The Captureof Crete , Bytheodosios the Deacon

text 4 The Capture of Crete, by Theodosios the Deacon

Introduction

The Author The author identifies himself in the title of the poem as “Theodosios, a hum- ble deacon”; his title is ΑΛΩΣΙΣΚΡΗΤΗΣ or The Capture of Crete, specifically the Byzantine retaking of Crete in spring of 961 on the orders of the emperor Romanos II and under the military command of Nikephoros Phokas, after more than 130 years of Arab control. The author also gives his name in a prose proem addressed to Nikephoros Phokas and at additional points in the text. Our knowledge of Theodosios is, however, limited to this text alone. He is clearly a contemporary of the event and his description of the emperor Romanos II’s “pale countenance” as a result of his concern for the expedition suggests that Theodosios may have been attached to the imperial court. He also mentions Romanos’s receipt of two “letters” (military dispatches) from Nikephoros Phokas that presumably served as his sources for portions of the text.1 He describes himself as the “servant” of Romanos and asks the emperor to grant him freedom to speak and not to overlook his labours and, as the “logog- rapher of the present day,” again asks Romanos to countenance his daring to speak. He says he has “read many books of many learned men,” naming specifically Plutarch and Dio Cassius, while mentioning Homer frequently by name at numerous points elsewhere in the text. He also refers to Demosthenes, Aristo- tle, Plato, and Xenophon. Numerous unattributed phrases indicate his reading and frequent use of George of Pisidia and a number of classical authors includ- ing Euripides.2

1 See Lauxtermann forthcoming, who also suggests that, while not specifically mentioned, additional dispatches were sent which served as a basis for akroaseis 3 and 4, and a fifth announcing victory and resulting in the truncated form of 4 which lacks a prologue and epi- logue, and the very different nature of akroasis 5. I am most grateful to Professor Lauxtermann for sharing a pre-publication copy of his chapter on Theodosios the Deacon. 2 For a full listing see Criscuolo’s 1979 Index fontium, but note the characterization of Theo- dosios’s use of citations by Luzzatto 1983, 232 “un arcipelago caotico di reminiscenze che vengono incorporate a forza, senza alcun riguardo al contesto originario.”

Date The poem is dedicated in the title to the emperor Romanos II, but preceded by a prose proem addressed to Nikephoros Phokas asking Phokas to accept the “prattle” of Theodosios and to allow him also to write of Phokas’s conquest of Aleppo. The proem is somewhat awkwardly concluded with the statement that while the poem seems to pertain to the previous emperor (i.e. Romanos II), Phokas will soon see upon whom the main focus lies. Phokas had taken Aleppo on December 23, 962 and the emperor Romanos II died on March 15, 963; Phokas was declared emperor by the army on July 2, 963 and formally crowned on August 16, 963. As Theodosios does not actually refer to Phokas as emperor, the proem was presumably written between the death of Romanos II and July 2, 963. The poem itself seems to have been left largely unchanged despite the new dedicatee. It is divided into five akroaseis or “recitations” and was apparently composed and recited in parts over a period of time from the receipt of the first military dispatch.3

Genre The poem might best be described as an historical epic with encomiastic ele- ments.4 Theodosios, as noted above, was strongly influenced by George of Pisidia (died ca. 631–634), whom he not infrequently quotes verbatim,5 specifically from the historical epics praising Heraclius for his campaigns against the Persians and Avars. Like George he writes in iambics6 and like George his sec- tions are also called akroaseis (“recitations”). The period in which Theodosios wrote was one of increasing Byzantine military success and expansion, and his epic exemplifies the increasing militarization of Byzantine society and its val- ues.7

Although his rhetoric has been characterized as “turgid and artificial,”8 his use of similes is frequent and occasionally well developed. Short similes include troops going forth “like mountain lions,” fire applied “like a whip,” dead bod- ies strewn about “like a plague.” Blood flows “like the descending bitterness of a mountain torrent,” Cretans fly out of the gates “like sparrows,” the spear of Rome is “like a sudden storm,” dead Cretans are “like a hare fallen and killed

3 See Lauxtermann forthcoming. 4 See Andriollo 2011 and Lauxtermann forthcoming. 5 Panagiotakes 1960, 19–23. 6 For comments on his metrics see Criscuolo 1979, x–xii and Schneider (1981) 282–283. 7 See Lauxtermann forthcoming, Kazhdan 2006, 277, and Andriollo 2014. 8 Kazhdan 2006, 276.