Kaldellis-00intro_Layout 1 7/17/15 12:19 PM Page 1 General Introduction Translated in this volume are the long funeral orations that Michael Psellos, the leading intellectual of eleventh-century Byzantium, wrote for three successive ecumenical patriarchs of Constantinople, who governed the Orthodox Church in Byzantium for a total of more than thirty years: Michael I Keroul larios (1043– 1058); Konstantinos III Leichoudes (1059– 1063); and Ioannes VIII Xiphilinos (1064– 1075). Also translated are several letters that Psellos ad- dressed to two of them. These works are worthy of study for many reasons. First, they are important sources for both the secular and the ecclesiastical ca- reers of these three men, which are not otherwise well documented. They are, in other words, important historical sources for a variety of events and top- ics, including the relations between emperors and patriarchs during a period when the Byzantine empire went from being the leading power in Europe and the Near East to a state on the verge of collapse, and when the Orthodox and Catholic Churches deepened their ongoing rift, especially with the events of 1054. Second, these speeches are important specimens of Byzantine panegyrical rhetoric. Modern textbooks of Byzantine rhetoric (and Byzantine literature in general) give the impression that panegyrics of emperors were performed without break at the Byzantine court from late antiquity to the end of the em- pire in 1453, but this is a misleading picture. In fact, few such texts survive from between the seventh and the mid-eleventh century, and there is reason to think that it was Psellos who revived and institutionalized the performance (and not just composition) of such speeches at the court.1 He stands at the 1. See the speeches in Psellos, Orationes Panegyricae. 1 © 2015 UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME Kaldellis-00intro_Layout 1 7/17/15 12:19 PM Page 2 2 PSELLOS AND THE PATRIARCHS origin of an explosive production of panegyrics that marked the Komnenian and Palaiologan courts in late centuries. Moreover, his are also the first funeral encomia of patriarchs that we have—that is, for patriarchs who were not also saints, because those received hagiographical treatments. The three orations translated here stand behind the later routinization of patriarchal encomia in Constantinople. Third, the three patriarchal orations (and associated letters) are important sources for the thought of Michael Psellos and the challenges faced by his proj - ect to revive and institutionalize the study of ancient philosophy at the heart of the Orthodox Christian empire of Romanía. Two of the patriarchs (Ke - roullarios and Xiphilinos) had at one time or another questioned Psellos’ per- sonal commitment to the Christian faith and sought, in different ways, to dis- cipline his intellectual explorations. Psellos seized the opportunity provided by the genre of the funeral oration to have the last word in his debates with them and to reframe these debates in more advantageous ways; and he used the funeral oration for Leichoudes to paint the portrait of an ideal patriarch as Psellos would have it. Each speech is structured loosely around the career of each man and has two “movements,” a secular one followed by a fall, and then an ecclesiastical one; the rises and falls of Leichoudes are the smoothest, those of Keroullarios are the most violent and extreme, and those of Xiphilinos are in the middle. However, the speeches focus less on facts and data and more on abstract defi- nitions of different virtues and states of being. They are, in short, brief ethical treatises by Psellos and reflect his idiosyncratic Platonic philosophy. They were not written to be spoken aloud at the patriarchs’ funerals, despite their occa- sional affectation of such a dramatic setting (the speech for Leichoudes was written at least twelve years after his death, that for Keroullarios at least one year later). If they were in fact delivered orally, it was probably in shorter ver- sions that were less philosophically embellished. They are ethical character- portraits, including analyses of the virtues shown by the man in question. This is not the place to offer detailed analysis of the rhetorical qualities and theory behind these speeches.2 In addition to the “movements” at the level of overall structure and the ongoing development of ethical theory (a progressive improvement from Keroullarios to Xiphilinos and, finally, Leichoudes), readers should watch for the moments when patriarchs and emperors interact, often in 2. Readers interested in these aspects should consult the magisterial recent study of Psellos’ rhetoric by Papaioannou (2013). © 2015 UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME Kaldellis-00intro_Layout 1 7/17/15 12:19 PM Page 3 General Introduction 3 confrontation, because these moments serve to define the character of the man in question. The emperors are in many ways the “mirrors” in which the patriarchs are reflected. Finally, readers will notice Psellos’ resort to spatial- geometrical imagery and apparent paradoxes to explain ethical concepts: op- posites thereby become complementary; setbacks contain the seeds for future progress; ascent is in fact descent, and vice versa; things change (on the sur- face) but really remain the same (underneath); beginnings and endings meet; and virtues are described in terms of figures and diagrams, peaks, circles, and oscillations. These figures make Psellos fun to read but also frustratingly opaque at times. The present introduction consists of three sections, the first two by An- thony Kaldellis: a brief biography of Psellos (reused from the first volume in the series, Mothers and Sons, Fathers and Daughters: The Byzantine Family of Mi chael Psellos, but revised and updated); a historical and interpretive essay on Psellos’ relationships with the patriarchs; and, by Ioannis Polemis, an inter- pretation of the funeral orations for Keroullarios and Xiphilinos. A Brief, Revised Biography of Michael Psellos No biography of Michael Psellos exists in any language, though the pieces are slowly falling into place and past errors are being cleared up.3 A brief statement of what is known will provide the necessary context against which to discuss his relations with the three patriarchs Keroullarios, Leichoudes, and Xiphilinos. Konstantinos Psellos—the baptismal name of the later monk Michael— was born in 1018, during the reign of Basileios II (976– 1025) and the apogee of Byzantine power, to a “middle-class” family in Constantinople. Early on, his mother Theodote perceived that he was clever and encouraged his studies with an eye to a career in the imperial administration. It seems that he stud- ied at the school housed in the local monastery of ta Narsou, with which Psel- los maintained a lifelong connection. He later boasted that school lessons were child’s play for him and that by the age of ten he could recite and expound the entire Iliad.4 He was also a purely urban creature, sixteen years old before 3. See Riedinger (2010); see Papaioannou (2013) 4– 13 for another short account of his life (with more documentation). 4. Psellos, Encomium for His Mother 5– 6. In the Chronographia 4.4 he implies that he started to study Homer when he was sixteen, but this is too late. For ta Narsou, see Hondridou (2002) 159– 160, citing previous scholarship. © 2015 UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME Kaldellis-00intro_Layout 1 7/17/15 12:19 PM Page 4 4 PSELLOS AND THE PATRIARCHS he even set eyes on the fields outside the walls, or so he claimed (probably only in Constantinople could this happen in all of Christendom). By that age he had begun to study rhetoric and joined the staff of a provincial judge, but this internship was, he implies, cut short by the death of his beloved sister.5 Psellos’ instructors in rhetoric were Ioannes Mauropous, who was famous as a teacher but would not make his mark as a writer until after Psellos’ rise at the court, and Niketas, who would later serve under Psellos in the reformed educational system.6 As far as philosophy was concerned, Psellos claimed to have studied it largely on his own: whereas he was “a perfect philosopher,” his friends were only “lovers of philosophy.”7 In 1042 Psellos appears as a secretary under Michael V Kalaphates (1041– 1042), and his career had clearly begun under that emperor’s uncle and predecessor, Michael IV the Paphlagonian (1034– 1041). Though only twenty, he already displayed a knack for making friends in high places, including Alou sianos, son of the last Bulgarian tsar (Ivan Vladislav), who joined Deljan’s revolt against the empire, deposed its leader, and betrayed it to Michael IV in exchange for titles; and the captain of the guard sent against Michael V in the popular riot of 1042, an event of which Psellos later wrote a dramatic first- hand account.8 His standing at the court rose dramatically under Konstanti- nos IX Monomachos (1042– 1055), a charming if frivolous patron of the arts and of education, whose expenditures and neglect of the army were topics of controversy. Psellos became one of his intimate advisors and secretaries, a position earned largely by “the grace of my language. For I am told that my speech is beautiful, even when making routine statements.” He also acted as the emperor’s spokesman, writing eloquent speeches in his praise and in support of his policies (regardless of whether he agreed with them).9 He had by then befriended Konstantinos Leichoudes, Monomachos’ “prime min- ister” and later a patriarch (1059– 1063), whom Psellos admired for his ur- bane, philosophical, and flexible statesmanship, and had facilitated the intro- 5. Psellos, Encomium for His Mother 15. 6. For Psellos and Mauropous, see Karpozilos (1982) 26– 28; and Ljubarskij (2004) 70– 83; for Niketas, see Psellos, Funeral Oration for Niketas 3– 6.