Achilles at the battle of Ostrovo

Achilles at the battle of Ostrovo George Maniakes and the reception of the Iliad Frederick LAURITZEN (Venezia) The battle of Ostrovo of 10431 is an important event for understanding how the Byzantines read the Iliad of Homer.2 The principle description of the actual death on the battle field of the epic protagonist, George Maniakes,3 has reached us in a hundred verse poem in dactylic hexameters4 inspired by the war scenes of the Iliad. That many of the lines form a cento from the Iliad allows one to understand a way in which this poem of Homer was read during the reign of Constantine Monomachos (1043-1055). Moreover, this represents important evidence for the reception of the ancient epic between the earliest dated manuscripts of the IX/X centuries, such as the Venetus A,5 and the commentaries of Eustathius of Thessalonica (ca. 1115-1195/6).6 1

There were two battles at Ostrovo (IÁñíéóóá today) at this time. The first was against Peter Deljan (Äåëåáíüò) in 1040 described in Psellos Chronographia 4.39-44, ed. Impellizzeri, in: S. Impellizzeri (ed.), Imperatori di Bisanzio, Milan 1984 and Skylitzes Synopsis Historion Michael4.27.11, ed. Thurn, in: H. Thurn (ed.), Ioannis Skylitzae Synopsis historion, Berlin 1973. In general see P. STEPHENSON, Byzantium’s Balkan frontier: a political study of the Northern Balkans, 900-1204, Cambridge 2004. The second battle was the one of 1043 where Maniakes died (Skylitzes, Synopsis historion, Const9.3.82, ed. Thurn). It is very likely Maniakes participated also in the first battle. For a useful introduction to the battles see G. OSTROGORSKY, History of the Byzantine State, Oxford 1968, 325. 2 For a survey of the question see R. BROWNING, Homer in Byzantium, Viator 6 (1975) 15-33. 3 For Maniakes one may turn to the following studies: A. JACOB, Le topotérète de la flotte Constantin et la révolte de Georges Maniakès en 1042 dans une inscription inédite de Terre d’Otrante, Nea Rômê 4 (2007) 163-176; E. MERENDINO, La spedizione di Maniace in Sicilia nel bios di san Filareto di Calabria, Nea Rômê 1 (2004) 135-141; A. SAVVIDES, Ãåþñãéïò Ìáíéáêyò: êáôáêôÞóåéò êáé êáôáêôÞóåéò êáé õðüìíçóç óôï ÂõæÜíôéï ôïõ åíäåêÜôïõ áéþíá (1030-1043 ì. ×.), Athens 2004; B. KRSMANOVIΔ – A. LOMA, Georgije Manijakis, ime Goudelios i Pselova „skitska autonomija“, Zbornik radova Vizantološkog instituta 36 (1997) 233-263; L. BRÉHIER, Hommes de guerre byzantins: Georges Maniakès, Tours. nov. 1902. 4 Edited in åkò ô’í ÌáíéÜêçí ðåñr ôï™ ìïýëôïõ, in: S. LAMPROS, AÉóôïñéêN ÌåëåôÞìáôá, Athens 1884, 162-165. A reprinted version of the text may be found in the appendix to this article to which has been added an apparatus of testimonia which is unfortunately missing in the most recent edition is that of M. BROGGINI, Il carme åkò ô’í ÌáíéÜêçí ðåñr ôï™ ìïýëôïõ attribuito a Cristoforo Mitileneo, Porphyra 15 (2011) 14-34 online at www.porphyra.it. 5 M. L. WEST, Homeri Ilias, Stuttgart – Leipzig 1998-2000. 6 M. van der Valk (ed.), Eustathius. Eustathii archiepiscopi Thessalonicensis commentarii ad Homeri Iliadem pertinentes, Leyden 1971-1987.

171

Frederick Lauritzen

It is the tenth century Suda7 which tells us most clearly what was considered a cento at this time: ©óáýôùò êár ëüãïõò dê äéáöüñùí óõíåéëåãìÝíïõò êár fíá óêïð’í Pðáñôßæïíôáò, ïpÜ åkóé ôN FÏìçñüêåíôñá. (Suda Lexikon K.1344.4-6, ed. Adler) In the same way they call centos the texts collected from different sources which define a single aim, such as the Homerocentra. It is striking that the Suda needs to give an explanation and an example of a text which is more than five centuries old at the time of writing. Indeed, LAUXTERMANN points out that the composition of the cento in Byzantium is actually quite unusual.8 The Suda however is clear that the point of the cento is to assemble verses from a different poem to create a new one with a specific aim. In our case the aim is the description of the final stages of the battle of Ostrovo in 1043. George Maniakes had been governor of Teluch in 1033 in the south east of the Byzantine Empire9 and managed to reconquer the city of Edessa (mod. S, anlí Urfa)10 and to bring back the letter written by Jesus to King Abgar as war booty.11 He was subsequently named governor of the neighbouring regions12 since the Byzantine Empire, thanks to him, now had control of more land in between the upper Tigris and Euphrates, known by the Byzantines as Mesopotamia. His most famous achievement was his expedition in 1038-1042 to conquer Sicily,13 during 7

172

Also Eustathius of Thessaloniki in his commentary on the Iliad: ôyò äc ôïéáýôçò ¼Üøåùò ðáñÜäåéãìá óáöcò êár ïj êÝíôñùíåò, ôïõôÝóôé ôN ëåãüìåíá FÏìçñüêåíôñá. êÝíôñùíÝò ôå ãNñ êõñßùò ëÝãïíôáé ôN dê äéáöüñùí ÷ñïé§í óõíåññáììÝíá åkò fí, ïpò ©ìïßùíôáß ðùò ôN FÏìçñüêåíôñá. êár ¼áøväßá äc ½ dî eêáôÝñùí ô§í FÏìçñéê§í ðïéÞóåùí óõññáöåsóá ³äx Píáëüãùò ô² ›ðïêåéìÝív ðñÜãìáôé, ãÜìv ôõ÷’í ~ dïñô† (Eustathius Thessalonicensis, Commentarii in Homeri Iliadem 1.10.24-29, ed. van der Valk). 8 M. D. LAUXTERMANN, Byzantine poetry from Psides to Geometres, Vienna 2003, 101. 9 ôï™ èÝìáôïò óôñáôçãï™íôïò Ôåëïý÷ (Skylitzes Synopsis Historion Roman3.6.2, ed. Thurn). For the study of this region still fundamental is E. HONIGMANN, Die Ostgrenze des byzantinischen Reiches von 363 bis 1071, Brussels 1935. Important is the article by G. DAGRON, Minorités ethniques et religieuses dans l’Orient byzantin à la fin du Xe et au XIe siècles: l’immigration syrienne, Travaux et Mémoires 6 (1976) 177216. 10 åšøý÷ùò ôï˜ò ðïëéïñêï™íôáò zìýíåôï (Skylitzes Synopsis Historion Roman 3.13.13, ed. Thurn). 11 åšñ¦í äc ôxí käéüãñáöïí dðéóôïëxí ôï™ äåóðüôïõ êár êõñßïõ EÉçóï™ ×ñéóôï™, ôxí ðñ’ò Á¡ãáñïí ðåìöèåsóáí (Skylitzes, Synopsis Historion Roman3.13.24, ed. Thurn). 12 Tñ÷åéí dêðÝìðåé ôyò Tíù Ìçäßáò ôyò êár Âááóðñáêáíßáò (Skylitzes, Synopsis Historion, Mich4.6.19, ed. Thurn). 13 1038: Skylitzes, Synopsis Historion, Michael4.16, ed. Thurn, 1040: Pêñïðüëåéò dí ášôásò ³êïäüìåé (Skylitzes, Synopsis Historion, Mich4.20.26, ed.

Achilles at the battle of Ostrovo

which he was aided by a contingent of the Varangian Guards,14 Vikings at the service of the Byzantine army. Their leader was Harald III Sigurðarson Hardrada,15 future King of Norway (1047-1066) who in 1066 landed at York and was defeated at the battle of Stamford Bridge. It is the Byzantine and Varangian expeditions which are commemorated in runic funerary stele found in eastern Sweden16 and such events even inspired epic poetry written in Old Icelandic, the Heimskringla, where one reads his praise and a Scandinavian perspective on the Sicilian expedition of 1038-1042.17 Here one finds traces of those events and Maniakes was clearly the Byzantine which left the most favourable impression. Christopher Mitylenaios18 also wrote a short poem on his death19 but in terms which criticize the abilities of surviving generals rather than the exceptional qualities of the deceased usurper. EÅðßãñáììá åkò ô’í ôÜöïí ôï™ ÌáíéÜêïõ äéE½ñùúêï™. ÌáíéÜêçò ëáëÝù Pð’ ôýìâïõ PíäñÜóé ðOóéí· ïš ëßðïí zíïñÝçí dðr ãáßçò, PëëE ›ð’ ãásáí ïk÷üìåíïò êáôÝ÷ùóá, dìïr äE Rìá óõãêáôÝèáøá. êåsôáé äE ïš÷r ðÝëáò ìåëÝùí ìïõ ©ò äÝìáò Tëëï, âñá÷éüíùí äc ìÜëéóôá dì§í ðåñr íå™ñá ìÝíïõóá (5) ïšê dèÝëåé Píáâyíáé Pð’ ÷èüíïò Tôåñ dìåsï Epigram to the tomb of Maniakes in heroic verse. I, Maniakes, speak from the tomb to all men: I did not leave my courage on earth, but as I went I shed it underground, I buried it together with myself. It lies not far from my limbs, as another body, Thurn). On the issue a useful reference is V. VON FALKENHAUSEN, La dominazione bizantina nell’Italia meridionale dal IX all’XI secolo, Bari 1978. 14 S. BLÖNDAL, Varangians of Byzantium: An Aspect of Byzantine Military History, trans. by B. S. Benedikz, Cambridge 1978. 15 S. BLÖNDAL, Varangians, 54-103. 16 Edition, translation and commentary can be found in S. BLÖNDAL, Varangians, 223-233. 17 An English translation: E. MONSEN, Heimskringla or the Lives of the Norse Kings, New York 1930. 18 The new critical edition of the poem is that of M. de Groote, Christophoros Mitylenaios Versuum variorum Collectio Cryptensis, Corpus Christianorum Series Graeca (CCSG 74), Turnhout 2012. Some books dedicated to the poet are the following: D. P. ŠESTAKOV, Tri poeta Vizantiiskogo renessansa, Kazan 1906; F. BERNARD, The beats of the pen: social contexts of reading and writing poetry in 11th-century Constantinople, PhD, Ghent 2010. Bernard at page 181 identifies the Maniakes Poet with Christophoros Mitylenaios. Without further argumentation, one may still refer to him as the Maniakes Poet. Broggini, p. 29 is also cautious about the attribution to Mitylenaios. 19 E. KURTZ, Die Gedichte Christophoros Mytilneaios, Leipzig 1903, poem 65.

173

Frederick Lauritzen

Remaining beside the muscles of my arms And it does not wish to rise from earth without me. The poem speaks of Maniakes after his death and indicates clearly how impressed the poet was with his strength and may be even criticizing his antagonists who had survived him such as Romanos Skleros.20 Considering that Mitylenaios did not compose many hexameter poems, one may consider that the poem was written in this metre because it was Homeric and heroic. This connection between the Homeric and heroic is also developed by Psellos who occasionally employs Homeric terms when he describes Maniakes.21 It is the heroic appeal of George Maniakes which is responsible for the Homeric cento dedicated to his memory and written when the relevance of the episode was still strong. It is a striking work since it is based on few select passages from the Iliad and it allows one to detect what this poet believed it meant to compose a short epic poem. Some technical remarks are necessary in order to narrow the framework of the large field of Greek epic poetry in dactlylic hexameters. The poem is dated after 1043 and yet does not seem to reveal any direct influence from the last surviving and lengthy epic poem of the fifth century, the Dionysiaca of Nonnos.22 This is striking also because Nonnos’ Paraphrase of the Gospel of Saint John23 was written in the same unique technique and originally constituted book 1 of the Palatine Anthology and therefore circulated during the century before 1043.24 It is also surprising because the Miliaresion Poet wrote a perfect Nonnian verse for a silver coin of Romanos III Argyros (1028-1034)25 and therefore these metrical tech20

174

The animosity between George Maniakes and Romanos Skleros is best described: ï£ôïò ¿ ÌáíéÜêçò êáôN ô’ èÝìá ô§í EÁíáôïëéê§í ôNò ïkêÞóåéò h÷ùí êár FÑùìáí² ãåéôïí§í ô² Óêëçñ², äéáöåñüìåíïò ðñ’ò ášô’í ðïëëÜêéò dðå÷åßñçóåí ôï™ôïí Píåëåsí, åk ìx öõã† ôxí eáõôï™ dðïñßóáôï óùôçñßáí. dðår äc ôN FÑùìáßùí óêyðôñá dò Êùíóôáíôsíïí ƒëèå ô’í ÌïíïìÜ÷ïí êár ¿ Óêëçñ’ò dðr ìÝãá ôý÷çò ‘ñôï (dðáëëáêåýåôï ãNñ ô² ÌïíïìÜ÷v ½ ôï™ Óêëçñï™ PäåëöÞ) ìÜãéóôñïò ôéìçèårò êár ðñùôïóôñÜôùñ, ô§í åkò ášô’í ìåìíçìÝíïò ôï™ Ãåùñãßïõ êáôáäñïì§í, êáôá÷ñþìåíïò ô† dîïõóßu êár ôxí Pðïõóßáí êáôáôñÝ÷ùí ôï™ ÌáíéÜêç, ôÜ ôå PíÞêïíôá ášô² dä„ïõ êár hêåéñå ÷ùñßá êár åkò ôxí ôïýôïõ êïßôçí PíÝäçí dîýâñéóåí. (Skylitzes, Synopsis Historion, Const9.3.55-64, ed. Thurn). 21 F. LAURITZEN, The depiction of character in the Chronographia of Michael Psellos, Turnhout 2013, chapter 7. 22 Under the direction of Vian the latest edition is Nonnos de Panopolis, Dionysiasques, Paris 1976-2006. 23 The Paraphrase is still being completed under the direction of Enrico Livrea. 24 On the question of the palatine anthology and its context the two main works are A. CAMERON, The Greek Anthology from Meleager to Planudes, Oxford 1993 and LAUXTERMANN, Op. cit. 25 F. LAURITZEN, The miliaresion poet: the dactylic inscription of a coin of Romanos III Argyros, Byzantion 79 (2009) 231-240.


niques were known at the time. Nevertheless, the Maniakes poem presents predominantly masculine caesurae (51%) unlike most late antique poets whose texts reveal percentages over 80% of feminine caesurae.26 Bucolic caesuras are present at 67% which means that the poet considered this an essential feature for composing epic verse. The Maniakes poet also sometimes has a spondee in the fifth foot,27 while poets such as Nonnos (5th century), Agathias (530-582/594), Paul the Silentiary († 575-580) and George of Pisidia († ca. 635) always have a dactyl.28 The four verses (20, 35, 39, 85) which contain a fifth foot spondee reveal that there is no strict adherence to late Nonnian rules. Moreover the preference to have a spondee in the third foot (30%) is another feature in contrast with Nonnos’ followers.29 Such details are part of a wider and general rule of the poem since the lines composed entire of dactyls are 34% and those composed with one spondee are 29%. Therefore 63% of lines are either holodactylic or have one spondee. Thus there is a clear tendency to have lines which are nearly entirely dactylic and which have a bucolic caesura, however details reveal that the main features are in contrast with those of the Nonnian poets. The Maniakes poet had been taught rules of composition whose tendencies are clear: masculine and bucolic caesura and spondees preferable in the third foot. These rules did not result from Nonnian textbooks or the reading of Nonnian poets, they are the result of reading Homer directly.30 This is clear from the poem itself where the following expressions or entire verses are identical to lines from the Iliad: MP 1 12

quotation T÷åé ìåãÜëv dò äï™ðïí Pêüíôùí

Iliad 9.9 11.364, 20.451

26 73% Oppian, 78% Triphyiodorus, 81% Quintus, 82% Nonnos, 99% Agathias, 84% Pisides. M. L. WEST, Introduction to Greek Metre, Oxford 1987, 177. For a detailed study of these phenomena see G. AGOSTI – E. GONNELLI, Materiali per la storia dell’esametro dei poeti cristiani greci, in: M. Fantuzzi – R. Pretagostini, Struttura e storia dell’esametro greco, vol. i, Rome 1995, 289-434. 27 Lines 20, 35, 39, 85. 28 M. WEST, Introduction, 178. For the history of hexametres one should turn also the poem of Dionysios Studites which introduces the iambs of Theodore Studites. It is edited in P. SPECK, Jamben auf verschiedene Gegenstände, Berlin 1968. See LAUXTERMANN, Op. cit., 70-72 and 143-144. 29 3% Triphiodorus, 5% Quintus, 3% Proclus, 3% Nonnos, 0% Paul Silent, 2% Pisides. M. WEST, Introduction, 178. 30 It may be pointed out that such metrical characteristics are in tune with tenth century practice as described by M. E. VAN OPSTAL, Jean Géomètre: Poèmes en hexamètres et en distiques éléegiaques, Leyden 2008, 81-86. However, the existence of such practice, as well as that of the miliaresion poet point to different techniques available at the time. Moreover the metre as well as the style of the poem is often altered by the presence of Homeric quotations or expressions.

175

Frederick Lauritzen

12 13 16 17 18 20 22 23 26 29 30 32 34 35 36 41 42 43 44 45 48 50 50 54 56 70 76 85 95 95

¯ñôï ëÝùí ©ò

20.164 21.50 öëïãr ånêåëïí 13.330 13.688 ~ êåsôáé dí êëéóßwóéí 24.554 — ôýðôå dðéóôïöÜäçí 21.20 Pñçéèïùí ákæç§í 8.298, 15.315, 20.167 ¬ëåóå èýìïí 11.342, (17.616), 20.412, 24.638 ÷åsñáò PÜðôïõò 7.309, 11.169, 12.166, 13.49, 13.318, 17, 638, 20.503 Píôßâéïí ìá÷Ýóáóèáé 3.20, 7.40, 7.51 ~ ák÷ìçôxí ôEhìåíáé êár èáñóáëå’í ðïëåìéóôxí 5.602, 16.493, — 22.269 äñõìN ðõêíN 11.118, íÞëåé ÷áëê² passim ðëÞóåéáí íåêýùí 16.72 ðëÞóåéáí íåêýùí 16.72 dí êïíßwóé ðáñEPëëÞëïéóé ôÝôáíôï 4.544 ¿ äEdðår êáìc ÷årñáò díáßñùí 21.26 ôåsñå ãNñ käñþò 21.51 ánìáôé êár ëýèñv ðåðáëáãìÝíïí 6.268 äáéæåìåíáé ìåíåáßíùí 21.33 dí ðOóéí Tóðåôïí ¯ñóå êõäïéìüí 18.218 öýãïé ákð˜í —ëåèñïí 6.57, 14.507, 16.283 kððïóýíw äc êåêÜóôï 23.289 åqíáé Tñéóôïò 15.108, 23.669 ðëÞîïE Tïñé ìåãÜëv 16.115 ðÝñçóå äETñ “óôÝïí ånóù 4.460, 6.10 ðëáã÷èç äEPð’ ÷áëêüöé ÷áëêüò 11.351 è™íå äéN ðñïìÜ÷ùí 5.250, 11.342, 20.412 áqìá êáôáññÝïí dî ¨ôåéëyò 4.169, 5.870 ìÝãáò ìåãáëùóôr 16.776, 18.26 dðr ÷èïír êåsôï ôáíõóèåßò 20.483

~ ãõìí’í Tôåñ êïñõèïò ôå êár Tóðéäïò —

These expressions taken from the Iliad are predominantly from the battle scenes which is obvious since the aim of the poem is to describe such matters, but surprising since the majority of verses of the Iliad represent dialogue. Moreover, the Maniakes poet does not have any dialogue in his poem and so represents a partial and one-sided reading of the Iliad. All books are quoted except 1, 2, 10, 19. It is not surprising that

176


the first book which contains no fighting is omitted or that the catalogue of ships is also absent, but book 10 represents a scene of night fighting. Book 19 describes a meeting of the Acheans. Therefore the poet seems interested in eliminating dialogue, the psychology of opposing different warriors and the elements which are external to the battlefield. The poet does have certain books of the Iliad he prefers as one may see from the following chart in which the quoted lines are placed beside the book number. In parenthesis are indicated the number of times a certain book is quoted. 1 – 2 – 3 3.20 (1) 4 4.169, 4.460, 4.544 (3) 5 5.250, 5.602, 5.870 (3) 6 6.10, 6.57, 6.268 (3) 7 7.40, 7.51, 7.309 (3) 8 8.298 (1) 9 9.9 (1) 10 11 11.118, 11.169, 11.342, 11.342, 11.351, 11.364 (6) 12 12.166 (1) 13 13.49, 13.318, 13.330, 13.688 (4) 14 14.507 (1) 15 15.108, 15.315 (2) 16 16.72, 16.115, 16.283, 16.493, 16.776 (5) 17 17.616, 17.638 (2) 18 18.218, 18.26 (2) 19 20 20.164, 20.167, 20.412, 20.412, 20.451, 20.483, 20.503 (7) 21 21.20, 21.26, 21.33, 21.50, 21.51 (5) 22 22.269 (1) 23 23.289, 23.669 (2) 24 24.554, 24.638 (2) It is worth focusing on the books with the most numerous passages in order to identify the criterion of selection. The preferred books are 20 (7 quotations), 11 (6 quot.), 16 (5 quot.) 21 (5 quot.). They are not employed in their entirety, but only certain passages seem to have caught the writer’s attention: 20.164-167, 20.412-503, 11.118-169, 11.342-364, 21.20-51. The first expression of book 20 is revealing since it is part of a simile by which Achilles is compared to a lion when attacking. Indeed both 20.164-167 and 20.412-503 are scenes which describe Achilles and his victories. The same is true of 21.20-51. Thus there is a strong intention of comparing Maniakes and Achilles. The passage first from book 11

177

Frederick Lauritzen

178

has the comparison of Agamemnon with a lion while the second has an attack of Tydes against Hector. Book 16 seems to provide simply formulaic expressions, rather than a context. Therefore the most quoted passages reveal a strong interest in similes and in comparing Maniakes to Achilles or at least to the leaders of the Achaean side of the Trojan War. Another way of detecting which passages he was particularly interested in, is to identify the quotations from the Iliad which consist of three metrical feet or more but which appear only once in the original. This is important since a formula does not allow one to detect the exact context referred to, even though such an expression would give a ‘homeric’ air to a new poem. These passages are: 4.544, 6.268, 11.351, 16.115, 18.218, 20.483, 21.20, 21.26, 21.33, 21.50, 23.289. It is striking that the same passage comparing Achilles to a lion appears with more references and therefore it seems certain that 21.20-21.50 was read with interest. Other verses reveal how useable lines were taken out of context. The line from the end of book 4 is a summary of the situation of the Achaean and Trojan dead. The second from book 6 is taken out of context since Hector employs this line when speaking to his mother and saying he cannot sacrifice to Zeus when the blood is mixed with gore and that he needs to be clean. The reference to 11.351 is to Diomedes who says to Odysseus that he was wounded. 16.115 has an expression defining Hector, as he attacks Ajax with his sword. 18.217 refers to the rise of din of battle like the sound of a trumpet. 20.483 describes the brains being spread over the ground. 23.289 seems to be an incidental remark but reveals the presence of Diomedes. These different passages reveal that there are, at this point, two different ways of composing: one based on lines taken from specific passages, and another based on useful lines taken out of context. The Maniakes poet prefers passages of book 11, 20 and 21, which are similes, and so it is important to address the question directly of the Homeric comparison or simile. The last three lines of the Maniakes poem refer to three different similes (bull, bear and oak tree). None of these exact images appear directly in the Iliad. In our brief poem the oak tree is described as ôáíýöõëëïò a term reserved to the olive tree in the Odyssey (23.195). This point should not lead one astray since the poet is referring to similes present in the Iliad at least for two of the images. These are oak falling under the axe (13.389-392=16.482-485) and the ox under the axe (17.520-523). Both these images are terms of comparison of a falling and dying warrior and so suited to such lines read by the Maniakes poem. However the three images here employed refer to two animals and a tree which have already fallen down and are lying stretched on the ground. Thus the poet has taken some liberty while managing to recall the overall atmosphere of the falling heroes of the Iliad.


This close reading of certain passages of the Iliad should not distract one from the interest the poet has in the entire work. The tendency to portray Maniakes as a hero is marked also at the beginning when the opening idea of the Iliad, that of the rage of Achilles, is evoked by the rage of Maniakes. It appears also from the last lines where the enemies who see Maniakes lying in the dust are fearful to take his body. This is a reminiscence of how corpses are honoured in the Iliad. In the ancient epic, the companions of the dead fight to take the body away and to honour it piously. Long passages are dedicated to the question (e.g. book 7) and much is made of the gathering of the body of Sarpedon (book 16), Patroclus (book 18) as well as the difficulty to honour the body of Hector (books 23-24). In the case of Maniakes no one dares to approach his body a clear sign of the heroic nature of his appearance. Thus the Maniakes poet is fascinated by certain aspects of the Iliad. It is clear he read the entire work and selected specific types of passages. The number of passages quoted makes the question of the text relevant. The manuscripts written before the twelfth century presented by M. West in his edition are the following:31 A D

Marc. Gr. 822 (olim. 454) Laur. 32.15

T B E

Lond. Bibl. Brit. Burney 86, Marc. Gr. 821 (olim. 453) Scorial. Õ.I.1 (291)

F Y C

Scorial Ù.I.12 (509) Paris. Suppl. Gr. 663 Laur. 32.3

10th century 10th century (books 5-24) 12th century (books 1-4) 1059 11th century 11th century (1.29-200 12th century) 11th century 11th century 11th-12th centuries

The readings of all the Homeric passages in the Maniakes poem find the agreement of all these manuscripts and so it is not possible to single out a specific tradition. This of course means that the reading of the Iliad indicated by the Maniakes poet was not limited to a specific tradition of manuscripts, but was widely available to all who owned or used manuscripts of the Iliad in Constantinople or in the Byzantine Empire. Historically this poem does not yield new information. The fact that the battle of Ostrovo was important was already known and was expressed concisely by the contemporary historians. The poem indicates a unique fact of the eleventh century, that the general Maniakes left a strong impression on Byzantine culture. His description in Psellos, Christopher Mitylenaios and this poem clearly indicates that the impression was that there was someone of the stature of a Homeric hero. 31 Omitted are Z which only has scholia, X which only preserves parts of book 4. Both are from the second half of the ninth century.

179

Frederick Lauritzen

Moreover, unlike Psellos and Christopher Mitylenaios who simply used Homeric motifs, the Maniakes poet directly employed the entire Iliad and specifically images which recalled the similes of lions and the figure of Achilles to make his point. Thus the Maniakes poet gives a unique indication that the entire Iliad was familiar to his readers and they would have appreciated his capacity to adapt the poem to the needs of a contemporary who had left a strong impression at the battle of Ostrovo in 1043. The Maniakes poem reveals a different way to read Homer and to write hexameter poetry. Unlike the Miliaresion poet there are no clear references to the Odyssey, striking also because Psellos’ teacher Niketas Magistros used to employ the Odyssey for his allegorical interpretations.32 Moreover he reveals a taste different from John Mauropous or Michael Psellos who apparently never write hexameter poems. Even Christophoros Mitylenaios does not appear to compose centos nor to have a specific preference for battle scenes in the Iliad. Even more striking is the fact there seems to be no connection with the Palatine Anthology. One may also add that LAUXTERMANN has pointed out that centos Homeric centos are rare and unusual in the period from George of Pisidia to George Geometres. One should emphasize that the centos of the empress Eudocia represent the usage of Homeric verses from Iliad and Odyssey put to a specific use. The poems she wrote remove the pagan elements and give Homeric form to Christian content. The Maniakes poet eliminates all the psychological aspects of the Iliad in order to give nearly exclusive prominence to the fighting with all of its gore. There are no dialogues and no scenes other than battles. The poem would be difficult to date if one removed only a few lines which refer to the events of Maniakes’ death. The aim of the poet was to combine Maniakes with the Iliad and to present a sort of Achilles at the battle of Ostrovo of 1043.

180

32 ½ ößëç ðáôñrò ðñ’ò |í ïk ðåñr ô’í EÏäõóóÝá Pð’ ôyò êáôáöáñìáôôïýóçò zðåßãïíôï, ½ Tíù ›ðïíïåsôï FÉåñïõóáëÞì. Sathas V.92.14.16, in: K. Sathas (ed.), Ìåóáéùíéêx ÂéâëéïèÞêç V, Venice – Paris 1876 (= Hildesheim – New York 1972), 87-96.


APPENDIX I

5

10

15

20

25

Èõì’í T÷åé ìåãÜëv âåâáñçìÝíïò Tãñéïò Píxñ ÌáíéÜêçò PãÝñù÷ïò, PñÞéïò, “âñéìïåñã’ò ìáßíåôáé dí êñáäßw êár Póðßäá ðOóáí Pãåßñåé, dîåëÜáí äc Tíáêôá èñüíïéï eï™ ÌïíïìÜ÷ïí êár ðüëéïò ìåãÜëçò âáóéëåõÝìåíáé dñéäáßíåé íÞðéïò, ïšäÝ ôé äx èÜíáôïí êáôN èõì’í h÷åóêåí. EÁëëE ¿ ìcí, «ò öñïíÝùí, äßåðåí óôñáô’í ”íðåñ Tãåéñåí, ½ìåôÝñv âáóéëås äE dðéôÜññïèïò ƒåí EÉçóï™ò, •ò íçìåñôcò håéðå ðÜëáé· äéEdìïsï Tíáêôåò óêyðôñá h÷ïõóé êár ãyò êñáôÝïõóé ôýñáííïé. Êár âáóéëå˜ò ìcí hðåìðå ðïë˜í óôñáô’í Píôßá êåßíïõ, ÌáíéÜêçò äEdò äï™ðïí Pêüíôùí ¯ñôï ëÝùí ªò. ãõìí’ò, Tôåñ êüñõèüò ôå êár Póðßäïò “ìöáëïÝóóçò, èþñçêüò ôå ìßôñáò ôå· díåsôï äc ålìáôá ëåðôN, Tñ÷å äEe§í eôÜñùí ákår êár ÷åsñáò díþìá öÜóãáíïí ïpïí h÷ùí, öëïãr ålêåëïí· híôåá äETëëá êåsôï dír êëéóßw· ïš ãNñ öïñÝåéí dèÝëåóêå. ôýðôå äE dðéóôñïöÜäçí, ìïíïðëÞãùò äE¬ëëõå ëáï˜ò. JÙ ðüóá FÑùìáßùí ôÝêåá êôÜíåí jððïêïñõóô§í, − ðüóá ¼yîå êÜñçíá Pñíéèüùí ákæç§í, − ðüóá ðñåóâõôÝñùí ëýóå ãïýíáôá êár ìÝíåE Píäñ§í Ôßò äÝ ïj Píôåâüëçóå êár ïšê Töáñ ¬ëåóå èõìüí; ïš ãNñ hçí êåßíïõ ›ðáë™îáé ÷åsñáò PÜðôïõò, •í êár åkóïñüùíôáò ›ð’ ôñüðïò jððÝáò åq÷åí. EÅããýèé äE dñ÷ïìÝíïõ ðPò dôñÝðåôE ïšäE hôE hìéìíåí Píôßâéïí ìá÷Ýóáóèáé ~ ášôï™ óôÞìåíáé Tíôçí. Ôïsïò hçí ïpüí ôéíE dí ½ìåôÝñïéóé ÷ñüíïéóé

1 T÷åé ìåãÜëv] Il. 9.9 9 äé...10 ôýñáííïé] cfr. Prov. 16 12 dò...Pêüíôùí] Il. 11.364, 20.451 | ¯ñôï...«ò] Il. 20.164 13 ãõìíüò...“ìöáëïÝóóçò] cfr. Il. 21.50 14 ålìáôá ëåðôN] cfr. Od. 22.510-511 15 ÷åsñáò díþìá] Theoc. 12.109 16 öëïãr ånêåëïí] Il. 13.330, 13.688 17 êåsôï...êëéóßw] cfr. Il. 24.554 18 ôýðôå... dðéóôñïöÜäçí] Il. 21.20 ¬ëëõå ëáï˜ò] cfr. Od. 24.428 20 Pñçéèüùí ákæç§í] Il. 8.298, 15.315, 20.167 22 ¬ëåóå èõìüí] Il. 11.342 (17.616), 20.412, 24.638 23 ÷åsñáò PÜðôïõò] Il. 7.309, 11.169, 12.166, 13.49, 13.318, 17.638, 20.503 26 Píôßâéïí ìá÷Ýóáóèáé] Il. 3.20, 7.40, 7.51 3 êñáäßw] êáñäßç AB | Pãåßñåé] Pãåsñåé B 5 ðüëéïò] ðüëåùò B 7 «ò] ¬ò B | äßåðåí] äéåêå A 9 dìïsï] Ýìïs ¿ B 10 êñáôÝïõóé] êñáôáéï™óé AB 11 Píôßá] Píôr AB | êåßíïõ] Pêåßíïõ A dêåßíïõ B 12 ëÝùí «ò] ©ò ô’ ëÝùí B 14 ålìáôá] åq ìáôN B 16 ïpïí] ïpïí B hí ôå PäA A 18 ìïíïðëÞãùò] ìïíïðëyãáò Lampr 20 Pñçéèüùí] Pñçsï èüùí B 23 êåßíïõ] êåsíïõ B 24 •í] dí B | ›ð’ ôñüìïò] ›ðïôñüìïò B 25 dôñÝðåô] dôñÝðåôï B

181

Frederick Lauritzen

30

35

40

45

50

ô§í í™í dê ìåñüðùí ï¡ôE hêëõåí ï¡ôå ôéò åqäåí, Tãñéïò ák÷ìçôxò êár èáñóáëÝïò ðïëåìéóôÞò, FÑÝæåôï äx ôÜäå hñãá PíN äñõìN ðõêíN êár ï¡ñç. ÁšôNñ dðår ðåäßïéï ìÝóïí óôß÷áò }ëáóåí Píäñ§í, äx ôüôE döéððåýùí ðëåßïõò êôÜíå íçëÝú ÷áëê², äçéüùí êñáôåñNò FÑùìáßùí ¼ßìöá öÜëáããáò. ÐëÞóåéáí íåêýùí êár áj ãýáé híèá êár híèá, ðëÞóåéáí íåêýùí êár ï¡ñåá âçóóÞåíôá. Ðïëëïr äE dí êïíßwóé ðáñE PëëÞëïéóé ôÝôáíôï dê óôéâáñyò ðáëÜìçò äáúãìÝíïé Píäñ’ò Pñßóôïõ, Píäñ’ò ÌáíéÜêïõ, ìáíéþäåïò, Píäñïöüíïéï dê äE höõãïí ðïëëïß ãå êár åk ìüíïí ášäÞóåéå ôïßçí zíïñÝçí èåüèåí ëÜ÷åí dí ðïëÝìïéóé. Ìíyóêïí TñE ¯äå —÷ëïé ¿ äE dðår êÜìå ÷åsñáò díáßñùí ÷Üæåôï Uö “ðßóù êár Tìðíõôï. ôåsñå ãNñ jäñ¦ò álìáôé êár ëýèñv ðåðáëáãìÝíïí Tíäñá ðÜ÷éóôïí. ÁšôNñ • á¤èéò dð§ñôï äáúæÝìåíáé ìåíåáßíùí dîåöÜíç êár ðOóéí dí Tóðåôïí ¯ñóå êõäïéìüí. FÑùìáßùí äc öÜëáããáò ›ð’ ôñüðïò ålëåôï ãõsá. EÅíèÜäå êár ðïôE Píåsëåí Pðåéñåóßïõò ïôß÷áò Píäñ§í ðÜíôïóå ðáðôáßíùí ìÞ ôéò öýãïé ákð˜í —ëåèñïí. LÇí äÝ ôéò dí FÑùìáßïéò PíÝñïò Pèëßïõ õj’ò, jððïóýíw äc êÝêáóôï êár å¡÷åôï åqíáé Tñéóôïò, ôüí ãå •ò ¬ôñõíå èõì’ò ÌáíéÜêw ìá÷Ýóáóèáé. EÁëëE •ôå äx ó÷åä’í ƒëèå öÝñùí ìåëßçí PíN ÷åsñá nõîå ÌáíéÜêçò êár dðÜëìåíïò Pìör ìÝôùðïí

29 Tãñéïò...ðïëåìéóôÞò] Il. 5.602, 16.493, 22.269 30 äñõìN ðõêíN] Il. 11.118 32 íçëÝú ÷áëê²] Il. passim et Suda 34 ðëÞóåéáí íåêýùí] Il. 16.72 35 ðëÞóåéáí íåêýùí] Il. 16.72 | ï¡ñåá âçóóÞåíôá] Hes. Theog. 130 36 dí...ôÝôáíôï] Il. 4.544 41 ¿...díáßñùí] Il. 21.26 42 ôåsñå...jäñ¦ò] Il. 21.51 43 álìáôé...ðáðáëáãìÝíïí] Il. 6.268 44 äáúæÝìåíáé ìåíåáßíùí] cfr. Il. 21.33 45 dí...êõäïéìüí] Il. 18.218 48 öýãïé...—ëåèñïí] Il. 6.57, 14.507, 16.283 50

jððïóýíw...êÝêáóôï] Il. 23.289 å¡÷åôï...Tñéóôïò] cfr. Il. 23.669 | åqíáé Tñéóôïò] Il. 15.108, 23.669

182

28 ôéò åqäåí] åkóåsäåí AB 29 èáñóáëÝïò] èáñóáëásïò AB | ðïëåìéóôÞò] ðïëåìéóôyò AB 31 dðår] dðr AB 32 döéððåýùí] döAjððåýùí AB êôÜíå] êôáíùí A êôÜíùí B | ÷áëê²í] ÷áëê§í B 33 äçéüùí] ëçéüùí A ëçúüùí B 34 ðëÞóåéáí...] om. B | ãýáé] ãõár A 35 êár] êc B âçóóÞåíôá] âõóÞåíôá AB 36 ä] äc B | ä...êïíßwóé] äc dí êïíßçóç B ðáñ PëëÞëïéóé] ðáñáëëÞëïéóé AB 37 äáúãìÝíïé] äáéãìÝíïé A 41 Ìíyóêïí] ìíÞóêïí B | díáßñùí] Píáßñùí AB 42 jäñ¦ò] jäñ§ò B 43 ánìáôé] ånìáôé B 44 ”] — B | äáúæÝìåíáé] äáéæÝìåíáé A 45 dîåöÜíç] dî döÜíç A 46 ›ð’ ôñüìïò] ›ðïôñüìïò AB | ålëåôï] åkëåôï A | ãõsá] ãõ@á A ãýá B 49 dí] dí äc AB 50 êÝêáóôï] êÝêáóôïí B 53 níîå] Eúóå A nõ@óå B | Pìör ìÝôùðïí] PìöéìÝôùðïí AB


55

60

65

70

75

80

ðëyîA Tïñé ìåãÜëv êár dðéóêýíéïí ëýóåí áqöá, dê äc öëÝâáò ôÜìåí ¯êá, ðÝñçóå äE TñE “óôÝïí ånóù öÜóãáíïí. dí äc êýêëïò êåöáëyò ðÝóåí ášôßêá ãáßw, dãêÝöáëïò äE döÜíç êár ÌáíéÜêçò èÝåí á¤èéò híèá ôéíE Tíäñá öÝñéóôïí dír êñáôr —ñèéá ðëÞîáò èÞêáôï dò äýï âñÝãìá Tðáí ôå êár ¬ìïõò. IÁëëïí dðéóôñïøÜäçí äc ðáñE “ìöáë’í ášôßêá âÜëëåé êár ôÜìå äé÷èN ðáñåõè˜ äéáìðåñcò T÷ñé íåöñïsï. ½ìßôïìïí äc ìÝñïò ÷è¦í äÝîáôï ðïõëõâüôåéñá lððïò äE ¨ê˜ò dêåßíïõ PíN óôñáô’í åšñ˜í PëOôï ãïýíáôá ½äc ðüäáò íåêñïsï öÝñùí Tìá êýóôåé. IÇôïé ” ãE Tëëïí hôõøå êár ášôßêá èõì’í Pðçýñá êár ôéíá ðñüò ôå âáë¨í ¬ìïõ óôéâáñï™ ðáñN êëåsäá dí êïíßwóéí hìéîå êár ÷åôï èOóóïí dðE Tëëïí êár âÜëå ðNñ êñïôÜöv, ¿ äc œðôéïò hêðåóåí lððïõ. ðëyîå êár Tëëïí Tñéóôïí, dðåóóýìåíïò ðåäßïéï, Pìör ìÝóçí êõíÝçí, ðëÜã÷èç äE Pð’ ÷áëêüöé ÷áëêüò. êár âÜëå äåýôåñïí áqøá êár ¬ëåóåí Tèëéïí Tíäñá, ¼Þîáò “óôÝá ëåõêN êáñÞáôïò ½äc ðñïóþðïõ ðïëëásóé ðëçã†óé. ÷üëïò ãÜñ ìéí ëÜâå èõì² ïœíåêÜ ïj ðüññù ðëÜã÷èç îßöïò dê ôñõöáëåßçò. EÁëëE ” ãå äx êár á¤èéò dðïñíýìåíïò êáôN äyìïí è™íå äéN ðñïìÜ÷ùí êåñáÀæùí ôÜãìáôá Píäñ§í, ðïëëï˜ò äE dîáëÜðáîå äüìïõò êár öñïýñéá Píäñ§í, êár íý êåí híäïí hâç êár dò ðüëéí åšñõÜãåéáí, åk ìx TñE ïšñáíüèåí âñá÷ßùí ìÝãáò åqñîå èåïsï ákíN äéáóêåäÜóáò âïõëåýìáôá Töñïíïò Píäñüò. FÙò ãPñ ÌáíéÜêçò ëáï˜ò “ëÝêùí èÝå ðÜíôç ½äE dðr äåîéN ½äE dðE PñéóôåñN Tïñ díþìá, hëðåôï ìcí êñáôÝåéí, äýíáìéò äÝ ìéí ášôßêá èåßá ›øüèåí ïšñáíßv ðáñN ãëïõô’í äïýñáôé âÜëëåé,

ðëyî...ìåãÜëv] Il. 16.115 55 ðÝñçóå...ånóù] Il. 4.460, 6.10 ðëÜã÷èç...÷áëêüò] Il. 11.351 72 “óôÝá ëåõêN] cfr. Chris. Mityl. 19.12 è™íå...ðñïìÜ÷ùí] Il. 5.250, 11.342, 20.412 54

70 76

54 ðëyî] ðëxî AB 55 ä Tñ] äáÜñE B 56 ášôßêá] ášôyêá B 58 ôéí] ôßí B 59 Tðáí] Qðáí A 61 äéáìðåñcò] äéáìåñcò B | íåöñïúï] íåöñïsò B 64 êýóôåé] }íóôåé B 65 Tëëïí] Tëïí B | ášôßêá] ášôÞêá B | Pðçýñá] Pðyõñá A Pç™ñá B 66 âáë¦í] âáë§í B | ðáñN êëåsäá] ðáñáêëåsäá AB 67 èOóóïí] èÜóóïí B 68 êñïôÜöv] ðáñêñïôÜöv AB 70 Pð’ ÷áëêüöé] Pðï÷Üëêïöé B 72 ½äc] ½ äc B 74 ïœíåêÜ] ïšíåêN A ïýäÝíåêá B 76 è™íå] è™íáé B 77 öñïýñéá] öïýñéá AB 78 åšñõÜãåéáí] åšñõÜãõ@áí A 79 Tñ] Tñá AB 80 ákíN] zíN B 81 ëáï˜ò] ëáï™ò B | “ëÝêùí] ¿ëÝêùí B 83 êñáôÝåéí ] êñáôáßíåéí AB èåßá] èåsá B 84

äïýñáôé] äï™ñá ôé B

183

Frederick Lauritzen 85

90

95

100

èåñì’í äE Pèñüïí ápìá êáôáññÝïí dî ¨ôåéëyò ãásáí häåõå ìÝëáéíáí êár Píßç ¼áèÜìéããáò. EÁëëN êár «ò hóöáôôå êár ïš ìåèßåé ðïëåìßæùí, Ô’í äE ©ò ï¤í èåñÜðùí díüçóåí âëçìÝíïí hã÷åé ¯êá ðáñcî dëÜáí ðëÞèïõò Tðï ðñï¡ôñåðå ðïëëï™ ÌáíéÜêçò äc ðÝðåéóôï êár ášôßêá ÷Üæåôï ðüññù dí êáèáñ², ”èé äx ðáäßïí ÷ëïåñ’í íÝïí }íèåé· PëëN êáôáèíÞóêùí ªñìáéíå ðÜëéí ìá÷Ýóáóèáé êáß ôE “ëéãïäñáíÝùí Pêüñçôïò fçí ðïëÝìïéï. FÙò ìáëáê† äE dí ÷þñw Pð’ øõ÷xí ëßðåí ášôxí, ô† ¼á ìÝãáò ìéãáëùóôr dðr ÷èïír êåsôï ôáíõóèårò, ô’í êár ›ðÝöñéîáí íåêñ’í ðëÝïí ½c âéï™íôá. êåsôï äc ïpïí âï™ò dñéáý÷çí ½Ý ôéò Tñêôïò ½c äñ™ò ôáíýöõëëïò Pðïôìçèåsóá ðÝëõîéí· ï£ êár dê íåêñïsï ìáêñNí öýãïí óšäE hôE hìéìíïí êár êùöxí ôñïìÝïíôåò ÌáíéÜêïõ êüíéí ášôÞí.

A = Vatic. Gr. 1357 B = Vind. Phil. Gr. 216, fol. 90r-94v

Note the edition is identical to that of LAMPROS and does not provide new readings of the Greek text. However the testimonia in the first apparatus are new and are the reason for reprinting this text.

Translation Maniakes, the savage man with a heavy mind for his great anger, arrogant, warlike and violent is mad in his heart and gathers every shield, to fight the lord of his throne, Monomachos and struggles to be emperor of the great city. (5) Silly man! He did not consider death in his heart, but lead the army which he gathered as he thought. 85 ápìá...¨ôåéëyò] Il. 4.169, 5.870 95 ìÝãáò ìéãáëùóôr] Il. 16.776, 18.26 | dðr...ôáíõóèårò] Il. 20.483

184

88 Ô’í...©ò] ôïíäù¨ò B 89 ¯êá ðáñdî] êÜðáñ AB | dëÜáí] dîdëÜáí A dîeëÜáí B 93 êáß ô] êáßôï B 94 ä dí] äc dí B | Pð’ øõ÷xí] Pðïøõ÷xí B 95 ô† ¼á] ôy ¼N A ôçñT B 97 ½Ý ôéò] ½c ôßò A } c ôßò B 98 Pðïôìçèåsóá] Pðïôìçèårò A Pðïôìçèåsò B 99 íåêñïsï] íåêñïsò B ïšä hô] ïšäå hôE B 100 êüíéí] êüíçí B


Our emperor was protected by Jesus Who once truly said: “through me, kings (10) keep their sceptres and tyrants reign the earth”. The emperor sent a great army against Maniakes, And he rose like a lion at the sound of spears, Naked, without the helmet nor the bossed shield, Nor armour nor belt. He wore fine robes And lead his companions and directed their hands (15) Holding a single sword, like fire. The rest of his armour Was in his tent; he did not wish to wear it. He struck in all directions, and killed men with a single blow. Alas, how many children of Roman knights did he kill? Alas, how many skulls of swift and strong men did he crush? (20) Alas how many knees of elderly soldiers and lives of men did he destroy? Who opposed him and did not immediately lose his life? For it was impossible to escape his invincible hands And fear seized even the knights who saw him. As he approached, everyone fled and no one remained (25) To fight him or to stand before him. He was such as no one has heard or seen in the time of our generation: A savage fighter and courageous warrior. He did these deeds in the thick vegetation and mountains. (30) As soon as he drove the row of soldiers in the middle of the plain, Then he rode and killed many with the ruthless blade, Swiftly destroying the strong roman battle lines. The roads, here and there, were filled with corpses. The wooded mountains were also filled with bodies. (35) Many were stretched beside one another on the earth Slain by the firm hand of the best soldier, The man Maniakes, mad killer. Many fled from him even if he only spoke. To receive from God such courage in battles! (40) The throngs stayed put and he tired his arms killing them. He stepped back and took a rest; for the sweat tired him, the immense man defiled with blood and gore. When he rose again anxious to kill, He appeared and caused an endless uproar. (45) Among the Roman legions, fear seized their knees Then he again killed innumerable rows of men Looking everywhere, so that no one would escape ultimate ruin. There was among the Romans a son of a wretched man, Armed for cavalry who boasted to be the best (50) And his courage pushed him to fight with Maniakes.

185

Frederick Lauritzen

But when he drew near, bearing a spear in hand, Maniakes cried and leaped and struck him In the forehead with the great sword and quickly split his brows. He cut his veins quickly and inserted his sword (55) In the skull. The crown of his head suddenly fell on the ground, The brain was visible and Maniakes ran once more Where he struck a very strong man straight on the head. He cut the entire head in two as well as the shoulders. As he turns round, he strikes another in the navel (60) And cut him in two right through until the kidneys. The fertile earth received one half of the body, While his swift horse wandered through the wide army, Bearing the legs and feet of corpse with the baggage. He also hit another and suddenly stole his heart (65) And hit some by the collar bone of the strong shoulder He mixed in the dust and rushed quickly to another And hit him on the temples, he fell from his horse on his back. He struck another excellent man, rushing along the plane, In the middle of the helmet, the bronze clashed against the bronze. (70) He hit another and killed the poor man, Breaking the white bones of the skull and forehead With many blows. The wrath seized him in the heart So the sword rang from the helmet. But he again rose against the people (75) He darted through the fighters cutting the rows of men. He destroyed many homes and legions of men, And he would have also gone inside in the wide street city, If the great arm of God had not prevented it from the heaven, Shattering the dreadful plans of the mindless man. (80) For, while Maniakes ran everywhere killing men Passing his sword on the right and the left hand And hoping to rule, a divine power From above with a divine spear hit his right buttock Warm blood poured together from the wound (85) And flowed on the black earth and trickled in drops. But as he slaughtered and did not relent his fight, When a servant perceived he was wounded by a spear He quickly turned to take him far away from the throng. Maniakes obeyed and quickly retreated (90) In a clear area where the plane has new grass; But, as he was dying, he tried again to fight And though too feeble, he was longing for war.

186


While in the delicate land he left his soul, And there he lay stretched great and gloriously on the ground, (95) And they feared him dead more than when he was alive. He lay as a bull with arched neck or a bear Or a leafy oak cut down by axes; Then they fled far away from the corpse nor did they stay Fearing even the silent dust of Maniakes. (100)

187