DOI 10.1515/bz-2020-0034 BZ 2020; 113(3): 769–788 Sergi Grau and Oriol Febrer Procopius on Theodora: ancient and new biographical patterns Abstract: The Anékdota or Secret History of Procopius of Caesarea tends to raise perplexity among scholars for different reasons,particularlythe fact thatacour- tier wrote this work as well as the Buildings,aclear praise of Justinianthrough his constructions and foundations, and the Wars,inthe most canonical historio- graphical tradition. It is apparent that the Secret History,asitisusually acknowl- edged, is related to the tradition of the invective and the pamphlet,eventothe earlier classic iambography, but we should try to answer the question with the same analyticaltools that have been applied in recent years to the study of an- cient biography, whencethe author takes inspiration, especiallyfor the portrait of empress Theodora.Herewehaveidentified, alongside the ancientbiograph- ical patterns of the classicaltradition, new ones, mostlyinversions of contempo- rary hagiographical narratives. Adressen: Dr.Sergi Grau and Oriol Febrer,DepartmentofClassical, Romanic and Semitic Philology,Section of Greek Philology,Faculty of Philology and Communication, University of Barcelona,GranVia de les CortsCatalanes, 585 08007 Barcelona, Spain;[email protected] and [email protected] Around 550,¹ acouple of yearsafter Theodora’sdeath, Procopius of Caesarea composed acontroversial yetrather minor work. Itsinterpretation has signifi- Apreliminaryversion of thispaper waspresented at the XVIII Congress on Byzantine Studies, promoted by the Spanish Society of Byzantine Studies (SEB)and held at the UniversityofBar- celona in January .Wewish to thank the organisers,and speciallyProf.Ernest Marcos, for their kind reception. We also thank the anonymous refereeswho had informed thispaper for their useful suggestions. The research is partofthe project entitled La construccióndel pasado en la Grecia arcaica yclásica: mecanismos compositivos, genealogíasycatálogos,directed by Jesús Carruescoand Xavier Riu, and financed by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (PID–GB-I). It is also registered in the SGR research group Logo- tekhnia. Estudis de culturagrega antiga,directed by Xavier Riu ( SGR ). The possible datesfor the SecretHistory are / (J.Haury,Procopiana. Augsburg ; B. Rubin,Prokopios vonKaisareia. Stuttgart [= RE ]; A. Cameron,Procopius and the sixth century.London ;G.Greatrex,The dates of Procopius’ works. BMGS , , 770 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung cantlyshaped the modern reception of emperor Justinian, his empire and his en- tire period: the Anékdota or Secret History (Historia arcana,inLatin),asitisusu- allyknown among scholars. Itsauthor criticises merciless Justinianand Belisar- ius, the famous general, alongside their wives, Theodoraand Antonina. However,the biographical patterns adopted by Procopius to shape his critique are by no means perspicuousand need to be addressed again.² As we wish to elucidatethrough these lines, Procopius, awell-trained and excellentlynurtured author,makesuse, alongside traditional patterns alreadyfound in classicalbi- ography – and, as far as we are aware, not yetidentifiedbyotherscholars –, of new ways to conveyhis enmity towardsthe reigning couple. Procopius’ education Procopius, born in Caesarea Palaestinensis ca. 500 AD to awealthyfamilyfrom this active and multicultural city,whereChristians of different denominations, pagans, Jews and Samaritans livedtogether,although not always in good har- mony, receivedagood education, basedonthe readingofclassical authors, rhet- oric, jurisprudence and asuperficial knowledge of philosophicalideas.³ This up- bringingallowed him to pursue acareer in public service and to apply for administrative posts that granted rich provincials certain privileges. His works show an accurate acquaintance with legal proceedings, although he conceals their arid formulation and technical languagewith amore florid literary style, –;J.A.S.Evans,The dates of Procopius’ works: arecapitulation of the evidence. GRBS , , –;J.Signes Codoñer,Prokops Anecdota und Justinians Nachfolge. JÖB , , –;A.Kaldellis,The date and structureofProkopios’ SecretHistory and his pro- jected work on Church History. GRBS , , –)and / (R.Scott,Justinian’s coinageand Easterreforms and the date of the Secret History. BMGS , , –; idem, Justinian’snew ageand the second coming,inR.Scott,Byzantine chronicles and the sixth cen- tury.Farnham/Burlington ;B.Croke,Procopius’ SecretHistory:rethinkingthe date. GRBS , , –). We consider the first one to be moreplausible, mostlyafter Kaldellis’ re- sponse (Kaldellis, GRBS , , –)toCroke’sobjections (Croke, GRBS , ), that has not convinced Scott,Justinian’snew age ,however.The sole importance of the char- acterisation of Theodora, whopassed away in ,asanelement of invective makes difficulta latedatingofthe work. For Kaiserkritik in the other works of Procopius,see, especially, J. Signes Codoñer,Kaiserk- ritik in Prokops Kriegsgeschichte. Electrum (), –. G. Greatrex,Perceptions of Procopius in recentscholarship. Histos (), – and, especially, G. Greatrex,L’historien Procope et la vie àCésarée au vie siècle, in G. Greatrex / S. Janniard(eds.), Le monde de Procope/The World of Procopius.Paris , –. S. Grau /O.Febrer, Procopius on Theodora 771 with an antiquarian taste.⁴ The rhetorical usagesthat characterise his style sit- uate him at the end of the so-called Third Sophistic, mostlybecause of his Attic- ism and the use of canonical authors typical of rhetorical handbooks. Those who exerted most influenceonProcopius were Homer,Herodotus and, by far,Thucy- dides, but he shows arather in-depth understanding,beyond the simple quote of aparticularpassage, of the biographies of the great men of Greece⁵ – such as Themistoclesand Alexander the Great.Healso eminently references Roman his- tory – the republican Numa,Camillus,Apius, Hannibal, Pompey;and the impe- rial Augustus, Nero, Vespasian,Titus,Domitian, Trajan, Zenobia, Diocletian and Constantine are all mentioned, onlytoname afew.Moreover,all of them are an- ecdotallyused as areference point,positive or negative,for the contemporary material he is dealingwith.⁶ The strength of tradition: classicalbiographical patterns With such an education, one should not be surprised that Procopius created, in the Secret History,aportrait of Theodorawhich is so different from her previous imagefound in the Wars. Although discussions about the historicityofboth im- ages have been redebated throughout the decades, it seems that nowadaysa consensus has been reached regardingthe historicalparticipation of Theodora in political and ecclesiastical affairs, thanks mainlytothe use of other sources, even epigraphical evidence. Theodora, as wasexpected from women in the im- perial court,appeared sidebysidewith her husband in court rituals and fi- nanced hospitals for indigents,convents and churches – she had financial means at her disposal to act rather independently.⁷ Likewise, attestations of Rubin, Prokopios (as footnote above), –.Particularlyfor the styleofthe Anékdota,see A. Kaldellis,Introduction, in idem, Prokopios.The Secret Historywith related texts.Indianap- olis/Cambridge ,xxxv-xl. Rubin, Prokopios (as footnote above), . About the uses of ancient historiographybysixth-century historians,see G. Greatrex,Pro- copius and the past in sixth-century Constantinople. Revue Belge de Philologie et d’Histoire (), –. C. Pazdernik, “Our most pious consort givenusbyGod”:dissidentreactions to the partner- ship of Justinian and Theodora,A.D. –.Classical Antiquity (), –;C. Foss,The empress Theodora. Byzantion (), –;J.A.Evans,The empress Theo- dora: partner of Justinian. Austin ,passim; and J. A. Evans,The power game in Byzantium: Antonina and the empress Theodora. London ,passim. 772 Byzantinische Zeitschrift Bd. 113/3, 2020: I. Abteilung her favour towards the Monophysites, and the ransom for poor youngwomen sold by their parents to brothels and procurers seem trustworthy.⁸ Her likelycon- nection to prostitution prior to her putting on the imperial purple, none the less, has more rhetoricaland literary relevance than historical, as we shall see further on.⁹ Her portrait in the so-called Secret History,onthe other hand,has been rightlyinterpreted as aquitetraditionalmovetobesmirch her husband’srepu- tation through the critique of the character and the habits of his wife.¹⁰ Itsan- cient parallels are countless,but the most striking ones, duetotheir obvious connection to Theodora, are Messalina(Plin. HN 10.172; Juv. 6; Tac. Ann. 11.25– 38), Agrippina (Tac. Ann. 12.3–7),¹¹ and, particularly, Aspasia. The latter was vis- ited even by Socrates,and wascalled awhorebythe comic play-wrights for her sincereand explicit romancewith Pericles – it is transmitted that they tenderly kissed each other every time he came homeorwentout (Plut. Per. 24.8 – 9). More- over her cultured disposition, extraordinary in awoman of her time, probably led the general public to think that she could not be one of the conventional wivesthat abide at their gynaeceum.¹² Similarly,Procopius underlines that Jus- tinian married her out of sheer passion, and it is preciselythis irrational passion that causes the ruin of the Empire (SH 9.30 –32). Further to this, the speech by Theodoraduring the Nikarevolt (Wars 3.24.37) is most likelyaplayofintertex- tuality with Plato’smocking parodyinthe Menexenus – and with other Socratics, such as Aeschines, author of an Aspasia that we have onlyfragmentarilypre-