Sanctification of Hagiographers in Byzantium the Canonization of Symeon Metaphrastes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
chapter 11 Sanctification of Hagiographers in Byzantium The Canonization of Symeon Metaphrastes Christian Høgel Sometime around the middle of the 11th century, the prolific and intellectually ubiquitous Michael Psellos (1018–81?) composed a hagiographical Εnkomion and a liturgical akolouthia in praise of the hagiographical rewriter Symeon Metaphrastes (active around the 980s in Constantinople).1 In this raising to sainthood, Psellos did not really collect any biographical data for his presenta- tion of Symeon’s life story but relied solely on the information given in Symeon’s own hagiographical rewritings, his Menologion, and perhaps on some more or less common knowledge about why and how Symeon made his rewritings. This comes as a surprise, for one would suppose that Psellos knew more. He was after all—with slightly more than half a century in between—employed in a position quite similar to that of Symeon: Psellos held various positions at the imperial court in Constantinople, becoming a personal adviser to Emperor Constantine IX Monomachos; Symeon, after being protasekretis, had reached the high position at the imperial court of logothetes tou dromou, the official in charge of foreign communication, under Basil II.2 It is possible that Symeon at some point fell from grace at court, and this could explain why Psellos had difficulties in gathering any further information on him.3 Still, it is strange that Psellos could find nothing to flesh out his presentation of Symeon and that this dearth of information even led him into misguidedly using one of Symeon’s texts as source material, a text that Symeon had in fact hardly touched. The 1 Ed. in Eduardus Kurtz and Fransiscus Drexl, Michaelis Pselli Scripta Minora. 2 vols. (Milan, 1936), 1:94–119; Elizabeth A. Fischer, Michaelis Psellis Orationes Hagiographicae (Leipzig 1994), pp. 269–88 (only the Enkomion). An English translation of the Enkomion is found in Elizabeth Fischer, “Encomium for Kyr Symeon Metaphrastes,” in Michael Psellos on Literature and Art: A Byzantine Perspective on Aesthetics, ed. Charles Barber and Stratis Papaioannou (Notre Dame, 2017), pp. 203–17. 2 On the life of Psellos, see Stratis Papaioannou, Michael Psellos: Rhetoric and Authorship in Byzantium (Cambridge, UK, 2013), pp. 4–39. On Symeon’s life, see Christian Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes: Rewriting and Canonization (Copenhagen, 2002), pp. 61–88. Symeon’s posi- tions are mentioned by Psellos in a most cryptic way: Kurtz and Drexl, Michaelis Pselli Scripta Minora, 1:98. 3 See the discussion in Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, pp. 127–34. © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2021 | doi:10.1163/9789004438453_012 Canonization of Symeon Metaphrastes 271 text, the Life of Theoktiste, had been included with almost no changes into Symeon’s collection of mainly rewritten texts, and this meant that also the voice of the original narrator—reflecting the personal experiences of the origi- nal author Niketas Magistros—had been left unaltered.4 Psellos, however, out of confusion, lack of precision, or some other cause, took the narrator’s, i.e. Niketas’, autobiographical comments to refer to Symeon Metaphrastes. In this way, the only real event he can tell of from the life of Symeon pertains to that of another writer working several decades before him.5 The lack of authentic biographical material may, on the other hand, not have troubled Psellos much, for his only real concern in presenting the saintly merits of Symeon was lauding his rewriting activities. This takes up most of Psellos’ prose Enkomion and even quite a substantial number of verses in his akolouthia,6 and in the Enkomion Psellos is eager to present Symeon as a hard-working person and in details tell of the old versions that Symeon embel- lished, of Symeon’s literary style and narrative technique, and of the rewrit- ing process itself. According to Psellos, Symeon wanted to salvage saints’ Lives from the ridicule they had been increasingly subjected to due to their simple language.7 He did this by raising their literary style, though not necessarily to the highest possible level, but by emphasizing thematic issues such as type of saint and place of origin.8 And in a difficult passage Psellos seems to describe the rewriting procedure of Symeon’s scriptorium.9 All this was the side of 4 Psellos’ use of the Life of Theoktiste comes in the liturgical akolouthia, Kurtz and Drexl, Michaelis Pselli Scripta Minora, 113–14. On the inclusion of this Life in the metaphrastic collection, see Hippolyte Delehaye, “De S. Theoctiste lesbia in insula Paro. Commentarius praevius,” in Acta Sanctorum, ed. Hippolyte Delehaye and Paul Peeters (Brussels, 1925), pp. 221–24; Høgel, Symeon Metaphrastes, pp. 66–68. From a literary perspective, this Life has attracted quite some attention, see Katarzyna Jazdzewska, “Hagiographic Invention and Imitation: Nicetas’ Life of Theoctiste and Its Literary Models,” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 49 (2009), 257–79; Ingela Nilsson, “The Same Story, But Another: A Reappraisal of Literary Imitation in Byzantium,” in Imitatio, Aemulatio, Variatio: Akten des internation- alen wissenschaftlichen Symposions zur byzantinischen Sprache und Literatur (Wien, 22–25 Oktober 2008), ed. Andreas Rhoby and Elizabeth Schiffer (Wien, 2010), pp. 195–208; Christian Høgel, “Beauty, Knowledge, and Gain in the Life of Theoctiste,” Byzantion 88 (2018), 219–36. 5 On the dating of the Life of Theoktiste to around the year 948, see Christian Høgel, “Beauty, Knowledge, and Gain,” 233–35. 6 Enkomion: Kurtz and Drexl, Michaelis Pselli Scripta Minora, pp. 99–106; akolouthia, see es- pecially the unfortunately badly preserved ode 5, Kurtz and Drexl, Michaelis Pselli Scripta Minora, pp. 112–13. 7 Kurtz and Drexl, Michaelis Pselli Scripta Minora, p. 100. 8 Kurtz and Drexl, Michaelis Pselli Scripta Minora, pp. 104–05. 9 Kurtz and Drexl, Michaelis Pselli Scripta Minora, p. 105 ll.19–25. On the use of shorthand in the process, see most recently Fischer, “Encomium for Kyr Symeon,” n. 39; arguing against this, see Nigel G. Wilson, “Symeon Metaphrastes at Work,” Νέα Ρώμη 2 (2014), 105–07..