is termed "classical scholarship." The numerous
works which belong to this category, such as grammars, dictionaries,
commentaries on ancient authors, extracts from ancient literature, and
metrical and musical treatises, are of little general interest, although
of great value for special branches of philological study, e.g. for
tracing the influences through which the ancient works handed down to us
have passed, as well as for their interpretation and emendation; for
information about ancient authors now lost; for the history of
education; and for the underlying principles of intellectual life in
Byzantium. The most important monument of Byzantine philology is,
perhaps, the _Library_ of the patriarch Photius. The period from about
650 to 850 is marked by a general decay of culture. Photius, who in the
year 850 was about thirty years of age, now set himself with admirable
energy to the task of making ancient literature, now for the most part
dead and forgotten, known once more to his contemporaries, thus
contributing to its preservation. He gave an account of all that he
read, and in this way composed 280 essays, which were collected in what
is commonly known as the _Library_ or _Myriobiblon_. The character of
the individual sketches is somewhat mechanical and formal; a more or
less complete account of the contents is followed by critical
discussion, which is nearly always confined to the linguistic form. With
this work may be compared in importance the great _Lexikon_ of Suidas,
which appeared about a century later, a sort of encyclopaedia, of which
the main feature was its articles on the history of literature. A truly
sympathetic figure is Eustathius, the famous archbishop of Thessalonica
(12th century). His voluminous commentaries on Homer, however, rivet the
attention less than his enthusiastic devotion to science, his energetic
action on behalf of the preservation of the literary works of antiquity,
and last, not least, his frank and heroic character, which had nothing
in it of the Byzantine. If, on the other hand, acquaintance with a
caricature of Byzantine philology be desired, it is afforded by Johannes
Tzetzes, a contemporary of Eustathius, a Greek in neither name nor
spirit, narrow-minded, angular, superficial, and withal immeasurably
conceited and ridiculously coarse in his polemics. The transition to
Western humanism was effected by the philologists of the period of the
Palaeologi, such as Maximus Planudes, whose translations of numerous
works renewed the long-broken ties between Byzantium and the West;
Manuel Moschopulus, whose grammatical works and commentaries were, down
to the 16th century, used as school text-books; Demetrius Triclinius,
distinguished as a textual critic; the versatile Theodorus Metochites,
and others.
Jurisprudence.
Originally, as is well known, Latin was the exclusive language of Roman
law. But with Justinian, who codified the laws in his _Corpus juris_,
the Hellenizing of the legal language also began. The _Institutes_ and
the _Digest_ were translated into Greek, and the _Novels_ also were
issued in a Greek form. Under the Macedonian dynasty there began, after
a long stagnation, the resuscitation of the code of Justinian. The
emperor Basilius I. (867-886) had extracts made from the existing law,
and made preparations for the codifying of all laws. But the whole work
was not completed till the time of Leo VI. the Wise (886-912), and
Constantine VII. Porphyrogenitus (912-959), when it took the form of a
grand compilation from the _Digests_, the _Codex_, and the _Novels_, and
is commonly known as the _Basilica_ ([Greek: Ta basilika]). In the East
it completely superseded the old Latin _Corpus juris_ of Justinian. More
that was new was produced, during the Byzantine period, in canon law
than in secular legislation. The purely ecclesiastical rules of law, the
_Canones_, were blended with those of civil law, and thus arose the
so-called _Nomocanon_, the most important edition of which is that of
Theodorus Bestes in 1090. The alphabetical handbook of canon law written
by Matthaeus Blastares about the year 1335 also exercised a great
influence.
Mathematics and astronomy.
In the province of mathematics and astronomy the remarkable fact must be
recorded that the revival among the Greeks of these long-forgotten
studies was primarily due to Perso-Arabian influence. The _Great
Syntaxis_ of Ptolemy operated in the oriental guise of the _Almagest_.
The most important direct source of this intellectual loan was not
Arabia, however, but Persia. Towards the close of the 13th century the
Greeks became acquainted with Persian astronomy. At the beginning of the
14th century Georgius Chrysococca and Isaac Argyrus wrote astronomical
treatises based on Persian works. Then the Byzantines themselves,
notably Theodorus Metochites and Nicephorus Gregoras, at last had
recourse to the original Greek sources.
Military science.
The Byzantines did much independent work in the field of military
science. The most valuable work of the period on this subject is one on
tactics, which has come down to posterity associated with the name of
Leo VI., the Wise.
Profane poetry.
Of profane poetry--in complete contrast to sacred poetry--the general
characteristic was its close imitation of the antique in point of form.
All works belonging to this category reproduce the ancient style and are
framed after ancient models. The metre is, for the most part, either the
Byzantine regular twelve-syllable trimeter, or the "political" verse;
more rarely the heroic and Anacreontic measures.
Epic.
Epic popular poetry, in the ancient sense, begins only with the
vernacular Greek literature (see below); but among the literary works of
the period there are several which can be compared with the epics of the
Alexandrine age. Nonnus (c. 400) wrote, while yet a pagan, a fantastic
epic on the triumphal progress of the god Dionysus to India, and, as a
Christian, a voluminous commentary on the gospel of St John. In the 7th
century, Georgius Pisides sang in several lengthy iambic poems the
martial deeds of the emperor Heraclius, while the deacon Theodosius
(10th century) immortalized in extravagant language the victories of the
brave Nicephorus Phocas.
Didactic poems.
From the 11th century onwards, religious, grammatical, astrological,
medical, historical and allegorical poems, framed partly in
duodecasyllables and partly in "political" verse, made their appearance
in large quantities. Didactic religious poems were composed, for
example, by Philippus ([Greek: ho Monotropos], Solitarius, c. 1100),
grammatico-philological poems by Johannes Tzetzes, astrological by
Johannes Camaterus (12th century), others on natural science by Manuel
Philes (14th century) and a great moral, allegorical, didactic epic by
Georgius Lapithes (14th century).
Romances.
To these may be added some voluminous poems, which in style and matter
must be regarded as imitations of the ancient Greek romances. They all
date from the 12th century, a fact evidently connected with the general
revival of culture which characterizes the period of the Comneni. Two of
these romances are written in the duodecasyllable metre, viz. the story
of Rodanthe and Dosicles by Theodorus Prodromus, and an imitation of
this work, the story of Drusilla and Charicles by Nicetas Eugenianus;
one in "political" verse, the love story of Aristander and Callithea by
Constantine Manasses, which has only been preserved in fragments, and
lastly one in prose, the story of Hysmine and Hysminias, by Eustathius
(or Eumathius) Macrembolita, which is the most insipid of all.
Lyrics.
The epigram.
The objective point of view which dominated the whole Byzantine period
was fatal to the development of a profane lyrical poetry. At most a few
poems by Johannes Geometres and Christophorus of Mytilene and others, in
which personal experiences are recorded with some show of taste, may be
placed in this category. The dominant form for all subjective poetry was
the epigram, which was employed in all its variations from playful
trifles to long elegiac and narrative poems. Georgius Pisides (7th
century) treated the most diverse themes. In the 9th century Theodorus
of Studium had lighted upon the happy idea of immortalizing monastic
life in a series of epigrams. The same century produced the only poetess
of the Byzantine period, Casia, from whom we have several epigrammatic
productions and church hymns, all characterized by originality.
Epigrammatic poetry reached its highest development in the 10th and 11th
centuries, in the productions of Johannes Geometres, Christophorus of
Mytilene and John Mauropus. Less happy are Theodorus Prodromus (12th
century) and Manuel Philes (14th century). From the beginning of the
10th century also dates the most valuable collection of ancient and of
Byzantine epigrammatic poems, the _Anthologia Palatina_ (see ANTHOLOGY).
Drama.
Dramatic poetry, in the strict sense of the term, was as completely
lacking among the Byzantine Greeks as was the condition precedent to its
existence, namely, public performance. Apart from some moralizing
allegorical dialogues (by Theodorus Prodromus, Manuel Philes and
others), we possess only a single work of the Byzantine period that, at
least in external form, resembles a drama: the _Sufferings of Christ_
([Greek: Christos Paschon]). This work, written probably in the 12th
century, or at all events not earlier, is a cento, i.e. is in great
measure composed of verses culled from ancient writers, e.g. Aeschylus,
Euripides and Lycophron; but it was certainly not written with a view to
the dramatic production.
Vernacular Greek literature.
The vernacular literature stands alone, both in form and in contents. We
have here remarkable originality of conception and probably also
entirely new and genuinely medieval matter. While in the artificial
literature prose is pre-eminent, in the vernacular literature, poetry,
both in quantity and quality, takes the first place, as was also the
case among the Latin nations, where the vulgar tongue first invaded the
field of poetry and only later that of prose. Though a few preliminary
attempts were made (proverbs, acclamations addressed by the people to
the emperor, &c.), the Greek vernacular was employed for larger works
only from the 12th century onwards; at first in poems, of which the
major portion were cast in "political" verse, but some in the trochaic
eight-syllabled line. Towards the close of the 15th century rhyme came
into use. The subjects treated in this vernacular poetry are
exceedingly diverse. In the capital city a mixture of the learned and
the popular language was first used in poems of admonition, praise and
supplication. In this oldest class of "vulgar" works must be reckoned
the _Spaneas_, an admonitory poem in imitation of the letter of
Pseudo-Isocrates addressed to Demonicus; a supplicatory poem composed in
prison by the chronicler Michael Glycas, and several begging poems of
Theodorus Prodromus (Ptochoprodromos). In the succeeding period erotic
poems are met with, such as the Rhodian love songs preserved in a MS. in
the British Museum (ed. W. Wagner, Leipzig, 1879), fairy-tale like
romances such as the _Story of Ptocholeon_, oracles, prayers, extracts
from Holy Writ, lives of saints, &c. Great epic poems, in which antique
subjects are treated, such as the legends of Troy and of Alexander, form
a separate group. To these may be added romances in verse after the
manner of the works written in the artificial classical language, e.g.
_Callimachus and Chrysorrhoe_, _Belthandrus and Chrysantza_, _Lybistrus
and Rhodamne_, also romances in verse after the Western pattern, such as
_Phlorius_ and _Platziaphlora_ (the old French story of _Flore et
Blanchefleur_). Curious are also sundry legends connected with animals
and plants, such as an adaptation of the famous medieval animal fables
of the _Physiologus_, a history of quadrupeds, and a book of birds, both
written with a satirical intention, and, lastly, a rendering of the
story of Reynard the Fox. Of quite peculiar originality also are several
legendary and historical poems, in which famous heroes and historical
events are celebrated. There are, for instance, poems on the fall of
Constantinople, the taking of Athens and Trebizond, the devastating
campaign of Timur, the plague in Rhodes in 1498, &c. In respect of
importance and antiquity the great heroic epic of Digenis Akritas stands
pre-eminent.
"Vulgar" prose works.
Among prose works written in the vulgar tongue, or at least in a
compromise with it, may be mentioned the Greek rendering of two works
from an Indian source, the _Book of the Seven Wise Masters_ (as
_Syntipas the Philosopher_ by Michael Andreopulus), and the _Hitopadera_
or _Mirror of Princes_ (through the Arabic _Kalilah and Dimnah_ by
Simeon Sethus as [Greek: Stephanites kai Iknelates]), a fish book, a
fruit book (both skits on the Byzantine court and official circles). To
these must be added the Greek laws of Jerusalem and of Cyprus of the
12th and 13th centuries, chronicles, &c. In spite of many individual
successes, the literature written in the vulgar tongue succumbed, in the
race for existence, to its elder sister, the literature written in
classical and polished Greek. This was mainly due to the continuous
employment of the ancient language in the state, the schools and the
church.
General significance of Byzantine literature.
The importance of Byzantine culture and literature in the history of the
world is beyond dispute. The Christians of the East Roman empire guarded
for more than a thousand years the intellectual heritage of antiquity
against the violent onslaught of the barbarians. They also called into
life a peculiar medieval culture and literature. They communicated the
treasures of the old pagan as well as of their own Christian literature
to neighbouring nations; first to the Syrians, then to the Copts, the
Armenians, the Georgians; later, to the Arabians, the Bulgarians, the
Serbs and the Russians. Through their teaching they created a new East
European culture, embodied above all in the Russian empire, which, on
its religious side, is included in the Orthodox Eastern Church, and from
the point of view of nationality touches the two extremes of Greek and
Slav. Finally the learned men of the dying Byzantine empire, fleeing
from the barbarism of the Turks, transplanted the treasures of old
Hellenic wisdom to the West, and thereby fertilized the Western peoples
with rich germs of culture.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.--1. General sources: K. Krumbacher, _Geschichte der
byzantinischen Literatur_ (2nd ed., 1897), supplemented in _Die
byzantinische Zeitschrift_ (1892 seq.), and the _Byzantinisches
Archiv_ (1898 seq.), which is intended for the publication of more
exhaustive matter. The Russian works in this department are comprised
in the _Vizantiisky Vremennik_ (1894 seq.).
2. Language: Grammar: A. N. Jannaris (Giannaris), _An Historical
Greek Grammar_ (1897); A. Dieterich, "Untersuchungen zur Geschichte
der griechischen Sprache von der hellenistischen Zeit bis zum 10ten
Jahrhundert," in _Byzant. Archiv_, i. (1898). Glossary: Ducange,
_Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae Graecitatis_ (1688), in
which particular attention is paid to the "vulgar" language; E. A.
Sophocles, _Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods_ (3rd
ed., 1888).
3. Theology: Chief work, A. Ehrhard in Krumbacher's _Geschichte der
byz. Lit._ pp. 1-218. For the ancient period, cf. the works on Greek
patrology (under article FATHERS OF THE CHURCH). Collective edition of
the Fathers (down to the 15th century); _Patrologia, series Graeca_
(ed. by Migne, 161 vols., 1857-1866). Church poetry: A collection of
Greek Church hymns was published by W. Christ and M. Paranikas,
entitled _Anthologia Graeca carminum Christianorum_ (1871). Many
unedited texts, particularly the songs of Romanos, were published by
Cardinal J. B. Pitra, under the title _Analecta sacra spicilegio
Solesmensi parata_ (1876). A complete edition of the hymns is edited
by K. Krumbacher.
4. Historical literature: A collective edition of the Byzantine
historians and chroniclers was begun under Louis XIV., and continued
later (1648-1819), called the _Paris Corpus_. This whole collection
was on B. G. Niebuhr's advice republished with some additions (Bonn,
1828-1878), under the title _Corpus scriptorum historiae Byzantinae_.
The most important authors have also appeared in the _Bibliotheca
Teubneriana_. A few Byzantine and oriental historical works are also
contained in the collection edited by J. B. Bury (1898 seq.).
5. Vernacular Greek literature: The most important collective editions
are: W. Wagner, _Medieval Greek Texts_ (1870), _Carmina Graeca Medii
Aevi_ (1874), _Trois Poemes grecs du moyen age_ (1881); E. Legrand,
_Collection de monuments pour servir a l'etude de la langue
neo-hellenique_ (in 26 parts, 1869-1875), _Bibliotheque grecque
vulgaire_ (in 8 vols., 1880-1896). (K. Kr.)